BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Game shape

Game shape

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
215437.8 in reply to 215437.3
Date: 5/1/2012 12:19:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
406406
As far as I understand this suggestion... What you are asking for - more or less - it the abolishment of the "60 minutes"-optimum.

Even if you changed the scale from 1-9 to 1-20 it would not change anything, as there are already sublevels in GS, so a shift from a 9 point scale to a 20 point scale would only mean that the (sub)levels would be displayed more accurately.

From: CrazyEye

This Post:
00
215437.9 in reply to 215437.7
Date: 5/1/2012 12:23:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
but having more then a 1,5 drop with the current system, is a very big loss where you need to play a player nearly 3* 48 minutes. Normally it is pretty easy to keep your player betwen 7 and 9, as we know the gs drop faster when it is high and raise faster when it is low and even then one bad week normally let it drop to 8 and when it drop to 7 it have many sub which you can see with the dmi. (which still means roughly just doubling the scale, and make it maybe better to read)

If you don't want to reduce the effect of overplaying, that even quite normal.


Last edited by CrazyEye at 5/1/2012 12:29:17 PM

This Post:
00
215437.11 in reply to 215437.8
Date: 5/1/2012 1:42:30 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
134134
On the opposite- i think the 60 min optimum would be better kept since the sub-levels would be more obvious.

The main change would be in the approach of the teams towards losing GS.

Since if they keep it on 17-20 most of the time they would mind less lowering the game shape to 13-16 for a week than going down from 9-8 to 6-7.

Anyway, thank you for the building criticism - it can only improve the offer- i also put a link to this offer on the debate in the israeli forum so that other people can put their input here.



Last edited by TrinZ at 5/1/2012 1:44:30 PM

This Post:
00
215437.12 in reply to 215437.11
Date: 5/1/2012 2:26:20 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
173173
I personally think this is a great idea, but I think Trinz isn't focusing on the main thing here.

The main idea is not that we'll have 20 levels of game shape instead of 9 with a lot of sub levels (even due I think this is by itself a good idea- to have better awarness on your players exact game shape), the main idea is to make the game-shape system more stable, so teams that are taking good care for their players playing time constantly won't suffer so much if they have a hard week with 3 important games and will be able to put on their best players in all of the 3 games without completely destroying them (The players will still drop in game shape, only the effect won't be as big as now).

Ofcourse, it will also be harder to bring your players into good game-shape and 1/2 weeks won't be enough anymore, teams will have to constantly give their players good minutes in order to bring them into a high level of game-shape.



Last edited by Yotamnor at 5/1/2012 5:45:27 PM

This Post:
00
215437.13 in reply to 215437.12
Date: 5/1/2012 4:35:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
406406
Okay so you want some kind of sliding average where the amount of minutes should be ~60 minutes average over a couple of weeks right?

week 1: 120 minutes
week 2: 0 minutes
week 3: 30 minutes
week 4: 90 minutes

Gameshape still high/max.

Do I understand you right?

This Post:
00
215437.14 in reply to 215437.13
Date: 5/1/2012 4:47:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
no, he want is more static with lower up and down of gs

This Post:
00
215437.15 in reply to 215437.14
Date: 5/1/2012 5:43:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
173173
Exactly, what do you guys think?

This Post:
00
215437.16 in reply to 215437.14
Date: 5/2/2012 3:21:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
406406
But that cant be achieved if the displayed levels of GS are just widened from 9 to 20.

Makes no sense to me.

This Post:
00
215437.17 in reply to 215437.15
Date: 5/2/2012 3:28:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
to be honest, i don't think the game shape is so fast, you can already can do it one week now without having a big handycap next week but doing it on regular basis won't be good with the old and new system. During the time i hadn't the roster to play all game seriously, it was more enthusiam and training which keep me from playing 3 games on full power.

And if they make it, i hope they won't change the current scale, since this is imho more confusing.

From: TrinZ

This Post:
00
215437.18 in reply to 215437.17
Date: 5/2/2012 3:40:24 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
134134
It is simply not true that it is not a big handycap...

Just yesterday in my PO game i played a team that had all of her starting players on 6 GS - it happend because for 1 game their manager couldn't get to a computer in order to set a lineup- most of the starting player were on GS 8-9 the week before.

That team is one that won against me twice in the regular season - and beacuse of the bad GS they had the last game was a blowout in my favor.

The way i see it- the point is to subtle the effect of a specific game - if you want the example on the old scale - the team i was playing with would have gone down to a 7+ GS instead of a 6+ - the scale change adds a little more accuracy for teams to be able to be more flexible with letting GS go down a bit and adds some weeks in accumulating GS...


Last edited by TrinZ at 5/2/2012 3:45:03 AM

Advertisement