BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Ingame rotation

Ingame rotation

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
1584.10 in reply to 1584.9
Date: 10/11/2007 5:00:28 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
well the first thing i'd say is that form might have changed between the games....

but that's i think a secondary point.

The first one is that there is this inherent tradeoff in a flexible substitution pattern. Earlier in the game we were getting massive complaints that the depth chart was not being obeyed strictly enough. We altered this pattern and now it gets more weight, even in the case of LCD. Now the problem is that it seems hard to set that weight correctly across all teams... maybe I should consider removing the depth chart weight a bit form LCD, but then people are going to complain that it lets users win who don't take the time to set depth charts well.

so i feel a bit like i'm getting tugged in two different directions, and our general feeling is that in those situations we are probably in the right ballpark... since people are equally unhappy on both sides.

perhaps though we should consider allowing people to set the weighting themselves.. so they can better control the distribution of minutes.

From: snuzers
This Post:
00
1584.11 in reply to 1584.10
Date: 10/11/2007 5:17:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
perhaps though we should consider allowing people to set the weighting themselves.. so they can better control the distribution of minutes.


I think this a good idea. I believe I posted something about assigning number of minutes to each player for each game, but I understand that is difficult.
However, a weighting system works equally as well. It sounds a bit easier to implement.

This Post:
00
1584.12 in reply to 1584.11
Date: 10/11/2007 6:44:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Ideally, I would like to be able to weight different positions. Maybe I want my centre to play the whole game, but maybe I want the coach to sub my SF as he sees fit. Something along those lines.

I would also like the option of playing my guys no matter how many fouls they have. If I'm training them, I want them to be on the court as much as possible. Currently, if a guy hits a high number of fouls early, the coach takes him off for an extended period. I might prefer to leave him out there until he fouls out.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
From: LA-Niko
This Post:
00
1584.13 in reply to 1584.10
Date: 10/11/2007 7:06:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2121
I think setting out own weight sounds like a great idea.

I have had many arguments saying that LCD became too strict but there are a lot on the other side.

But thinking back to first season I think there still needs to be a minimum weight somewhere between what LCD was and what LCD is now.

Creator of (http://www.buzzerbeaterstats.com) and (http://www.buzzerbeaternews.com/) -- Ex GM of Australia -- Division 1 winner of Italy Season 1 then moved team to Australia after the country was created by the BBs. Australian team manager for 2 seasons. Won various tournaments and division 1 titles in the following seasons.
From: raonne

This Post:
00
1584.14 in reply to 1584.9
Date: 10/11/2007 10:46:17 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1616
Let me get this straight:

LCD causes more substitutions, but only in case the subs skill is a little less than the starters.

On my last two games I've played LCD. On the first I put an SG A, and he played 40 and he played 40 minutes, where his sub (lets call him SG B) played the rest 8. On the last game, I've put SG B as a starter and SG A as backup. According to what you've said, SG A should get a good amount of minutes, as he have better skill than A. Nevertheless, SG B, which had a lousy shooting game (4 of 20 from the field) was given by the coach 42 minutes (!), where SG A only got 6, which he used marvelously 9 points (3 of 3 behind the arc!).

How can we explain this?


Before you said one game was in "Follow DC until 4th" and the one after was in "LCD".
"Follow DC until 4th" means SFDC for 3 quarters, which explains everything, as detailed in my previous post.

This Post:
00
1584.15 in reply to 1584.10
Date: 10/12/2007 11:06:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9696
an other option would be to add the posibility to set a minimum or maximum amount of playtime for players.

You could then for example tell the coach to have the substitute play at least 15 minutes, or have the starter play max 35 minutes... or even have the substitute play at least 25 and max 30 minutes.


They are not your friends; they dispise you. I am the only one you can count on. Trust me.
This Post:
00
1584.16 in reply to 1584.15
Date: 10/12/2007 1:34:08 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2121
This has been suggested before and it would lead to much too easy training of players etc.

How would it be a challenge to train perfect amount of minutes and still win if we could specify the exact minutes a player plays?

Creator of (http://www.buzzerbeaterstats.com) and (http://www.buzzerbeaternews.com/) -- Ex GM of Australia -- Division 1 winner of Italy Season 1 then moved team to Australia after the country was created by the BBs. Australian team manager for 2 seasons. Won various tournaments and division 1 titles in the following seasons.
This Post:
00
1584.17 in reply to 1584.16
Date: 10/12/2007 2:04:27 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Why does training and setting minutes have to be such a challenge?

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
1584.18 in reply to 1584.17
Date: 10/12/2007 2:43:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
Why does training and setting minutes have to be such a challenge?


this is a very good question.

I would love to play a game which is realistic but making it difficult to give the players a certain amount of minutes is very unrealistic.

i want to tell my coach this guy should play 35min. if a players is having a good game, coach can decide to play him 41 min, if he is having a bad day coach is able to say u r only playing 29 min.

This Post:
00
1584.19 in reply to 1584.18
Date: 10/12/2007 2:56:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
Why does training and setting minutes have to be such a challenge?

this is a very good question.

I would love to play a game which is realistic but making it difficult to give the players a certain amount of minutes is very unrealistic.

i want to tell my coach this guy should play 35min. if a players is having a good game, coach can decide to play him 41 min, if he is having a bad day coach is able to say u r only playing 29 min.


The game needs to be a challenge.

If everything was handed to everyone, there'd be no point in playing.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
1584.20 in reply to 1584.19
Date: 10/12/2007 4:02:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
I hope you will agree with me that there are lots of challenges in this game. Why do you need to make unrealistic ones when this is the case?

The minutes thing is not really a challenge, if you think about it. It just means you have to log in more often to keep massaging your line-up. Does the game want to advantage people who can log in more often?

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
Advertisement