BuzzerBeater Forums

The randomeness is not the minute that will be given in a specific game, repeating every factor in it.

Maybe naming it randomeness wasn't the right word.

Anyhow, in the scenario already given, any coach in the real world (with minimal sense), will know that there is no reason to give more minutes to the backup that played a lot that week over the starter that didn't play to much that week.
Again, in a game that went to garbage time due to your team beating the other team!

If we also continue with the real world comparison, lets take the current (or at least the one who played two years ago) SA spurs team.
It is a very good team but with some aging issue...
In case Ginobili (for example) would have get 48 minutes (or so) per game, the team would beat most of the teams, but in the end of the year at the playoff this player would be exausted.

Look. Just list 7 players. Play, follow depth chart strickly. Do not assign positions you are training. Example. Your training Center. List the 2 reserves for the PG, SG, and SF position, leave empty the PF and C position and you'll have a whole lot less problems. Its been working for me. I rarely have minute problems, and can regularly get 3 players with 48+, while single position training.

WHat you gave is a single case solution.

When you want to train two players and not just one (for example) you need the minutes split much better.
Especially when you have other limitations for some of the games that are not only related to training consideration.

A coach-engine much be define in a way that, in the scenario I gave, he will act reasonably regarding the minutes splitted in that garbage-time while winning the game.

I've had no problems get 48+ mins for 6 players, doing it my way.

Yes, but they where 6 splitted to 5 positions.

In case you want to train 2 C, and one of them is your main player and the other a prospect, it is not that simple...

And again, simple or not does not answer to the issue I've raised regarding the logic of a coach in the case stated.

Your answer is kind of specific and not realy realistic to most of the cases.

In your first case, it describes a case when each of the 3 players played exactly one game (on that single position) from start of the game untill its ending.
This means that they need to have a very good stamina, that you are able to give them those minutes with no harm to the team ability (meaning they are all in a very close ability level, or at least higher than other teams).

In addition, if the engine is desgined right, your players should suffer more from injuries, as the probability to an injury rises upon minutes in a single game. The same is true for stamina drop.
WWhat I mean is that 48 minutes in a single game should have worse affect than 48 minutes spreaded in a week.

Your way of thinking in general is "it is working don't touch it".
This way of thinking causes things to stay as it is and not improve.

You also basically didn't gave any reason why a coach will act as he did in the scenario I gave.

So summarizing it up, I think the case you gave doesn't answer the general cases.
I think that there is no reason why not improving the engine for example in the given scenario.

Thanks for your time and response.

If it truly is a waste of your time, you should revisit your priorities because our lives are too short to be wasting our time.

I love the game of basketball and Buzzerbeater is still the best basketball manager online, in spite of the flaws and idiosyncrasies that I mentioned. So I shall continue to waste my time on the game for the near future, but thanks for your concern.

No problem.

Simply not going to happen.

Minute management is what differentiates the good managers from the bad. Taking this away would make the game far too easy for everyone to manage GS and training.

For the purposes of game design, I can see why the BBs don't implement this.

Making it too easy would definitely be a problem. But on the other hand, if you have two starter-caliber players at the same position, both with high stamina, it's nearly impossible to try to get the backup anything more than about 6 to 8 minutes, regardless of which one you pick, and when you have three bigs you want to have a reasonable rotation at PF/C, it's even worse. I'd honestly just like the option to reduce a player's stamina to mediocre. if we can't get get an option to at least let the coach know that we would like them to use the backups at certain positions.

sadly your post it a bit overseen here, cause i think that you could change it without taking away the challenge of managing minutes. Maybe it would be really possiblie, to make something like an 6th man role where the backup is considered equally as a starter.
or overwork the Coach deciision with the coach set up, cause i get such an 6th men feeling easily when i play coach decides with a blank lineup but when i ply coach decides with a given lineup my coach forgets to substitute. Sounds weird but at least that is my experience with my roster, that when the coach have a pair of players for a position the result may change from 28/20 to 42/6 through the fact that you give him a starter(and strictly follow gives more backkup minutes even with equally strong players).