BuzzerBeater Forums

Okay, but what other conditions have changed? Stamina of both him and his replacements, the relative quality of him and his replacements, the closeness of games, the attributes of his opposing player and your opposing team, on and on ... all affect it. To be fair, BLU was just an exploit that they finally got around to closing. We can learn to cope w/o BLU, surely.

Other conditions?

Heavy mins means more chance of injury. ... have you not seem that in your time yet, go by your own games played.

Why on earth do we have stamina here then? It should not be the better stamina you have the more mins played. .. it should be direct effectiveness throughout the game. In the BLU FIX and Injecting your lineup manually having mediocre stamina is the way to go. .... this in itself is just wrong in spirit.

Other conditions?

Yes, just what I listed there, for example.

Heavy mins means more chance of injury.

I already agreed with that. Twenty minutes played, twenty chances of injury. Forty minutes played, forty chances of injury.

Why on earth do we have stamina here then?

Performance deteriorates as fatigue sets in. With good stamina, performance deteriorates more slowly.

Other conditions?

Yes, just what I listed there, for example.

Heavy mins means more chance of injury.

I already agreed with that. Twenty minutes played, twenty chances of injury. Forty minutes played, forty chances of injury.

Why on earth do we have stamina here then?

Performance deteriorates as fatigue sets in. With good stamina, performance deteriorates more slowly.

Again why MAX mins for MAX stamina?
There needs to be a change there.

Again why MAX mins for MAX stamina?
There needs to be a change there.

I'm not clear what you are asking for ... minimum minutes for maximum stamina ... maximum minutes for minimum stamina?

he probably ask that stamina influence performance but not number of minutes on court..
and i agree with that

Amen!
Pound for pound. . If you have two players with the exact same skill set down the board. .. one with mediocre stamina and one with proficient..... who should do more damage?
As it stands the proficient stamina player is in great danger because of the increased odds of injury due to 42+ mins a game. ... on average!
Right now with this system the only benefit of having high stamina players (which should be the standard) is when you KNOW your opponent will play RNG during a game. ... your team won't be gassed by the mid to late 3rd qter and the 4th turns into a layup drill.
If you play m2m because a 3-2 may not stop second chances under the basket.

How could something so fundamental be so misapplied here for so long? Again the BLU countered this flaw and let me state I'm not against the principals of the change at all.

But in practice teams like myself who did not abuse that tactic, all realism to the game is gone. ... flat out gone!

The issue at hand has been raised of how can we get that reslism back within the next calender year. Again this is on a fundamental level.
By addressing this it changes the game as a whole for the better.

Is this a Basketball SIM. ..... or baseball? Because as far as I'm concerned I'm staffed with a bunch of pitchers!
American League!

Last edited by BarryS at 2/20/2015 10:47:28 AM

As it stands the proficient stamina player is in great danger because of the increased odds of injury due to 42+ mins a game. ... on average!

A. The odds of an injury in the first minute are the same as the odds of an injury in the 41st minute ... which is actually giving a break to the high stamina player, who in RL might be more at risk in his fatigued state.

B. BLU often played your best players more, not less, thus increasing their odds of injury. And worse yet, it was out of your control.

I see BLU going away as a good thing for these reasons.

The point that BLU played my best players more........I'm here to tell you I have consistently seen just the opposite the past 3 seasons.... it kept mins down , so that point you have repeatedly stated.
Again without BLU my mins are way up....I know I have mentioned that point to you before.
You are speaking to something you possibly saw in print........I'm talking to you about extensive experience dealing with this personally.
But as you have stated you don't have time to digest my team stats for the past few seasons.

check any game of your own NT and you'll see that Barry is right. I can promise you the near totality of NT teams used to play blanks (because it was the most effective). Better minute distribution was a side effect (probably intended for some other feature, maybe LCD, which is also not working as intended and only working properly with blanks) and by better we mean lower minutes on the starters and higher on the backups.

Well, I'll have to take you guys' word about the NT's. I don't study them.

I still think removing exploits improves the game overall, though, and the NT manager having to set lineups seems like a miniscule price to pay. They're qualified to do that, eh?