BuzzerBeater Forums

i think heigth could be possible if you make it not that detailed.

How about calling a player betwenn 1.75-1.90 small, 1.93-2.05 medium, 2.05 - ... big

In this case it wasn't more detailed then the suggested position, but maybe fits better for the wished traing regime. And when i see, how basketball clubs take the heigth of the player it isn't unrealistic^^

You're claiming $0 scouting gets the same information as $10k scouting?

no, I am just claiming that the quality of the free information (the one you can see investing zero) is the same that the one you get from scouts.

By reading my league forum and the SerieA forum i found out that:
- (36897) invested $0 and see 3 5 star players.
- (26960) invested $0 and see 3 5 star players.
- (45443) invested $0 and sees "three decent players considering rating and potential".
- (37089) invested $0 and sees 3 5 star players + 4 4 star players.
- (26862) invested $0 and sees 2 5 star players plus several 4 star.

And then I see this poor guy (106339.1).
And then I see my list (with 5k all season): 1 5 star (no second look), 3 4 star (only 1 second look, 19yo B-), 10 3 star, 6 2 star, 2 1 star.

I think there should be a way, that if you see few good players you should have least more chances to scout them twice.

list update:
- (26839) invested $0 and sees 4 5 star and 5 4 star.
http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/6615/immagine2kdl.png

I repeat myself, the current draft ain't fair.

there lots of ways to improve the current system.
One I would like is to have three levels of information.
1st- Like now, star rating and preferred position.
2nd- Age, height estimation (tall, short, middle height), box score.
3rd- Potential, best skill, lowest skill.

And in order to make it more interactive, there could be a first draft list after 7 weeks, with all visible players scouted once.
In the following 5 weeks you can decide whether to have a second look at some players or scout new ones.
New scouting report and the choice, in the last two weeks, to have a third looks, a second looks, or scout new players.

This is just an idea, but again, there could be tens of better ones... all of them better than the current system.

I second the suggestion on having height listed in terms of a range. Maybe have 4 ranges:

under 6' - Small
6' - 6'5 - Medium
6'6 - 6'11 - Large
7' above - X large

0 is 0, there should be no observations whatsoever!!!

I don't need to pay $10K to turn on the TV and see some guy play, or read about him in a newspaper or magazine.

So if you turn on the TV you can't decipher how tall a guy is?

Secondly the current draft is boring and adds very little to the game. I feel that the draft should have a main role (second only to the matches and the roster management) and there could be much more interaction along the season.

THIS is the key aspect. It simply is boring as hell, because you do nothing at all, except for maybe changing your investment once or twice during the season and then taking 5 minutes to order a list of 48 players, at least 35 of which are completely useless anyways.
So what is that, about 5 minutes and 30 seconds per season of actually doing something?

So what is that, about 5 minutes and 30 seconds per season of actually doing something?

only if u are slow...

So what is that, about 5 minutes and 30 seconds per season of actually doing something?

only if u are slow...

I try to take it as slowly as possible in order to prolong the fun.

I agree with the ones that say that the drafting system has to be changed, and not because we want to find better players with lesser money, nor because we want better players at all. My motivation is to have a scouting process (and a draft) which is less stupid, useless and boring than now.

Our perplexity (at least mine one), is about a system which makes you send around people (our beloved scouts), who is not even able to tell me age and height of a guy they had under observation for a whole match, but can estimate his potential.

I mean, can we find a more realistic way to manage scouting?

For example:
- no scouting: just age, role and (approx.) height. (TV mode)
- one observation: esteem of general skill (one match seen mode)
- two observations: better esteem of skill and box score, potential ("hey, he's interesting" mode)

To allow managers to better define the scouting, it could be possible to "configure" scouts to find a certain role and ignore others, or it could be possible to organize scouting process in two different phases: general and aimed, giving the chance to managers to decide which player(s) to observe again.

About the idea that giving the age will allow managers of the same league to excange info about players, well, if everybody knows each player's height, there's no info to exchange...


Last edited by TheMaxx © at 9/1/2009 9:58:26 AM

About the idea that giving the age will allow managers of the same league to excange info about players, well, if everybody knows each player's height, there's no info to exchange...

unless you don't have other informations about him, who you could trade with players who look for another type of player ...

I think to combine this is a challenging mission for the developers but i hope they will find a way it work - maybe with the S,M, L and XL modell.

The current structure of the draft does not allow adding more information about draftees without making it extremely easy to collude. So any improvement should probably include a comprehensive draft reform.