Another classic in WtfIS

Over a years worth of pure magic right there!

...wow

sly, do you still have the John Stockton substitution one somewhere?  We should compile all of their great customer service into one thread.

One Thread to be Ignored by Them All!

Here's one of the few I haven't deleted.

8/7/2011 9:34 PM	ashamael
Your substitution logic is killing me. This is just the latest in a series of substitution atrocities: Ashlando Mustangs OFF "Master Blaster" DEF PG M. Beltz 100% M. Bogues 100% SG K. Smith 100% M. Jordan 100% SF S. Lowe 100% C. Ceballos 100% PF P. Ewing 100% C. Barkley 100% C R. Evans 100% J. Scott 100% If the formatting is poor, well, I copied & pasted straight from your game log. 4th quarter, pm game of 8/7. Multiple issues here: 1. Belts - not on depth chart at all, not 100% effective at PG. Is 100% effective at SF. 2. Smith - not on depth chart at SG, is on depth chart at PG where he is 100% effective. 3. Lowe - not on depth chart at SF, 90% effective there. He is on depth chart at PG and SG where he is 100% effective. 4. Ewing - not on depth chart at PF, is on depth chart at C, the only position he's 100% at. 5. Evans - not on depth chart at C, is on depth chart at PF, the only position he's 100% at. WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN? Every person there could be on the floor at a position they are 100% at.. yet WIS puts the subs at positions they are not 100% at and ARE NOT ON THE DEPTH CHART AT. This happens consistently to my teams whether they are in foul trouble, blowout situations OR IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Sometimes this happens in situations that end up costing me the game. Most of the time it happens and just forces extreme fatigue in somebody who should never have been on the floor where they were. Luckily (or actually, unfortunately) I was already down big when this happened. Explain to me why your substitution logic not only ignores my depth chart but common sense on top of it. I often see guys with the lowest effective position effectiveness for a position put there when there are many others that could fill in.
8/9/2011 9:15 AM	Customer Support
Josh, The substitution logic isn't perfect of course. It's a complicated piece of logic that has to account for many different factors and situations. There are times where it doesn't make the same decisions that a human coach would. We'll use your feedback along with other feedback to work on improvements. Thanks.

Yes, let me find it.  Your example above is absolutely incomprehensible.  The first sentence in the response from CS just about made me fall off my chair in laughter.

Date	User
8/1/2010 8:24 PM	slymonium
Please review the box score and tell me why John Stockton was subbed in at SG. He is not listed anywhere in my depth chart. I have 96-97 Jason Kidd who is 100% at SG as my backup SG, yet for some reason Stockton was subbed in.
8/2/2010 2:46 PM	Customer Support
Hi Nick, Stockton played because 89-90 Michael Jordan on your team was in foul trouble and fouled out in the 3rd quarter.
8/2/2010 4:23 PM	slymonium
Please actually read my post this time, then try to comprehend and give a valid response. At 6:43 left in the 1st quarter John Stockton was subbed in at SG. So your response above makes zero sense. The issue: John Stockton is not on my depth chart anywhere. 96-97 Jason Kidd is #2 on the depth chart at SG yet for some reason Stockton was subbed in.
8/3/2010 12:09 PM	Customer Support
Nick, You have Kidd set as the only backup for both positions. So there will be times where he needs to back up PG and there is no one left to come in at SG. To avoid that you need to set another guy in the depth chart at one of the two positions.
8/3/2010 1:03 PM	slymonium
Again, you need to do a little more research into what I'm saying. I have TWO different Jason Kidd player seasons on my squad. The 96-97 Kidd is ONLY set at #2 on my depth chart at SG. The 08-09 Kidd is set at #2 at PG. So, I will pose the question for the third time. Why would John Stockton be subbed in at SG when: 1. He is not listed on my depth chart anywhere 2. 96-97 Jason Kidd is set at #2 SG 3. 96-97 Jason Kidd is not set on my depth chart at any other position.
8/3/2010 1:35 PM	Customer Support
Jordan was in foul trouble and 96-97 Kidd was likely over target minute pace, so it had to find someone else to play there. Any time there is foul trouble it's going to cause odd sub patterns.
8/3/2010 2:54 PM	slymonium
The logic of your statement does not make sense. Kidd was over target minute pace so it had to find a replacement. The replacement it found was someone who was set at zero target minutes. Kidd was over target minute pace? He played 1:25 in the 1st quarter before being replaced by someone who is not on my depth chart and not 100% at SG. Then he played another 2:50 to close out the 1st. Stockton (zero target minutes) ended up playing 19 minutes while Kidd only got 13.
8/3/2010 4:23 PM	Customer Support
Kidd had played about 1.5 minutes when he came out, and since there had been only 3 total minutes played in the game he would be on pace to play nearly 24 minutes, which is clearly well above his target of 3. A player not set in the depth chart is basically Mopup, so their target minutes aren't handled the same way.
8/3/2010 5:32 PM	slymonium
19 minutes for a player not listed on my depth chart is outlandish. Target minutes relate to players listed on my depth chart. If a player is not listed on my depth chart, why would the sim just assume that it should throw in a player for 19 minutes despite the fact that I purposely did not list him on my depth chart? It just doesn't make sense.
8/3/2010 5:47 PM	Customer Support
Most coaches would be more upset if a guy they had set to low minutes used up a ton of minutes in a game like this and that affected his use for the rest of the season.
8/3/2010 7:55 PM	slymonium
Most coaches would be ****** if Michael Jordan fouled out in 6 minutes, but I wasn't even going to bring that up. This isn't about me or "most coaches." This is about sim logic. He should not have been subbed in. Who is the coach, me or the sim? If I had wanted Stockton to play, I would have put him in the depth chart, yes?
8/3/2010 8:01 PM	Customer Support
Thanks for the feedback. We'll take it into consideration for future changes.
8/4/2010 10:43 AM	slymonium
Future changes? That must be a joke right? You haven't even released the 09-10 players!

My favorite part of that whole exchange:

8/3/2010 5:47 PM	Customer Support
Most coaches would be more upset if a guy they had set to low minutes used up a ton of minutes in a game like this and that affected his use for the rest of the season.
8/3/2010 7:55 PM	slymonium
Most coaches would be ****** if Michael Jordan fouled out in 6 minutes, but I wasn't even going to bring that up.

I feel like I should say something but I already have - you guys make me (or someone who looks a lot like me) so proud...

I work in an escalations dept for a customer service company whose client is very large and well known.  A fair amount of what I do is damage control, let people know that I'm going to "forward suggestions along" or "pull other calls and bust some heads" but I'll never do it, I don't really have the resources and it's not my job...if the problems aren't affecting the bottom line, then there's really no reason to change...it's kind of changed my approach/behavior in situations, because I almost automatically feel that at this point my point of view/prerogative/suggestion/etc will ALWAYS fall on deaf ears.

With that said, I find this circumstance to be a bit different.  I'm almost positive that the programmers are the "customer service" reps as well, so while they may be doing what I do, they actually have the control/power to change the ills of their product, and they're not even as close to being as prosperous as our client is (and I'm not even really proud to work for the company that I do, but it is what it is), thus their responses come off like they're petulant children and that's really discouraging.  Users don't give a damn about this game because the programmers/WIS/FOX don't give a damn about this game, and it's unfortunate...this used to be fun.  The programmers get what they put in, and when they refuse to legitimately delve into the problems of their game/product, then they're really doing a disservice to EVERYONE.

Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in...carry on.

Well obviously nothing is going to change, they keep saying they'll take it under advisement and nothing happens, so really you have 2 choices...A. Play the game as is because the likelyhood of them changing the thing anytime soon is probably about 1% or B. Quit, and if you really want to make a stand, that's the way to do it.  All of the claims here are more than valid, but you know who you're dealing with, thus what do/can you really expect.....A or B, pick one...

I'm glad I decided to read the Sim Bball forums for the first time ever, because I just read my favorite forum post of ALL TIME....

thanks slymonium, and welcome to WIS!

Welcome caesari.  Glad I could provide some entertainment.

I just realized I made an error in my back-and-forth with "Customer Support".

8/3/2010 2:54 PM	slymonium
The logic of your statement does not make sense. Kidd was over target minute pace so it had to find a replacement. The replacement it found was someone who was set at zero target minutes.

The last sentence should have read, "The replacement it found was someone who was not listed on my depth chart."

and therefore also over pace for target minutes by being put in at all.  Stupid WIS.