BuzzerBeater Forums

Hi, on the same topic I would just like to add that it should totally be a valid setting to have your trainer/coach play a trainee for 48 minutes exactly. In real life, coaches do manage players' minutes very precisely (though not to the dot 48 minutes exactly but irl players dnt need 48 minutes to receive 100% training). I don't see why we can't have an option to set minutes played +/- 5 minutes for a player in a game in setting lineups.

I'm also on the opinion that there should be an option, where you can set minutes to be played, for players. I'm annoyed that I have to figure out whether or not my players can get 48+ mins of play time. In my last game, I played only one player in PF positsion, didn't even have any subs or reserves in that positsion, and I was like now I can get him the minutes he needs. Yet, two players who I didn't put into play at all, but were on the bench, got to play in the PF positsion, and my training went to south. Let me remind that I DIDN'T HAVE ANY subs or reserves in PF positsion...

Last edited by MrPaapz at 5/15/2015 7:36:34 AM

I'm also on the opinion that there should be an option, where you can set minutes to be played, for players. I'm annoyed that I have to figure out whether or not my players can get 48+ mins of play time. In my last game, I played only one player in PF positsion, didn't even have any subs or reserves in that positsion, and I was like now I can get him the minutes he needs. Yet, two players who I didn't put into play at all, but were on the bench, got to play in the PF positsion, and my training went to south. Let me remind that I DIDN'T HAVE ANY subs or reserves in PF positsion...

If you're ahead by a large margin when the fourth quarter starts (or occasionally very large leads late in the third or later in the fourth), you'll enter "garbage time". In that time, the coach will replace any of your starters with anyone from the bench, even if the starter is assigned starter-backup-reserve and the bench player is not assigned a spot in the depth chart. The general consensus is that the best way to have the best chance of 48 minutes for a single position (PG in my example below) is to dress a maximum of 9 players, and set a lineup like:

A-A-A
B-F-F
C-G-G
D-H-H
E-I-I

Because of a specific scenario involving one of your players being at the free throw line when garbage time is commenced, it's even better to have 8 players instead of 9 (in the above, maybe have H replace I in the depth chart and don't put I into the eligible players).

The only way to guarantee 48 minutes if there is no injury or foul out is to dress 5, 4 or 3 players. Dressing between 6-9 players and setting the lineup appropriately gives you a pretty good chance of 48 minutes, though you want to reduce the bench some if the player you want 48 for has very low stamina or very low skill compared to the bench players.

There's also the question of whether the loss of a minute or two is worth getting all worked up about. In the grand scheme of things, is losing (hypothetically) 5% of one week's training going to really make that big a difference to the player in the long run? For most players, I imagine that the amount of training lost to these minutes pales in comparison to the amount lost because of injuries and foul outs.

Okay, thanks, and I appreciate your time taking :)
Next time I will use the line-up you recommended!

just a few points on this
- Yes in real life basketball, players minutes are managed very precisely.
BUT
- show me an NBA game recently, where a player has played 48 mins (a non-overtime game)

It just doesn't happen and when it does, it is so rare. usually a fluke, or when for some reason, the team has only 6 dressed players due to injury/illness.

So lets say we do allow this 'play all of the game' suggestion, even in garbage time.
If this was to go ahead, then i think there should also be corresponding changes to stamina drop and gameshape issues, when a player plays the whole game. also increased chance of injury.
like, seriously, make it so highly risky that people will basically be playing Russian roulette with their player if they set 'play all game'.

Why compare NBA to BB when, on BB, you need 48' on the field to have training?

Do you like to manage minutes perfectly? Ok, gave me the possibility to select 16' to player A, B and C in every match. And when i speak about 16', it meanings 16', not 16:01 nor 15:59... this is not reality but is technical, is "without randomness" and is "mathematical".

it's also suggested that they're more likely to play the full 48 with slower offenses, patient for example. Or a Normal paced. the subbing out happens most on faster offenses.

i train 48 mins just like you, and it's rarely happened to me. It basically ALWAYS happens for out of position training (playing my C at PG 48 mins), which is annoying, but i learnt to deal with it.

try a slower offense like Low Post or patient, or maybe motion / base offene / an isiolation.

why not just have a button that says 'give all my players awesome training', then we can not have to worry about training altogether

in fact, lets just have a button that says 'win everything for me'. then i won't have to worry about actually trying and putting in effort and trying different things and actually hitting challanges which i believe, is the whole bloody point of the game.

so no im sorry.
the game manual never suggests that you can definitely train 3 players in one position each week. its not a flaw, its challange.
If you want a player to get 48 minutes, play him over 2 games in that position. Nobody else has an advantage, everyone has a disadvantage.
Those users whom are the better managers are able to do training and combine minutes across 3 positions, and can do so, not every week, but the better managers are able to do it more often than the worse managers.

this suggestion would take away an advantage that I currently have over these lesser managers, because im actually actually to train 48 mins most weeks, using my knowledge and skill of the game. not always, but most of the time.

Training 3 players 1 position is an art, its not a science. You can never have it perfect. Taking that away from players reduces the competitiveness and SKILL that is required to win in BB.

enough said don't you think?

why not just have a button that says 'give all my players awesome training', then we can not have to worry about training altogether

in fact, lets just have a button that says 'win everything for me'. then i won't have to worry about actually trying and putting in effort and trying different things and actually hitting challanges which i believe, is the whole bloody point of the game.

so no im sorry.
the game manual never suggests that you can definitely train 3 players in one position each week. its not a flaw, its challange.
If you want a player to get 48 minutes, play him over 2 games in that position. Nobody else has an advantage, everyone has a disadvantage.
Those users whom are the better managers are able to do training and combine minutes across 3 positions, and can do so, not every week, but the better managers are able to do it more often than the worse managers.

this suggestion would take away an advantage that I currently have over these lesser managers, because im actually actually to train 48 mins most weeks, using my knowledge and skill of the game. not always, but most of the time.

Training 3 players 1 position is an art, its not a science. You can never have it perfect. Taking that away from players reduces the competitiveness and SKILL that is required to win in BB.

enough said don't you think?

I'm not against the challenge. Probably my post was misunderstood, but i'm against the "Real VS BB". My post was ironic but "real": this is a game which wants to "copy" reality. But has too much difference with reality: for example, nobody in RL needs 48' to play in matches for traininng (but this game want to copy another one). And i was against things like "Give me an example in RL of this"... Also, i'm against the "48'" during a match with the stamina effect (in our Serie A, a team just promoted from II with 6 players only, playing 4*48 nearly every match).

And i'm for the challenge due to "choices", and it lowers the costs of trainee. If i want to train 3 mono (or 6 double when neededd) the best is 2 stronger (or with more potential) players and one cheaper, with lower, who plays on cup/friendly if there are minutes, otherwise he doesn't receive training.

The bad thing underlined in this post is that Coach instruction doesn't work the same with identical options. So, read me right: IF i set lineup A, and i set another Lineup A but with different players (still the same) where in both i call 9 players and i used

PG-PG-PG
SG-rSG-rSG
SF-rSF-rSF
PF-rPF-rPF
C-rC-rC

(where the "r" is for reserve), should be explained why in match 1 PG plays 48 and in match 2 PG plays 46' (naturally in same conditions, no foul trouble, same instruction by me, same kind of match...).

when you explain (tell me you don't know how it works, like marin did about the difference between LCD and Strictly Follow Depth Chart, is not an explanation) i have an idea. Naturally, i can figure out, but how do you call something that happens once and the other not?


Let's remain the main thingh about the challenge, really.