BuzzerBeater Forums

No...start a new one. Keep this one focused. ;)

i think i've to wait for an answer from Charles ^_^

That is the problem with linking training with playing time, but that is how BB is set up.

It isn't much different than telling LeBron that he can't start half of the time because you want someone else to also train ("I know you are by far our best player, but you've already played 48 minutes this week - go sit down").

i would love to know what type of games you watch. Some team put their point guard in the post when they feel they have an advantage to post up a smaler or weaker player. And jthe bucks once player the starting backourt in the post and had their big men shoot the thee. As a coach you should have freedom on how to train your players. If you have a 6"6 point gaurd why cant he post up someone who is 6"3. If a team wants to go small and out run me why cant i go big and post them up.

I played college ball and was a shooting guard and i practiced in the post. Not as much as our centers but if needed in a game i could post up the other team 2 guard and our centers worked on dribbling and shooting but not as much sas me. Its a common thing in training. Any good coach trains all his players in everything until it is obvious that he cant do something and then you do it a bit to keep him from getting worse.

Last edited by GM-ksachs at 5/9/2008 12:48:46 PM

My 2 cents on training:

While realism is good, there are two other main things to consider from a gameplay perspective:

Functionality: The training system should be able to provide adequate training where it's needed. For example, SFs need quite a bit of rebounding, since they're the third most important source in the team rating. However, the only way to get them this particular type of training is to either play them out of position at PF, or train the whole team in rebounding. And team training cannot be very fast, since it can potentially train up to 15 guys. So a clear failure there.

OTOH, I don't think it should be easy to create a SF who is proficient in both outside and inside skills at the same time. My impression is that by using different offensive tactics you can get away with a primarily perimeter-oriented or primarily inside-oriented SF.

My suggestion will be to have some more of the perimeter training regimes the option of 'Swingment' , and likewise -- 'Forwards' to the inside training regimes in order to allow SFs to train in 2-player training regimes, as opposed to 3-player training ones.

Which brings me to my second point:

Simplicity: I am, for one, strongly opposed to giving managers the opportunity of selecting their own training positions. I think the preset trainings system is more logical and less chaotic. Plus it is somewhat foolproof for newbies, as it guarantees that they train something which is at least marginally useful. Otherwise we'll see someone who's just starting up train SB for PGs, which is a recipe for disaster.

As far as WFUs post is concerned, he is right to an extend. But you can easily see this in your own game engine code: if a player is supposed to use a particular skill often, then he should be able to train it effectively. I know no skill is ever completely useless in BB, but some are clearly less useless than others

Hopefully this made a little bit of sense. Cheers on the good initiative -- at least you're not losing out on good weather while you're locked up in the office reading the forums ;)