BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

If you go back some pages of this thread you will surely see that almost all of the people complaining have used "use depth chart until 4th". So I guess you're right: it doesn't work as promised - use "strictly follow depth chart" instead.

If you go back some pages of this thread you will surely see that almost all of the people complaining have used "use depth chart until 4th". So I guess you're right: it doesn't work as promised - use "strictly follow depth chart" instead.

So what you're saying is that this is a pretty much known bug - and apparently known for quite some time, too - yet so and so pages later, we're still affected by it? I see. Well, I suppose that is OK. I suppose there is really no need to do anything about it since - as you said it yourself - we can always use "strictly follow depth chart". But of course. That makes perfect sense. Thank you. Thank you so much for your help, Mr. Karanga.

Last edited by Mr. Hyde at 7/19/2011 3:55:00 AM

Thanks for your sarcasm. I was just trying to help you. Won't happen again. BTW: I'm only a user as you are, can't help you more than I did.

Thanks for your sarcasm.

I apologize for that. I misinterpreted your words.

Last edited by Mr. Hyde at 7/19/2011 12:41:06 PM

No problem. I agree that this should be fixed. I could have made that clearer, I guess.

In my recent cupgame (38911345) I entered the following line-up:

PG Thiemer - Valencia
SG Tammens - Steger
SF Luickx - Glinieciqicz
PF Kamerlingh - de Rover
C Kools - Frot

but it seems to have played:

PG Thiemer - Valencia
SG Tammens - Steger
SF Glinieciqicz - Luickx
PF de Rover - Kamerlingh
C Frot- Kools

Let Coach Decide

This ruined my minutes since the bolded players already had 50+ minutes

I was directed here with this problem (thanks BB-Marin). The way I understand it the advice is that everyone in the game should use Strictly follow depth chart if they want to have control over who they want as starters and leave the other substitution patterns alone.

I personally think that the substitution pattern should only influence how you coach handles the substitutes and not how he changes your starting line-up.

This post is more to add my voice to yours than to add a surprising new plot twist.


p.s. @BB-Marin, thanks for pointing out that this is a familiar bug and has been stressed many times, including in the sticky post. But if the substitution pattern really influences whether or not you have control over who starts I'm not sure if a mention in a sticky post is enough.


Last edited by Tesse at 8/19/2011 9:25:28 AM

I don't think you've read the message where Marin was directing to?

This will explain a lot ;-)

(26712.134)
By BB-Charles:

Just thought I should add here that we're aware of these issues and it's something that we have been trying to figure out how to fix as part of future improvement to the game engine. We have a advanced coaching AI that makes substitution decisions taking many factors into account, and some of the problems being exposed here are pretty deeply buried in that logic, in ways that we could not really adjust without also affecting other things the coaching AI does very well and that are pretty important.

What this means is that it's a very large overhaul of the game engine if we want to adjust these things. The next time we make a major overhaul, this is going to be one of the things we look at closely. But on the other hand, we don't make major overhauls of the game engine without a pretty long pre-announcement and testing period, so this is not likely to change in the very near future.

Actually I did. And it does explain very well why the bug is still here. I would like to see it fixed but understand Charles' post that it's not an easy fix.

I guess I have a bit of a problem with that we buzzerbeater players should just know about this. A post in a sticky does of course help and I like that it's prominent on the first post of the sticky. But I think I read the stickies the first time I came to the forum and left them alone soon after.

Maybe I could have done more to keep myself up to date with the bugs better. But as an above average activity user I fear that many more are less informed than me and do not know about this bug.

(I know from the Dutch forum that you didn't know either, Nick ;)).

Ghege nope, I didn't knew it. A few days ago I've read this sticky for the first time ;-)

When you post a possible bug, it's recommended to search the Bugs folder first. The last time I thought four times that my team was bugged in one way or another. Before I posted the bug, I've searched if it was a known issue, or if there's a simple solution for it. Three times I found what I was searching for ;-)

But you are right. Stickies are maybe not the right way to communicate this to the managers. But do you know a better place? If yes, I would go to the Suggestions forum ;-)