BuzzerBeater Forums

Yes, after engine changes substitution works with many unlogic approaches. I also raised a thread, but no BB answered...
So bad imnplemented...

I'm a bit disappointed that after almost two days, no BB has commented on this thread yet - I can understand that there could be debates and considerations about whether this needs to be fixed and how it's best fixed and a final solution could potentially take more time than I am begging for here, but I really think this is a situation where BB should at least confirm whether they consider this a legit bug and are considering the ramifications about the changes.

Again, currently I don't see a reasonable way to maintain Nan's minutes and gameshape (He either gets 85+ min a week if he starts 2 games, or gets 55- min a week if he starts 1 game and sub 2 games), and without a legit means to maintain my old star player's GS, I'm basically throwing away a season I planed 10+ seasons for.

I honestly think this is a situation that the BB at least owe me a "sorry, we missed this specific situation in our change, we are discussing about how to approach this, let's keep in touch" note.

I appreciate the response and the discussion above. I understand that sometimes it's hard to find a flawless solution to a problem, and am willing to adapt to new equilibriums from new game rules/engine, etc.

at the same time, I do sincerely ask the BB that - whatever you are trying to achieve, provide a viable means to allow all managers to achieve it (ie. if we want a longer roster with more sub minutes, enable a system where we can actually get the subs into the game with a deepened roster)

personally, I really would like to suggest BB look into ways to combine the three similar-but-currently-independent concept into one:

A) The generally expected minutes played in a reasonably close game for a starter
B) The optimal time expected for a player to maintain a good game shape
C) The generally "effective time" a player enjoys on court before he is too exhausted

personally, I really think we could solve A LOT OF the current complaints if we could somehow set a relationship between these three - for example, B = 2 * A (the optimal gameshape time is what you would expect to start the said player twice a week, given his stamina), and C = A*1.1 (a player that normally is expected to play 36 minutes as a starter gets exhausted after 40 minutes starts to shy away from defensive/offensive assignments - I understand we already have the concept of decreased performance with longer time in the Game Engine, so the decrease of efficiency really shouldn't be too hard to implement, just a matter of finding the right penalty coefficient).

We all know it's hard to change the GE given how old and complicated it is. but if that's the case, at least we could make the GE as untouched as possible, and model our other concepts such as minute management & player efficiency according to the GE, right?

I believe our smart BB engine coach is named Tom Thibodeau

I believe "Let coach decide" works so well (or not, in your case...) because it compares players on some criteria and chooses the one deemed to me most efficient atm.

The strict substitution pattern doesn't work well because, as Justin said, it only cares about the starter's level of stamina/efficiency and does not compare the starter with his set backup/reserve at all.

If I'm not far off, it should be quite easy to fix the substitution patterns by just adding a comparison check (with different modifiers for backups and reserves ofc) at every game break suitable for substitutions.

Is it normal ?
M. Urban - 47 MIN???