BuzzerBeater Forums

And likewise in HT you lose skills differentially with age: some skills are easier to drop than others. Also, despite the fact that his skills have started to drop, a 32-year-old can still be a great player in HT. 'Not losing his brain' is also exactly reflected by accumulated experience which is not dropping.

I knew it!! My coach IS losing his mind: he is steadlily losing experience... :)

Absolutly right in both cases :p But the money was just to good for him to refuse...
But anyway, back to the topic!

Oh, and I thought continuous stamina training was great -- now I don't have to bother about changing my training to accommodate for stamina.

do you think so? Make from teams a farms for NTs with 5 percent share stamina? Another disadvantage, Bleah?:)

No they are not! We need proof!! ;-)

NT injuries cannot be longer than the game in which the injury was suffered.

This is a confirmed fact.

optimizing team policies for 1 single player and optimizing team policies for the entire squad rarely coincide

I'm sure about that after share-stamina implementation, I hope that it will be never like that in here, where is still possible to have an NT player and do something with your team like (for example) in real life, but I heard that HT is more about well-gameplay, which is after this implementation indeed very well

but I would like to stop the OT, this topic shouldn't be about mistakes of one old game

hi charles,

you stated "The problem in effect is that a team earning $13M per season can afford to pay $750k/week in salary, but is incapable of doing so with the talent currently in BuzzerBeater. As training catches up and the game reaches equilibrium, the players union will need less and less of a cut, eventually going away, because the players themselves will be earning that money"

my view to this is this, what your doing right now controlling the inflation is correct. but can it really solve the issue in the future?

but to actually see it happening is kinda hard, because the way i see it is this we have 3 golden years of training that is ages of 17-20 will train faster then from 20-22 would be slower and 23-24 is more slower and 24 onwards lets not hope too much to see results. ( this is how i feel about it, im not a expert in training )

with this, how much talent can we develop in this span of time in 2-3 seasons. only to see those in division 1 teams or even yet better division 1 teams would still be hoarding talents since they have the money and buying power to get superstars and the scraps would just be only for lower division teams.

you can see the trade market you cant see a lot of talent this is one of the reasons why prices can jack up so high especially when you see 4 respectable and 1 strong to even hit close to 2 million. only way i can see this resolve is

1) we have a high increase in user base that can train more players
2) increase the speed of training ( yes its been done before )

because if we have a number of quality players in the market then only then will the market come to normalize a price. ( suppy and demand )

what im suggesting is can we speed up training to a point that it reaches a point and from then on it goes normal to slow. i know its ridiculous and im not really good at explaining this. i flunk at comprehension.

my point can we set that players from atricious till it reaches average or respectable to train more faster, because the more we see this kind of players in the market the prices would be regulated. but from that point on onwards would be normal pace or speed. also this encourages players to try develop more players than just concentrating on his lone star.

in truth, any player even without much talent needs just to work hard to develop some skills fast. im sure just give him playing time and proper training he will develop better than before but to what extent already depends. this isnt about if he is a all star or mvp or 6th man, its like this i play basketball and totally suck at passing or shooting surely every practice ill be ask to do passing or even shoot 100 shots, surely ill be better than what i am before but wont necesarilly mean i can beat those shooters or can be a good assist guy.

because i meant by atricious is he totally suck at this, i have a guard who cant shoot ft that he has a 4% average from ft line. surely if i train him more he will be better, now normally as human beings if before i was hitting 4% with a little training i would probably get 30-40% ft average faster or even in no time but to hit 50-70% average is going to need a lot more work into it.

the truth is, we have already a system with the training but we are still creating more of a gap since one team can only train 4 at a time while results vary differently. im not saying results should be the same but it gives more room to create. im not saying to change it but enhance it.

as i see it, 400k tv revenue plus arena earnings. if this phase of controlling revenue is over ( we dont know till when ) probably it would get better but to what extent we cant actually tell. because users tend to go high at one point and low again and reach a average again.

only time ill see a team with 15-30k starters ( all 5 ) and role players of 10-15 k ( next 5 players ) in teams especially in division 1 is still kinda far.

i might be wrong here but this is how i vi

To make it short: speeding up training would sure make the market full of the top players we see once or twice nowadays. But they wouldn't be top players anymore, and the top players would still leave for enormous amounts of money.
Speeding up the training would only elevate the quality of players, it wouldn't regulate supply and demand. By the way, speeding it up would actually even make the difference between top players and average players even bigger, as it would also accelerate the gap between well trained players and not-so-well trained players. It's inevitable that there are only few top players on market. Unless you set a low cap for every player in the world, which seems a bit dumb.

so here the answer .. the junior NTs will be U21 .. look NT Rankings ..
and it's inclusive age 21..

what you says ..