BuzzerBeater Forums

Well, if you do, how come then there is no response to our complains?
I set up my lineup with J. Whipple as my starting SG, but your GE started M. Alfaro who was assigned only to be Whipple's substitute.
How can we possibly know that you're doing anything - although I didn't noticed that anything was done in regards to my problem - if you not communicate with us?
And what about my other questions? As I pointed out in my original post, even if M. Alfaro was supposed to start - which he was NOT - why did he played so many minutes? If I remember correctly - and I do - GM's and BB's keep telling us how in blowout games GE rests starters regardless of whether we actually want that to happened or not. So then, once again, why did M. Alfaro played 43 minutes in blowout game?

Well, if you do, how come then there is no response to our complains?
I set up my lineup with J. Whipple as my starting SG, but your GE started M. Alfaro who was assigned only to be Whipple's substitute.
How can we possibly know that you're doing anything - although I didn't noticed that anything was done in regards to my problem - if you not communicate with us?
And what about my other questions? As I pointed out in my original post, even if M. Alfaro was supposed to start - which he was NOT - why did he played so many minutes? If I remember correctly - and I do - GM's and BB's keep telling us how in blowout games GE rests starters regardless of whether we actually want that to happened or not. So then, once again, why did M. Alfaro played 43 minutes in blowout game?

Well, even though I'm not a GM, I think there might be two explanations. One is that in that game you didn't instruct the coach to "strictly follow depth chart" - if you e.g. did set "depth chart until 4th" it regularly happens that the coach inserts the better player into the starting lineup. This is a bug that has been reported and the BBs haven't yet found a way to really fix it.

The other explanation, why he played 43 minutes is also quite simple (given the fact that he somehow was inserted into the lineup). He is by far the better player than Whipple and if Alfaro does have stamina at around 7-9 then my experience is that those players - even in a blowout-game tend to play longer than the usual startes with less stamina.

Well, even though I'm not a GM, I think there might be two explanations. One is that in that game you didn't instruct the coach to "strictly follow depth chart" - if you e.g. did set "depth chart until 4th" it regularly happens that the coach inserts the better player into the starting lineup. This is a bug that has been reported and the BBs haven't yet found a way to really fix it.

I believe that bottom line here is that this IS a bug, and that been said, BB should do their utmost to somehow compensate us until the problem is permanently fixed. Responding to our reports is a bare minimum of what they could, and should, do.

The other explanation, why he played 43 minutes is also quite simple (given the fact that he somehow was inserted into the lineup). He is by far the better player than Whipple and if Alfaro does have stamina at around 7-9 then my experience is that those players - even in a blowout-game tend to play longer than the usual startes with less stamina.

Quite simple? I don't think so.

Is Alfaro significantly better than Whipple? Yes, he is. But I could also make a case that my starting PF in that game, Drake (5653072), is also significantly better than his substitute, Daniels (11768932), yet Daniels managed to grab - in comparison to Whipple - solid 15 minutes. How do you explain that? And before you start talking about stamina again, Drake actually has the highest stamina on the team. Coincidentally, Daniels has the worst.
Besides, by the end of 3rd quarter I was up by 38 points(!) - don't you think that would warrant more minutes to Whipple regardless of how bad of a player he might be? And may I also remind you that we're talking about meaningless scrimmage here, too?
But in all honesty, I wouldn't be even half as pissed about this if there were some kind of consistency in the game. This way, in one blowout game GE almost equally distributes minutes between starters and their substitutes, and then in another blowout game - that is in no way different from the previous one - we have a case where starter logs 43 minutes. I mean, come on, man(!) that is a bull and you know it.
My biggest complain, though, still remains to be that I DID NOT set Alfaro to start that game.

P.S.
Thank you for time; I really appreciate it. Although you're not GM :)


Last edited by Mr. Hyde at 7/3/2011 4:55:49 PM

Try loading the lineup from that game and see how it is set. I know i have been pretty sure about setting the lineup right some times but have mixed it up in some way.

Actually, that was the first thing I did after the game was over AND I got confirmation that I set Whipple as a starter and Alfaro as his substitute. I pointed out at that in my opening post (26712.481), too, if you're willing to go back and read it once again.

P.S.
Thank you for time; I really appreciate it. Although you're not GM

You're welcome. And I absolutely agree with you that even though Whipple is such a bad player he should have logged in more minutes when you're up by 38 points. The only thing to add is that your coach doesn't make a difference between a league game or a scrimmage ... and don't get me wrong - I also think that's quite odd ... but anyway ... hope some BB is going to comment on this.

... hope some BB is going to comment on this.

4 days after I originally asked them for help? I wouldn't bet on that. But that is OK. I'm not even mad anymore; just very, very disappointed.

Just for the record, I'm playing another scrimmage tomorrow, and I will again set J. Whipple (19246479) to play as my starting shooting guard. And just as the last week, I will again set M. Alfaro (9210286) to play as his substitute.
Now, let's see what happens this time.

Just for the record, I'm playing another scrimmage tomorrow, and I will again set J. Whipple (19246479) to play as my starting shooting guard. And just as the last week, I will again set M. Alfaro (9210286) to play as his substitute.
Now, let's see what happens this time.

J. Whipple started and ended up playing 29 minutes today. M. Alfaro played as his substitute for 19 minutes. Out of those 19 minutes, 12 of Alfaro's minutes came in the last quarter, clearly as a result of the blowout.
That is how it should be, yet last week that was not case. Why?

P.S. Here is the link to this week's scrimmage (35721250) And once again, here is the link to last week's scrimmage (35711849)

OK, this is the last time I'm posting here - clearly, there is no point in doing so - but if I were you I would really be ashamed of myself.

Today my starting line-up was messed up once again. Same stands for my training minutes and form of my players, but who cares, right?
Anyway, the reason I'm reporting this game (35738792) where again instead of my assigned starting shooting guard for the game, J. Whiple (19246479) your GE started his substitute - this time that was C. Chadwick (10236365) - is not to get help - I gave up on that - but to actually provide you with some data. Hopefully, you'll do something productive with it.

I first reported this problem 2 weeks ago (see (26712.481)). As I didn't find it relevant at the time, I failed to report that I played your "depth chart until 4th" - whatever "depth chart until 4th" means now since it clearly doesn't do what you and your game manual suggests that it does.
In my next scrimmage (35721250), I set up pretty much the exact same line-up but this time I used "strictly follow depth chart". As a result, J. Whipple started the game and managed to play 29 minutes in his position.
Today, in scrimmage (35738792), once again I set J. Whipple as my starting shooting guard, but went back to "depth chart until 4th" and guess what(?) the GE put him on the bench again, and started the player I originally assigned to play as his substitute instead. In other words, the exact same thing happened as in scrimmage (35711849) from two weeks ago.

So, what do we get out of this? What is my point?
Well, clearly the ONLY order in regards to line-up settings that is still not broken is "strictly follow the depth chart." "Depth chart until 4th" is obviously not doing what is supposed to do - if there was any doubt about that, it is definitely gone now - and I'm scared to even thing what would happen if anyone would ever try to use the other two orders.
So, there you go. Keep ignoring us. Do not pay any attention to people affected by this bug, or however you wanna call this apparent malfunction of your GE. And please do not do anything about it - there is clearly nothing wrong with this and I'm clearly being very difficult and very annoying with no good reason.