BuzzerBeater Forums

I have a theory about experience that I am going to be kind enough to share with you without charge. It's pretty elaborate, based on lots of speculation, and thus could be wildly wrong. With that caveat, here goes:

I think of a given player's performance as being a result of (a) his skills and (b) the intangibles. Within (b) I place Game Shape, Stamina, and Experience. The importance of Game Shape in defining a player's performance is obvious to any one who has been through a season or two of this game. I have recently (over the last couple of seasons) discovered the benefits of Stamina, which I understand as the ability to sustain peak performance in a game. In both of these cases, all skills are enhanced (from what I can tell) -- to put it more broadly, players "play better" (that is, no one skill works better, but I think they all do).

BuzzerBeater is a relatively young game -- we are only in season 12 -- and for that reason I think Experience is the least understood, least appreciated, and least exploited of the "intangibles". To make a cheap joke, we have no experience with Experience. My guess is the effect of Experience is similar to that of Game Shape and Stamina -- all skills are maximized with the most experienced. I expect that as our understanding of the game matures, more coaches will come to value a player with high Experience -- indeed, because it can not be "trained", it may prove to be more valuable than Stamina or Game Shape.

Implications? As with so much of this game, balance is important. Right now, coaches fall all over the 18-year old with great potential, but place no premium on the solid, experienced pro (judging from the Transfer List). I once thought 26-year olds were not worth the effort, but now I am guessing that a 26-year old with a decent skill set but much experience may be much more useful to my team than a comparably skilled 19-year old who demands a great deal of time and attention (training).

That said, an Experienced player is still limited by his skill set. I don't think a squad full of 27-year old inexpensive, but experienced, would be a wise way of building a winner. And LeBron at 20 is much better than Corey Maggette at 30, but Steve Nash young is not as good as Steve Nash experienced.

i know which post you mean, but this was about why 18 year old starts with respectable Experience and 31 old have atrocious starting values there - so it wasn't really on topic about XP raises in the game.

And yes they change the system^^

this is not the post i was talking about.
the post i was talking about was directly about exp gained via mins and what effects the amount of exp

I am skeptical. Can you find some proof?

I read through this entire thread, and it seems that everyone is in agreement on experience progressing linearly. This makes sense to me, but, has anyone considered that a player's potential may also factor in to the equation? For example, the role player may progress slower than a superstar in experience.

Perhaps it is a crazy thought, but with the broad range of numbers provided for minutes between experience pops, maybe potential functions as a variable?

I would definitely agree with Hassan Donnelly. In my last league game, down 84-68 going into the 4th, my most experienced player scored 15 in the final quarter and knocked down the game winning shot.

im not a supporter so that will take me forever.
someone care to search for said post?
it was from the bb answer day way back when

The real question is: how does the minute breakdown between each type of game impact how fast experience increases? I guess the only way to really know the value for each game is to get a couple more people to volunteer and do the same thing I just did with my player. If anyone is interested let me know and I can open a new federation.

I've started tracking my players. I have 8 guys left over from the original team that was generated for me, ranging in experience from atrocious to inept. I signed up right after the all-star break, so I only have a little less than half a season of data, and granted, I don't have NT players and the Cup season is over. But I think league and scrimmage minutes should provide a baseline as these are the only two constants. Cup, Playoff, and NT games are variables as not everyone participates. I'm leaning towards the idea that scrimmage minutes count simply because they count for training skills.
One side note, though: I noticed that for some players, the sum of their individual game minutes is more than the minutes displayed in the season totals. I assume that's because individual game minutes are rounded up and season totals are not. That may be an insignificant amount for half a season of data, but it could potentially lead to a larger margin of error if in fact it takes a season and a half to gain a level in Experience.

I remember that thread, as well. I will search for it. I can't recall if a BB made that statement or just a regular user, though.

Edit: Found the thread I was thinking of...pretty sure it was the stickied thread for experience in this very forum. Not sure this is what you were thinking of, though. It says nothing difinitive, just personal experiences and conjecture. I would be interested to see a BB's comment if you could find one.

Last edited by GCCSteel at 6/10/2010 1:16:52 PM

So I decided to run some numbers on my players that I have had long term for you guys to analyze. Each of them had Atrocious experience when I got them. All the minutes are approximate, I have tracked my entire career w/ BuzzerControl which I update every Friday.

Player 1: (7922017) Drafted By Me 18 y/o, Has gone from Atrocious -> Inept
Pop 1
League: 1009
Cup: 107
Playoff: 162
Scrimmage: 358
Total: 1636

Pop 2:
League: 1074
Cup: 31
Playoff: 259
Scrimmage: 200
NT: 69
Total: 1633

Pop 3:
League: 1102
Cup: 41
Playoff: 166
Scrimmage: 26
NT: 259
Total: 1594

Player 2: (7921982) Drafted by me 19 y/o Has gone Atrocious -> Awful
Pop 1
League: 1024
Cup: 97
PO: 130
Scrim: 247
Total: 1498

Pop 2:
League: 730
Cup: 56
Playoff: 173
Scrimmage: 462
Total: 1421

Player 3: (6925069) Bought when he was 19 w/ Atrocious XP. Has gone from atrocious -> Inept
Pop 1:
League: 986
Cup: 355
Playoff: 191
Scrimmage: 396
Total: 1928

Pop 2:
League: 767
Cup: 40
Playoff: 141
Scrimmage: 501
Total: 1449

Pop 3:
League: 1106
Cup: 133
Playoff: 104
Scrimmage: 230
Total: 1573

Player 4: (8983257) Bought by me when 18. Has gone from Atrocious -> Awful
Pop 1:
League: 1044
Cup: 85
Playoff: 112
Scrimmage: 479
Total: 1720

Pop 2:
League: 1046
Cup: 48
Playoff: 252
Scrimmage: 120
Total: 1466

When I have time I am going to run some basic numbers trying to predict the importance of each game and roughly the time it takes to pop. If more people could post data like I have it would increase the sample size and the accuracy.

That is fantastic data, but the only conclusive evidence I can see from your very tiny sample size is that pops take more than 1400 cumulative minutes.