Hardwood - Suggestions: Order of Subs

Forum >> Suggestions >> Order of Subs

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#21152	03/03/2024 7:28:01 am	Mar 19th, 2037
coachwannabe Joined: 03/09/2018 Posts: 437 Penn Quakers IV.2	This is a minor suggestion, just to see if it’s possible. As of right now, there’s an order in which players play positions. Something like: PG, C, SG, PF, SF So if a player is listed at both starter at PG and C, then PG gets priority. Would it be possible to add this to the Game Tactics page, and let teams determine their own positional priority order? For those who like to do advanced tactics, it may be of use. Just an idea!

#21156	03/03/2024 10:24:18 am	Mar 21st, 2037
lmartins6746 Joined: 02/26/2020 Posts: 250 North Greenville Crusaders IV.3	+1

#21205	03/19/2024 8:24:18 am	Nov 4th, 2037
naph Joined: 02/29/2020 Posts: 592 St. Marys Gaels II.1	Love this idea.

#21206	03/19/2024 10:46:08 pm	Nov 7th, 2037
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2461 Hardwood Administrator	What ordering would you want? Maybe there could be a selection rather than wholesale reordering. Steve

#21208	03/20/2024 5:56:38 am	Nov 7th, 2037
cwb Joined: 02/08/2019 Posts: 67 Prairie View A&M Panthers III.1	Maybe: SF, SG, PG, C, PF PF, C, SG, PG, SF PG, SF, SG, PF, C Then there would be: 2 options with PF > C and 2 with C > PF 2 options with SF > PF and 2 with PF > SF 2 options with PG > SG and 2 with SG > PG 2 options with SG > SF and 2 with SF > SG Those seems like the 4 most common positions for overlap, but this is all off the top of my head.

#21209	03/20/2024 5:57:29 am	Nov 7th, 2037
cwb Joined: 02/08/2019 Posts: 67 Prairie View A&M Panthers III.1	^The above are recommended options along with the current order.

#21210	03/20/2024 11:35:01 am	Nov 11th, 2037
lmartins6746 Joined: 02/26/2020 Posts: 250 North Greenville Crusaders IV.3	I'd like the option to swap SF and SG as I normally have more players I'd play at SF than SG.

#21211	03/20/2024 12:03:05 pm	Nov 11th, 2037
lmartins6746 Joined: 02/26/2020 Posts: 250 North Greenville Crusaders IV.3	I do think user defined is the way to go. I know my ordering will change based on the roster make up. For example if I had a good defensive 7 footer that wasn't quite good enough to start I'd swap PF and C so my starting C could backup my PF and my reserve could get 20 mins at C rather than getting either 10 mins at C and maybe 8 at PF or 20 mins at PF.

#21213	03/21/2024 6:50:47 pm	Nov 14th, 2037
Eddie Sutton Joined: 02/29/2024 Posts: 7 Oklahoma State Cowboys IV.1	I struggle to follow the subs orders people are suggesting tbh. I have low scholar numbers so just want to have players be able to backup across multiple positions - 5 starters, 1 small backup who is 2nd on depth chart for PG/SG and potentially SF, 1 tall backup who is 2nd on depth chart for C/PF and potentially SF. So 7 players getting 27-30 minutes and 3rd on the depth chart only playing if there are injuries. At the moment because all of the sub options have overlaps in the positional sub timings you get the 3rd string playing routinely and on A-option I ended up off depth chart to cover them. C-option seems to be the best but after one of my planned redshirters got on the field outside of the depth chart I've gone to walk-ons covering some positions - it's not like I'm aiming to win anything this season.

#21231	04/03/2024 8:09:47 pm	Dec 31st, 2037
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2461 Hardwood Administrator	I can look into this. I don't think it's super high priority. I realize it can add some flexible for power users...but does it make things too complex for the causal users? Steve

#21232	04/06/2024 5:17:30 pm	Jan 9th, 2038
lmartins6746 Joined: 02/26/2020 Posts: 250 North Greenville Crusaders IV.3	I'd assume there would be a default that new/not interested users would use.

#21234	04/07/2024 11:59:05 am	Jan 14th, 2038
coachwannabe Joined: 03/09/2018 Posts: 437 Penn Quakers IV.2	Same ^

#21236	04/08/2024 9:55:25 am	Jan 14th, 2038
El jefe Joined: 07/06/2018 Posts: 683 Temple Owls I.1	I think this is a good idea and would be helpful to provide more flexibility. I get the complexity it introduces though and whether it risks slowing down the sim significantly; so maybe we start with just having a Default option (PG, C, PF, SF, SG) and then a secondary option - PG, SG, PF, C, SF, or one of the other ones proposed.