|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Mar 21, 2023 10:27:56 GMT -5
So, this is a poll about something that can not be fixed in-season.
The normal default setting is a bit much in my opinion. In the test seasons I've done, my preference is to have long term injury potential. It happens in real life, but I don't think we need it to happen at the same rate.
The options given are Low, Very Low, and None.
Low was fine, but led to some weird roster issues on occasion.
Very Low feels best because I've been screwed, but it's not often enough to call it a problem.
None is just none. We'll deal with short term injuries only throughout the year.
Vote please!
|
|
|
|
Post by Texas GM on Mar 21, 2023 10:38:34 GMT -5
I've played if before too and if I'm correct, a long term injury can also bleed into the next season too, really screwing up your team plan, or even for the player entering FA too? I honestly don't think we need that can of worms where FA lists are going to require a spreadsheet with LT injury reports.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM on Mar 21, 2023 10:46:12 GMT -5
This is one of the few aspects I’ll miss about DMB. I think their metrics of injury frequency and length were almost perfect.
I know in the OOTP Mobile game, I had to turn my injury frequency down at least one notch, because they were so frequent that I couldn’t even sim a week without play stopping for injury.
*This is maybe a side can of worms, but I do think a compromise where we turn off injuries for the postseason only would be cool. That way, every team can put their best rosters forward.
JIm
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Mar 21, 2023 13:56:11 GMT -5
I've played if before too and if I'm correct, a long term injury can also bleed into the next season too, really screwing up your team plan, or even for the player entering FA too? I honestly don't think we need that can of worms where FA lists are going to require a spreadsheet with LT injury reports. It does do this, but I don't think that will impact us at all. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but we will be buying the new version each year. Hopefully, we can transfer rosters to the new version to make life easier for Joe, Sean, or whoever is populating the rosters, but we should be able to reset all injuries pretty easily. Since we aren't using the in-game progression (in my current save, Nolan McLean has turned into a perennial All-Star and MVP candidate...), I can't imagine the injuries will carry over, either. |
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Mar 21, 2023 13:59:26 GMT -5
Long-term injuries in this scare me. I've lost middle-of the order bats, number 1 SP's, and ace closers early in the season for the rest of the year. In a regular OOTP game, that's kind of a fun challenge. I have a minor league system of around 200 players to either replace that player with or make a trade with. Or, if I just say screw that season, I can sim the entire season in minutes and move onto the off-season.
In our league, where we have reserve rosters of way less than 200, it wouldn't be as much fun.
Is there a way to set maximum injury length?
|
|
|
|
Post by Texas GM on Mar 21, 2023 14:30:47 GMT -5
Long-term injuries in this scare me. I've lost middle-of the order bats, number 1 SP's, and ace closers early in the season for the rest of the year. In a regular OOTP game, that's kind of a fun challenge. I have a minor league system of around 200 players to either replace that player with or make a trade with. Or, if I just say screw that season, I can sim the entire season in minutes and move onto the off-season. In our league, where we have reserve rosters of way less than 200, it wouldn't be as much fun. Is there a way to set maximum injury length? I AGREE. I've lost SP's for a year and even longer. We simply don't have the roster size to overcome that. One season, I lost 3 SP for the entire year.That said, I spent this entire offseason building as much depth as possible for exactly that reason. Injuries and depth in OOTP can have even more impact than roster talent. |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Mar 21, 2023 15:37:43 GMT -5
And this is why we vote. There is not a lot of nuance to adjusting injuries. It probably a best practice to not have injuries carry over season-to-season. I would be fine with turning off long term injuries. In an situation like that, I would also prefer to leave short term injuries at a high level. And yes, we don't have 200 players in our minor league system. I have also played some seasons with this game and can tell you that having 200 players isn't the factor that dictates whether or not you can have injury replacements. MOST of the 200 players, like 75%, are completely unusable in a given year. We will have more options available to us in FA to cover injuries. If you are debt adverse, you might want to start budgeting for injury replacements.  |
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Mar 21, 2023 15:47:23 GMT -5
Yeah, but you can use those 200 minor leaguers to trade for a better replacement that you can find in free agency. The computer digs prospects. Whenever I need money, I sell off low level prospects with a potential rating of a 1/2 a star and can make millions just by selling a few of them. It's a weird bug. That's not important for this discussion, though.
Short term injuries are good. You get a lot of day to day injuries, where the players are still ok enough to play, but it hampers them. Some injuries hamper running, some throwing, some batting, etc. I kind of like that, because it's pretty realistic.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluejaysgm on Mar 21, 2023 18:39:36 GMT -5
This is all sounding like way to much to track. Uggh.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Mar 21, 2023 19:00:39 GMT -5
This is all sounding like way to much to track. Uggh. You won't even know about this stuff once everything is set up. It'll just be another simulation program. There are a lot potential options, but we'll be eliminating a bunch of them during league set up. |
|
|
|
Post by raysgm on Mar 22, 2023 12:37:35 GMT -5
I voted for "very low", but I think my ideal world would be we use "low" but increase the roster size so we had more options for replacement players. The way DMB was set up, it was pretty easy to skate by with ~27 simmable players since injuries were so infrequent/not long lasting
|
|
|
|
Post by Elephanti! on Mar 24, 2023 9:51:43 GMT -5
I voted very low. I think I like having some injury randomness involved, but obviously, it can easily be debilitating.
I am all in favor of increasing the roster limit though (and implementing a 40 man roster with an option and rule 5 system!)
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Mar 24, 2023 9:59:34 GMT -5
I voted very low. I think I like having some injury randomness involved, but obviously, it can easily be debilitating. I am all in favor of increasing the roster limit though (and implementing a 40 man roster with an option and rule 5 system!) I think 40 man and Rule 5 is something to think about. We never did it in the past because the tracking of it doesn't sound fun. But if OOTP does it for us... |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Mar 24, 2023 10:16:31 GMT -5
I voted very low. I think I like having some injury randomness involved, but obviously, it can easily be debilitating. I am all in favor of increasing the roster limit though (and implementing a 40 man roster with an option and rule 5 system!) I think 40 man and Rule 5 is something to think about. We never did it in the past because the tracking of it doesn't sound fun. But if OOTP does it for us... I really hate the 40 man roster rules... It's my least favorite part of baseball. As always, I could be down for a version of Rule V. I just hate the 40 man roster so darn much. So much. |
|
|
|
Post by Elephanti! on Mar 24, 2023 10:33:32 GMT -5
I think 40 man and Rule 5 is something to think about. We never did it in the past because the tracking of it doesn't sound fun. But if OOTP does it for us... I really hate the 40 man roster rules... It's my least favorite part of baseball. As always, I could be down for a version of Rule V. I just hate the 40 man roster so darn much. So much. The problem with not having it is (I'll use my team as an example) you end up with players like Taijuan Walker, who I have owned since 2011, just hitting his first arbitration season. I will have the opportunity to own him through his age 33 season, having reserved him for all of his time struggling with injuries. He probably should have had to pass through waivers during some of that stretch. The overall roster limit just doesn't give a good enough incentive to not "stash" players. |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Mar 24, 2023 10:54:17 GMT -5
I really hate the 40 man roster rules... It's my least favorite part of baseball. As always, I could be down for a version of Rule V. I just hate the 40 man roster so darn much. So much. The problem with not having it is (I'll use my team as an example) you end up with players like Taijuan Walker, who I have owned since 2011, just hitting his first arbitration season. I will have the opportunity to own him through his age 33 season, having reserved him for all of his time struggling with injuries. He probably should have had to pass through waivers during some of that stretch. The overall roster limit just doesn't give a good enough incentive to not "stash" players. While I agree with you, my opinion remains unchanged LOL. I'm completely open to whatever the majority wants to do. If we do want to expand rosters again ever, we would probably need to figure out a version of 40 man roster rules. I always thought that having smaller reserve rosters would create the push to churn out players that haven't developed or who had issues maintaining sim use. Then the league expanded rosters. Probably need to investigate having it in place this next offseason.  |
|
