BuzzerBeater Forums

If you notice that walkover occurs then you should know boxscore. It looks like:

Final 	1 	2 	3 	4 	Total
AAAA 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0
BBBB 	0 	0 	0 	0 	25


AAAA            	Team Ratings    	BBBB
 
????            	Offensive Strategy 	????
????            	Defensive Strategy 	????
 
atrocious (low) 	Outside Scoring 	atrocious (low)
atrocious (low) 	Inside Scoring  	atrocious (low)
atrocious (low) 	Perimeter Defense 	atrocious (low)
atrocious (low) 	Inside Defense  	atrocious (low)
atrocious (low) 	Rebounding      	atrocious (low)
atrocious (low) 	Offensive Flow   	atrocious (low)
 
Matchup Ratings
Points per 100 Shots 	Position 	Points per 100 Shots
0.0             	as PG   	0.0
0.0             	as SG   	0.0
0.0             	as SF   	0.0
0.0             	as PF   	0.0
0.0             	as C    	0.0

and all players have game log like:

0 - 0  0 - 0  0 - 0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  NR

or

Did Not Play - Coach's Decision

Played minutes depend on lineup so they are known as well.

Last edited by B.B.King at 1/25/2013 8:26:35 AM

Yep thats great, but thats not want i need.
What i dont know whilst i wait for the game to finish, is how the ladder is going to look after the game, because it doesn't update until the ladder until my walkover game is finished - which just seems silly and pointless to me.

This is what I also thought too which is what made me surprised when last nights Private league standings were updated about 1 minute after my game finished. Even the player averages got updated straight after the game was finished.

PL games finish normally start around 6pm my time, this game was still running 2 hours later, so it might be that the standing updates happen at a set time after game kick off or until last game finished. (eg: triple overtime would push this time out) so if this is the case, maybe they can just exclude walkovers, display 25-0 straight up and save all that time.

yup exactly.

plus im sure having it run as a calculated game is extra processing that just doesn't need to happen. so maybe if they took away these games from running as a viewable process, it may save on calculation/processing usage?

The WO games are run to determine injuries.

Thanks Wally, that does explain why the game is calculated - but now im wondering if this should be the case as well. Seems a bit illogical to me.

Say you set a normal 10-man lineup, with each backup being the same as reserve.
2 minutes into the game, the starting PG gets injured.
At the end of the game, he still ends with 36 mins (36? Or is it 40? i cant remember)... that number... of minutes for the game. yet was injured 2 mins in. (Is this true?!?! Would this actually happen? I assume so).
Or reverse the situation - In the game caluclation, the backup PG gets injured after player 20 mins in the game, yet ends up with 12 minutes allocated for that game. How can that be?

So the game is run to calculate injuries, but no statistics are used, no weekly minutes (from the game) are used and all else is pre-determined.
If ur going to allocate a player training minutes, without them having to actually play those mnutes, then why play the game at all?
In real life, what would happen is that the other team would forfiet and no game would be played - therefore no injuries, BUT also no minutes - I realise that a calulation is requied to allocate minutes in this game for training... but at the moment its just a calculation that does not require the game to be run... so just take out injuries from WO and dont run the game. hey presto :)

The injuries are possible in WO games in order to keep the playing field as equal as possible. The idea is not to punish the team that wants to play (they get training minutes) and not to favour them either (they may get injuries). It can be argued that they are punished anyway as they will cannot get 48 minutes in a single position and so on, but this is anyway the reasoning to make the best out of a bad situation.

Of course, there are other ways to allocate injuries in WO games or other ways to reach a meaningful balance that would simultaneously reduce the server load. I just think the BB team has their hands full of work, and the current system is known to work so it is a low priority to change it. One thing to consider about the server load is that the WO games are probably not a bottleneck or in the worst path of the system complexity. There is a certain number of games every week, and an unknown number of them will be WO games. Thus, there needs to be capacity to run the full number of games each week. But future improvements in this area are anyway possible.