BuzzerBeater Forums

Over the past couple years, there have been many opinions voiced on changing the training paradigm: speeding it up, making it not position related at all, ensuring 48 minutes if someone is booked starter/reserve/backup (and doesn't get injured or foul out), making it not related to # of minutes at all, etc...

Folks who are fine with the current training system usually only share their opinion when they are responding to someone who wants to change it, so I thought I'd just throw this out there.

I like the current system. Always have.

It's challenging as well as fun. It makes your opponents do unexpected things with their lineup, it makes me do unexpected things with my lineup, it can be frustrating at times, and it can lead to much joy (Friday morning pops)...

Certainly, if management decides to alter the training system, I'll take that in stride, but it is my sincere hope that any changes do not come as some sort of complete overhaul.

I totally agree with you.
Training has been made easier already quite a few times. Training Speed is definitely a lot faster than in Hattrick, where you had to wait 7 weeks for an up of a 19 yo in the important Skills. Please let's keep the challenges around Training!

Last edited by LA-Karangula at 4/24/2016 10:48:24 AM

I'm not discussing Hattrick - you are.

As usual you picked out the points of somebody's argument you like and ignore the rest you don't like.

So once and for all:
the training system in BB is good, almost too easy by now. There should be challenges all over the game and training is an important part of it - so it has to be challenging.

The training system is not really challenging, there is noch much variation. You just have 3 trainees and play them 48min with a slow tactic and less than 10 players. nobody trains OD in two position, or uses the alternatives to off position training (like OD training at SF). Why? because they are not a valid alternative.

If you look at the different trainers you have around 4% more training effect per trainerlevel and peopl are paying for this. If you look at the positions you have 10% training decrease per position. That is too much.

There are interesting, complex and challenging parts of training (like crosstraining, elastic effect, what to train first and player builds) but the part that you have to train your player for the most part of his career at a position where he does not play at his best sucks (in my opinion)..

Its true sometimes it makes leads to very special tactics (like Patient with the SF trainee at C), but in other occasions it forces you to be very one dimensional.

my team for example it very balanced, it has a slight favor for insidetactics, but I could play outside tactics like Prince just as good. But because my SF trainees have to play at PG and are not very suitable in passing or shooting I can't really play outsidetactics at the moment and I am forced to play LI all the time. (it does work very good, but I would prefer a normal lineup)

I'll ask you the same questions I asked Joe. You don't have to answer, at this point I think its rhetorical but maybe you'll surprise me.

Guess, you mean these?

Key follow up questions:
Had BB never had this out of position stuff to begin with it, would that really mean you wouldn't have liked it?
IF they get rid of out of position will you quit?
If there was no out of position and they were suggesting to implement out of position, would anyone like that suggestion?
In a game where there was no out of position and say 60k users, do you think they would keep more than 5 of them if they suddenly implemented out of position training?

1) BB doesn't have out of position stuff only. You can easily train Centers by playing them at Center their whole life. You can do the same with PGs and SGs as well and there are thousands of people doing so.
But if you want to have well rounded players you either have to play them out of position OR train them with less than 100% of weekly possible training. I see a challenge there - you see a flaw.
I quit quite a few games where training was for dummies, yes.
Things that made training a lot easier considering out of position training are defensive switches and %es for training on position.

2) If they make training so easy it's going to be a non-brainer I'll not quit. I'm still here because of other people not because of the flawlessness of this game.

I'll not answer 3) and 4) because they are too theoretical.

Summarizing again:
I like training as it is: fast, not too fast. Challenging, but not impossibly difficult.

This is a managment game. Management takes time. So does training.

hey Karangula, I think you are right in a lot of points. Training should not be easy, banal and boring. Still I think there might be a way in between which combines the "trickyness" of out of position training with a more enjoyable game experience.

I would like to hear your opinion on this: (278239.1). It is more a theoretical discussion I don't mind if training stays like it is, but I wonder if this wouldn't be much more interesting, expecially for new users who come here to play basketball and want their players to have good stats and performances from the beginning..