BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Training Diversity

Training Diversity

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
319331.61 in reply to 319331.60
Date: 5/25/2023 12:47:30 PM
Pupazzia
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
139139
Second Team:
Puppets Madness
One thing I didn't find in PRO vs CONS is the effect on trainee.
I think both option will produce stronger/better players than now.
(now you are often forced to choose from the need of one trainee sacrifying the others, so you get the wage to big or the growth not equilibrated)
I see it as a CON, because IMHO there are already too much good players in BB.
IMHO, someone can see it as a PRO!

Another thing you mentioned in CONS is "Might change TL prices".
I think the point could be worst. Many manager will be able to avoid the need for selling/buying in the market. And there will be a desertification of good prospect for sale. Once you get that player you won't ever need to change your plans!
This in not necessarely a CON, but it lead to a lower engagement (lower views/login for BB).

PS: I'm still in doubt and didn't vote!

This Post:
22
319331.62 in reply to 319331.61
Date: 5/25/2023 1:00:52 PM
deanswer
IV.48
Overall Posts Rated:
177177
Second Team:
dequestion
I like the idea of making training more flexible, not to make it too easy as plan A.

I would modify slightly plan B as follow:
- training 1 that applies to Saturday and Tuesday games
- training 2 fot Thursday game

what do you think?

S52 CUP WINNER "non dire gatto se non ce l'hai nel sacco"
This Post:
44
319331.66 in reply to 319331.1
Date: 5/25/2023 5:14:03 PM
Cassville Yuck
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
553553
Second Team:
Yuckville Cass
This feels rushed. Pretty drastic changes proposed here for a game that is really well balanced. I prefer smaller changes and in stages so the economy as well as the user base are able to align and shift in a methodical manner.

I see Plan A seems to have significant support. I voted no change after some serious thought, would hope any owner that voted for plan A applied some similar thought. Not saying I am right and they are wrong, just really need to weigh all the ramifications that will come with a change like this. Once done, it can’t be undone.

This Post:
00
319331.67 in reply to 319331.37
Date: 5/25/2023 5:25:22 PM
Iqaluit Heat
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
1010
Second Team:
Iqaluit Heat II
You have your reasons for playing Buzzerbeater, I have mine. You have your opinion, I have mine. I'm just having too much fun training players

From: Moussx
This Post:
00
319331.69 in reply to 319331.68
Date: 5/25/2023 5:48:41 PM
Touristes de Sans-Souci
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
3131
I didn't vote because I prefer the system from this post : (319308.1)

I.e. distribute training tokens to your roster as long as they played more than 48 minutes in games that week.

That would solve my main issue with the training system: if you want to take full advantage of your training today, the only way is to make your trainees play 48 minutes in a single game, with a scuffed roster because bringing 10 players to the game makes the coach ruin the training.

I'd like to be able to prepare games with normal rosters, and also not have to worry that I would only be able to train 4.5 players on a 2 position training because minutes got automatically shared by the coach without me being able to do anything about it.

Last edited by GM-Perpete at 5/26/2023 1:28:40 PM

This Post:
11
319331.70 in reply to 319331.66
Date: 5/26/2023 8:03:01 AM
Spartan 300
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
52555255
Second Team:
Spartan Kids
You're right.
Plan A is too much. I don't like drastic changes either.
No change at all or at least something like Plan B where you can train 1 player differently, should be more then enough.

This is where we hold them!
Advertisement