BuzzerBeater Forums

I think you are wrong, because "depth chart until 4th Q means use the lineup(starts) until 4th Q and then use the backup. It is or not?

I think you are wrong, because "depth chart until 4th Q means use the lineup(starts) until 4th Q and then use the backup. It is or not?

No, it means "use the depth chart until the 4th and then do whatever you think is best". Or at least that's what I think.

Either way, if something is buggy we don't know how it's going to behave anyhow, I guess.

Wouldn't depth chart until 4th mean:
-first 3 quarters are run using strictly follow depth chart
-final quarter is run using let coach decide

If so, then the starters should never be switched immediately (because it's SFDC)

That's precisely how I thought it works. The question is to isolate some common condition for the starting lineup failure, and there seems to be none yet

Wouldn't depth chart until 4th mean:
-first 3 quarters are run using strictly follow depth chart
-final quarter is run using let coach decide

If so, then the starters should never be switched immediately (because it's SFDC)

That's precisely how I thought it works. The question is to isolate some common condition for the starting lineup failure, and there seems to be none yet :/

well, a lot of people specified that they used "Strictly follow deep chart" or "Depth chart chart until 4th" and the match has started with wrong line up.

In my case it happens every week for the friendly. Simply whatever I choose as substitution options, if there is a very better player set as 2nd or 3rd the match start with him as 1st.

In my case it happens every week for the friendly. Simply whatever I choose as substitution options, if there is a very better player set as 2nd or 3rd the match start with him as 1st.

The same here.

so you have a good player A and a bad player B

you put B as starter, A as backup

but in the match report A shows up as starter

does A get the playing time he normally would as a starter with B as a backup? or does B get more time than he normally would if he were a backup?

i know it sounds like a funny question, but depending on the answer it points me towards one reason or another.

A get normally time would as a starter and B don't get more time than he normally would if he were a backup.

can i get other opinions on this point.. i cant stress enough how much this would help localize the bug.

two caveats... if player B were a backup normally would he get any time? and is he getting no time now?

this result is confusing to me because you are saying that this a) only happens when B is starting instead of A... so it only happens when you try to start a worse player

so perhaps the coach is overrulling you as to who should start... but then you are saying it is as if the depth chart was never even loaded correctly because you can't see ANY effect on Bs minutes.

see either the IO is broken and the coach is getting the wrong orders, or the coach is implementing the orders incorrectly.

the fact that this only happens when B is set to start would lead me to believe it is the coach implementing the orders incorrectly, on the other hand if you see no effect it makes me think the coach never got the orders in the first place. (that isnt to say you didnt submit the tactics, but somewhere along the data chain they got dropped).

The first observation could be because people always have the default lineup be their best players and then its these modifications that put their worse players first which are getting missed and then the coach gets the default orders instead.... anyway... please if people can look closely and see if what bruno says holds for them.

Yes, B normally would get time when he were a backup.
And no, he is getting time now.



Sorry for my english and I hope I have understood what you asked and answer what you asked.

Ok this is the case I've been looking at and testing.

Let's start with game (10313097)
Everyone got correct minutes higher played time listed as option 1 and scrap minutes as option 2. Slow paced offence used to neglate stamina issues. Only spot that was different was C spot where E.Ida started but was listed as option 2. Now you could think that there is a big quality difference between those 2 but PF spot had basically the same difference.

Next (10320731)
This game I thought i was smarter. PG,SG and C spot reserves were listed as option 3. Other spots as option 2. Slow paced offence used. Great was E.Ida was not started and played only 9 minutes notice the same guy at C spot as earlier game.

Finally (10337266)
Needed more minutes for one of my PF's and E.Ida. Only PG reserve was used as 3'rd option. All other spots were used as option 1 and option 2. R.Ameters and E.Ida were used as subs (option2). Normal paced offence was used. Surprise surprise E.Ida started the game and to my bigger surprise R.Ameters was not switched to starter although he was subbed in as fast as possible and as you can see played more time that the 1-st option. I you look at the jump ball of this game you can see that the other team also switches out one man at jump ball thats just wrong.

Conclusion: I think the coach is trying to win the game from the start as I always used Depth chart until 4-th and as you can prolly figure out that my defalt is not slow paced offence + I used normal to even show that he get's the part what tactic to play but just can't get over my lineup and tryes to correct it.

Huh too long I hope it helps gotta sleep now...