 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Beta Issues & Suggestions » Managerial Tendencies
celamantia
I know that being able to tweak managerial tendencies is on the to-do list, but it looks like such a big undertaking that I'm sure it's low on the priority list. But if you look at it in terms of simply modifying some of ABE's percentages, some of the simpler management tendencies could be tinkered with right now.
Let's start identifying places we'd like to be able to manage. Everyone jump in!
Before we get too far in, though, I believe we should plan on having modifiers to each tendency, so rather than just having a slider or a number rating for each item, there would also be rules as to when that adjustment would kick in (or, to simplify things, different traits for different situations.)
To standardize this, how about each tendency have three options:
- When the game is close
- When losing by a large margin
- When winning by a large margin
PITCHER PATIENCE:
This one is straightforward: a modifier on how soon to yank a pitcher. A maximum rating would, on average, leave pitchers in 25% longer, a minimum rating would pull them 25% sooner.
FIELDING AGGRESSIVENESS:
This would increase fielders range by a percentage. Plays made in this extended range would have only a percentage chance of success, with failure costing an extra base for each runner as the fielder is now out of position. (Success could be noted in the box score as a "diving catch" or a "stolen home run" to judge the effectiveness of the tactic.) In addition, plays made in the last half of the extended range would have a greater chance of injury (when injuries per play are taken into account). Setting this lower than normal would reduce the range, but also reduce the chances of errors and extra-base hits, as ther fielders are fielding very conservatively.
THROWING AGGRESSIVENESS:
Similar to the previous, this would increase the fielders' arms by a percentage, but play made in the extended range would have a greatly increased chance of throwing errors, and a greater injury chance. Reduced aggressiveness would reduce arm, but would greatly reduce throwing errors.
(Hmm... fielding and throwing aggressiveness should be set separately for infield and outfield.)
BASERUNNING AGGRESSIVENESS
This would not actually change a player's speed, but it would adjust the thresholds which Abe uses to decide whether to go for stolen bases or extra bases.
More ideas to come...
Managerial Tendencies
June 13, 2002 at 05:06PM View BBCode
Right now, the only way to affect what your team does on the field is by adjusting the lineup. For those dealt a cruel hand by ABE in the draft, this leads to hopeless seasons with nothing to do but watch your boys flail around. We really need a way to tweak the virtual manager.I know that being able to tweak managerial tendencies is on the to-do list, but it looks like such a big undertaking that I'm sure it's low on the priority list. But if you look at it in terms of simply modifying some of ABE's percentages, some of the simpler management tendencies could be tinkered with right now.
Let's start identifying places we'd like to be able to manage. Everyone jump in!
Before we get too far in, though, I believe we should plan on having modifiers to each tendency, so rather than just having a slider or a number rating for each item, there would also be rules as to when that adjustment would kick in (or, to simplify things, different traits for different situations.)
To standardize this, how about each tendency have three options:
- When the game is close
- When losing by a large margin
- When winning by a large margin
PITCHER PATIENCE:
This one is straightforward: a modifier on how soon to yank a pitcher. A maximum rating would, on average, leave pitchers in 25% longer, a minimum rating would pull them 25% sooner.
FIELDING AGGRESSIVENESS:
This would increase fielders range by a percentage. Plays made in this extended range would have only a percentage chance of success, with failure costing an extra base for each runner as the fielder is now out of position. (Success could be noted in the box score as a "diving catch" or a "stolen home run" to judge the effectiveness of the tactic.) In addition, plays made in the last half of the extended range would have a greater chance of injury (when injuries per play are taken into account). Setting this lower than normal would reduce the range, but also reduce the chances of errors and extra-base hits, as ther fielders are fielding very conservatively.
THROWING AGGRESSIVENESS:
Similar to the previous, this would increase the fielders' arms by a percentage, but play made in the extended range would have a greatly increased chance of throwing errors, and a greater injury chance. Reduced aggressiveness would reduce arm, but would greatly reduce throwing errors.
(Hmm... fielding and throwing aggressiveness should be set separately for infield and outfield.)
BASERUNNING AGGRESSIVENESS
This would not actually change a player's speed, but it would adjust the thresholds which Abe uses to decide whether to go for stolen bases or extra bases.
More ideas to come...
hcboomer
Seems like one way to deal with this is to allow managers an opportunity to push the fatigue envelope, with the accompanying risks of diminished effectiveness. That way, if you have a high-rated, low-endurance closer, for example, he could sometimes stay out there past his "limit." His effectiveness should weaken at that point -- but may still be better than the fresh alternative still available among the relievers.
Maybe through managerial tendencies owners could decide how often -- and in what circumstances -- they'd want certain pitchers to exceed their limit, and to what extent. An increased injury risk could also be incorporated into this. This, I think, would create a more realistic and desirable pattern of use that would still recognize the limitations of certain pitchers at certain times.
June 13, 2002 at 05:19PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
This is another of those well-down-the-road discussions, but it seems like the biggest beef a lot of us have at this point is with pitcher usage, particularly with the bullpen. For instance, the low-endurance closer who can't face more than three batters.
Seems like one way to deal with this is to allow managers an opportunity to push the fatigue envelope, with the accompanying risks of diminished effectiveness. That way, if you have a high-rated, low-endurance closer, for example, he could sometimes stay out there past his "limit." His effectiveness should weaken at that point -- but may still be better than the fresh alternative still available among the relievers.
Maybe through managerial tendencies owners could decide how often -- and in what circumstances -- they'd want certain pitchers to exceed their limit, and to what extent. An increased injury risk could also be incorporated into this. This, I think, would create a more realistic and desirable pattern of use that would still recognize the limitations of certain pitchers at certain times.
knoxville
July 14, 2002 at 10:00PM View BBCode
something i was thinking of about this topic was the ability to have a depth chart of pinch hitters. who you would want to be the first choice of PH for righty and lefty etc. im not sure exactly how it works now. i had more things too but i forgot most of them :\\ i think of lots of things at work and never remember them. i should start writing them down
DrDiamond
I like the idea of situational preferences. I used to play in a fantsy soccer simulation that allowed you to choose different formations and tactics after the 75th minute (out of 90, for the footie impaired) that would vary if you were ahead, drawn, or behind. I thought it was a great way to get a little more "hands-on" in the individual game.
This concept could be applied to decisions such as "guard the line", "infield in", "infield back", "send runner from third", and so forth. Most all of what Celamantia proposes could be incorporated into this concept. The threshold could be set at, say, entering the seventh inning. This is where ABE would determine game status and start kicking in your preferences.
I'm sure this would be rather time-consuming to implement, but it would add immeasurably to the realism and enjoyment, IMHO.
July 14, 2002 at 10:30PM View BBCode
I'm not a Beta player, so, to coin a phrase, pardon the interruption, but ...I like the idea of situational preferences. I used to play in a fantsy soccer simulation that allowed you to choose different formations and tactics after the 75th minute (out of 90, for the footie impaired) that would vary if you were ahead, drawn, or behind. I thought it was a great way to get a little more "hands-on" in the individual game.
This concept could be applied to decisions such as "guard the line", "infield in", "infield back", "send runner from third", and so forth. Most all of what Celamantia proposes could be incorporated into this concept. The threshold could be set at, say, entering the seventh inning. This is where ABE would determine game status and start kicking in your preferences.
I'm sure this would be rather time-consuming to implement, but it would add immeasurably to the realism and enjoyment, IMHO.
Pages: 1