BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Couple of suggestions I have..

Couple of suggestions I have..

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
160866.12 in reply to 160866.11
Date: 10/14/2010 2:44:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
Also having an option that says "when up by this amount slow the tempo" you say the AI makes in game changes but it doesnt... my team was up 30+ points in its last game and was still chuckin up 3's when there was 10+ seconds on the shot clock. In a situation like that you should have an option that says when up by so much go for the lay ups inside shots and vice versa..when down by so much start taking more 3's

This Post:
11
160866.13 in reply to 160866.12
Date: 10/14/2010 3:13:41 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
because it is working :)

Switch to inside shot, who are maybe more difficult for the team could help you to loose the lead.

This Post:
00
160866.14 in reply to 160866.13
Date: 10/14/2010 5:03:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
And you didnt get what I am saying. You can switch to inside shot during the game.

This Post:
00
160866.15 in reply to 160866.14
Date: 10/15/2010 8:43:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
So let me get this straight. You would like your team with outside focused tactics, start to go for layups (when up by 30) against an opponent who has only inside def and is playing 2-3 zone? To make sure you miss all those shots and give them an opportunity to get back into the game?
The game engine is fine, you give your team orders and game engine makes small corrections (looks for the best shooting opportunitys) when needed. The only thing missing atm is letting your team play for point difference instead of blowout rule coming into effect.

From: hoo-cee
This Post:
22
160866.16 in reply to 160866.15
Date: 10/17/2010 8:43:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
Can someone tell me why it should be hard to get as many minutes to your players as you want? And if your answer is training (or BB or something else) would be too easy, then I'd like to know why training should be hard or shouldn't be easy?

There are some "tricks" in minute management that make no logic. For example: you play with "strictly follow depth chart", if on foul trouble "let them play" and you put the same player as a starter, a backup and a reserve for the same position. With my logic you should then get 48 minutes to that player in any situation (except injury, fouled out), but that's not how it works. If you end up leading 20+ points in the 4th quarter that player will be substituted to another one and hence fails to get all 48 minutes.

Unless you have only assigned 5 players for that match so that it's unpossible to make the substitution... If you have assigned 8 players then still might happen that the player you want to get 48 minutes gets taken off during a blowout in the end and the guy whose minutes aren't that important will play.

IMO the minute management system really could use some improvements.

Last edited by hoo-cee at 10/17/2010 8:45:37 PM

From: Kukoc

This Post:
00
160866.17 in reply to 160866.16
Date: 10/18/2010 6:35:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
If you have assigned 8 players then still might happen that the player you want to get 48 minutes gets taken off during a blowout in the end and the guy whose minutes aren't that important will play.
Unless you assign those 3 sub players to specific spots.
I'd like to know why training should be hard or shouldn't be easy?
Because people want to play challenging games.

From: rwystyrk

This Post:
00
160866.18 in reply to 160866.17
Date: 10/18/2010 8:24:51 AM
BC Hostivař
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
12021202
Second Team:
Jirkov
You can assign well sub players and still there is nothing guaranteed.
(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/26583723/reportmatch.as...)
This substitution (Portocarrero for Capela on PG) is one of most ridiculous I have ever seen on BB. Does it have any sense to boost lineup at 1:07 before the end while leading 99-32?
My suggestions are:
Suggestion 1)
"Strictly follow depth chart" should be really strictly even in last 2 minutes or at least should be strictly in last 2 minutes if there is 20+(?) points difference. In close games I have nothing against this non-wanted substitutions.
Suggestion 2)
I can imagine split this option to two:
A) "Strictly follow depth chart" - strictly for whole 48 minutes
B) "Strictly follow depth chart (except for last 2 minutes)" - behaviour as present option
I can imagine option A) can cause drop in Fan Survey if it's used and team loses the close game.

I think even without these substitution situations training would be very challanging. Because training for example passing for PF/C, inside def. for PG/SG etc. is still very challanging even if you swap positions in defence.

From: Kukoc

This Post:
00
160866.19 in reply to 160866.18
Date: 10/18/2010 9:36:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
As BB's said, they never intended anyone to play just one guy at one spot the whole game (48 mins). So going for one position training with 3 players should be a risk. Injurys, fouling outs and odd substitutions. Working as intended.
Like I said the only thing we are actually missing is the play for +/- increase. Basically playing for the biggest lead and ignoring the blowout rule.

From: aigidios

This Post:
11
160866.20 in reply to 160866.19
Date: 10/18/2010 12:30:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
4040
If you compare that to the challenging effect of the training in other position than is suitable for the player, there is some kind of logic that it is necessary in order to make multiskill players valuable and so on. But once you have to fight with any wicked rules which makes your coach to substitute during bigger win and so on, it makes things really bizare and it just sucks.

Last edited by aigidios at 10/18/2010 12:31:12 PM

From: rwystyrk

This Post:
00
160866.21 in reply to 160866.19
Date: 10/18/2010 12:31:19 PM
BC Hostivař
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
12021202
Second Team:
Jirkov
I agree, that ignoring blowout rule should be usefull in same cases.

Back to my suggestion. This is suggestion forum, not bug forum. I know what in past BB's said but still I insist on my suggestion. There is already space for changing their mind. It's really totally unlogical that someone is penalized for huge lead. Because in game I mentioned if I was only 10 points ahead, Capela would have played 48, because Portocarrero would have been on SG and there wouldn't have been anyone on the bench who would have been selected on PG instead of Capela by coach.

From: hoo-cee

This Post:
00
160866.22 in reply to 160866.19
Date: 10/18/2010 5:03:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
As BB's said, they never intended anyone to play just one guy at one spot the whole game (48 mins). So going for one position training with 3 players should be a risk. Injurys, fouling outs and odd substitutions. Working as intended.

If I play a scrimmage and I win by a lot I can never be sure what kind of minutes my players will get. If I lose it or play a very close game the minutes will be more as planned. It's really not logical and probably not intended, but something that has just happened.

There is a BB quote about "not intended one player to play the whole game"?

Advertisement