BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't mind seeing this Suggestion keep coming up from new people. It's just a constant reminder that it's the will of the people! Yeah, it's an old argument here, but how many times was the old draft system taken out to the shed before we got the way better draft system that we have now! Keep up the SF training protests!

edit: typo

Last edited by chihorn at 2/16/2011 3:58:18 PM

I honestly didn't know there was already a thread like this so appologies.

I looked over that thread, the main points I got out of it was that it would create advantage/disadvantage to some managers, I particularly looked at GM-Lord of Doom comments in (67212.33). I've realized that BB is pretty conservative about changes. In the past I suggested that there would be much more involvement in worldwide competition than to have only 144 out of 60000 teams be part of it. What it seems like is that many things which started from day 1 with BB is something that no matter what won't be changed. But I think there should be more aggressivness towards changing certain things.

Regarding advantages/disadvantages, changes like Outside Isolation tactics implemented this season for example is something also can be said disadvantaged for anyone with 1 key player. Once there was the change in trainers and say you spent tons of money to get the highest rated trainer, the following season with the new change your trainer was lvl 6 which was not the highest. The very important point to make is that this shouldn't happen overnight, at least a season in advance people should be aware of such change been made for SF if it does and I'm sure its possible if only you be willing. Those things happen all the time you just got to manage them. Balancing the SF position would also make it easier for new users who won't know this is a Reggie Miller or Yao Ming league. Can't have a Lebron, Durant, Pippen, Garnett guys

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 2/16/2011 5:18:39 PM

I think there's no need to apologize on this. I like seeing lots of earnest discussion in the Suggestions Forum, that's how things get better. The SF issue is complicated since the idea of changing SF training makes some of the more seasoned managers grumble about how making a change in training isn't fair since they've always done things a different way and it's not fair, it's not fair (and then they hold their breathe before storming away in a huff). One of these days somebody is going to come up with an idea that is just too logical to dismiss at a time when change could happen. Patience and persistence.

Its perfectly fair if you get at least a season in advance notice that they would change. It gives enough time to make adjustments. I think we can all agree more or less guards & center training are equal or at least not at a point where people complain about imbalance. Same thing with SF its just a new area to train, should still be equal to guards & centers in training rate bottom line and no one is more advantageous or disadvantageous

I have trained and am still training a NT SF, have been for 7 seasons now.

I would LOVE it if there was another option to train one in their natural position. I have done it the hard way and honestly I wouldn't wish it upon anybody. To really does take a lot out of your team and takes so much time that most people just give up or train half-cooked SFs.

Please please please make it easier. I don't want to train another SF for 9 seasons till he's complete. I'll train him for 5-6, but please don't make me train him at PG, then at C. It's so ridiculously difficult and unnecessary.

As someone who has trained SFs since joining BB, I don't like the idea. Does the guard who needs a rebounding pop then have a case for training rebounding as a guard, or does his owner need to make an extra sacrifice to train him in a category foreign to his position? The latter makes more sense. Real life balanced SFs are rare, and tend to be capable of playing any position on the floor (or at least four of them). If you want to train a Lamar Odom-like player who can handle and pass, while also rebounding and defending bigs, playing him at PG and PF/C makes perfect sense anyways. As somebody already mentioned, it's a sensible design inflexibility.

Last edited by RiseandFire at 2/17/2011 12:45:54 AM

I guess the most problems with training SFs could be sold if:

ID-training was offered for forwards
OD-training was offered for wingmen

That wouldnt make training too easy but help a lot and add some kind of realism to this weird training system.

I dont think so.

It makes a huge difference if you can play your SF at his natural position or as a C or PG - you could use him in a 4-5 man rotation (less minutes per game) instead of forcing him to play the full 48 minutes plus the ratings and thus the output would be much better.

my problem with this suggestion, is that is it a huge Change for people who just trained there player the "complicated" way and make those sacrifices to have an extremly valuable player. Just to notice that the next generation is pretty easy to train and destroys the value.