Live Q&A with Bernie, 3/17/06 (transcript)

[bernieh]

[i:d1e5665d96]sent in by Runnin' Rebel:

Since we rarely play the teams in the card sets as intended, I have alway envisioned an ATG "mystery card" where a pool of players are bound by the teams they played (All-Time Phillies, Indians, Cardinals) instead of particular seasons. That way you can include Hal Trosky '36, Carlton '72 and other amazing individual years w/o having to weaken the pool with less than stellar teams. Is such a concept possible considering the general resistance to the "mystery card" concept??

Thanks for having th is fourm,

RR[/i:d1e5665d96]

[color=darkblue:d1e5665d96]What "general resistance" to the mystery card concept??

From what I see, some people like it, some people don't, you can say the same thing about Brokeback Mountain.

Anyway, I'm not exactly sure what you're suggesting, but we are thinking about ways to spice up the MM... without compromising its original premise. That's all I can say right now.

Except that I, personally, am in no hurry to see Brokeback Mountain.
[/color:d1e5665d96]

[bernieh]

[i:e8854942af]sent in by Play By The Rules:

Bernie:

1) Thanks for all the upgrades implemented in the 2005/1969 games. Can't
wait to see some of those applied to ATGIII! A question- I like the
flexibility with some of the roster changes but why 24 players? I liked 23
better.

2) THANKS for agreeing to allow us to sequester at least two RP after the
8th.

Play By The Rules
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Bickel[/i:e8854942af]

[color=darkblue:e8854942af]Hey, I didn't know PBTR and Bickel's Bombers were one and the same.

re: 24 vs. 23. 24 is less unrealistic. Also, since we are now more actively encouraging managers to carry at least 11 pitchers (in 200x games, at least), this goes along with that too.[/color:e8854942af]

[bernieh]

[i:7406000d50]sent in by mportier:

Dear Bernie:

If NCAA March Madness hoops and the World Baseball Classic weren't
enough, you had to go and introduce an improved version of the world's
best online baseball game, this very same week! Bernie, my question is,
can you recommend a good divorce lawyer?[/i:7406000d50]

[color=darkblue:7406000d50]Yeah, the one that represented by good buddy's ex-wife, who took him for everything he had.

It's been a great WBC! Best one ever. I watched the US/Mexico game last night and couldn't believe they trotted out [b:7406000d50]Jorge de la Rosa[/b:7406000d50] of MY Milwaukee Brewers (he of the 2.03 WHIP) in the 9th, up 2-1.[/color:7406000d50]

[bernieh]

[i:65ae2f2059]sent in by Free Radicals:

Is it possible to list in the play by play the actual dice rolls ? And how about a "live ticker" when the game is running? Props on the 2006 games new features[/i:65ae2f2059]

[color=darkblue:65ae2f2059]Both of those things are on my to do list, but NO promises.[/color:65ae2f2059]

[bernieh]

[i:63fec4e271]sent in by agabriel:

Strat-O-Matic will not allow current player cards to be displayed on Diamonddope. Would you consider allowing a link only available through the TSN 2006 site (with SOM's blessing) to display 2006 Diamonddope data?[/i:63fec4e271]

[color=darkblue:63fec4e271]That's totally up to SOM.

Didn't I tell you once that if we'd give you a job if you moved to NYC? That's right, your wife didn't like the idea. Tough luck, buddy![/color:63fec4e271]

[bernieh]

[i:cc71cf9a21]sent in by albert2b:

Bernie,

I've read in a past thread you have said that bullpens consisting of 5-6 relievers generally have less instances of "misuse" (i.e. - a 9L RP brought in/left in to face a RH hitter).

Afterwards, you started another thread asking managers to post poor in-game decisions by HAL. What was the end result of those findings? Was it really HAL making bad decisions...or was it a case of HAL simply not having enough choices choices because the team only had a 4 man (or less) bullpen?

I'm asking only because I'm building a team with a 6-man bullpen with quite a few "tilted" pitchers. I'm banking on what you said originally to be true :-)

Thanks,
albert2b[/i:cc71cf9a21]

[color=darkblue:cc71cf9a21]Well it's definitely true. The game'll make much better relief decisions if you give it a realistic bullpen to work with.

Sorry that I haven't been as publicly involved in the study as I intially wanted to; turns out there wasn't enough time to do it justice before I had to focus on releasing the new game. But all the posts were VERY helpful in finding spots to put my diagnostic traces in. My preliminary findings are that 1) yeah, many cases were examples of user settings that were too restrictive, and 2) poor communication of what the settings actually do on our part. One example of the latter point is that I think that setting a pitcher to be your Closer will mostly keep him for the 9th inning, and I heard a few complaints about Closers not coming in to save a crucial 8th inning situation.

I'll be able to devote more time on the study in the coming months.[/color:cc71cf9a21]

[bernieh]

[b:d7790bc696]End of Q&A session[/b:d7790bc696]

Okay, that's all the time I have for your questions today. I had fun; I hope you all found it worthwhile.

I guess i'll open up the thread in case you want to comment.

Thanks!

[Sykes25]

[quote:867ddd8abe="bernieh"][i:867ddd8abe]from Sykes:

Can you possibly enlighten the 80's folks with any information regarding what you may be looking at upgrading? We know that the interface is one, but will there be salary adjustments and/or player pool expansion of any kind?[/i:867ddd8abe]

[color=darkblue:867ddd8abe]For the short term, I plan on getting as many of the recent site advancements into the 80's game as possible, namely: flexible salary caps, frenzy option, game headlines, etc. We haven't made a formal decision about adjusting salaries or the player pool, as that's a much more significant change ( i.e. we can't just roll it in), but after the summer it is a distinct possibility.[/color:867ddd8abe][/quote:867ddd8abe]

Thanks for the response. I think this is plenty for the short term for the 80's game. Getting the interface and basic game options on par with other products is a step in the right direction.

[MEAT]

figures i'd be sending this as bernie shut down...

[quote:32368764a9]Bernie...thanks for the chat, would be great to make it a recurring thing. What are the chances, in addition to the aforementioned dice roll results, of getting a home/road distinction on the last ten games list, plus a statistical day by day standings reading so we can see where our run or collapse started, how far back or in front we were on a given day compared to where we are now. Also any possibility of ever having a season long game log available for your players? Whole heartedly agree we need more than one reliever allowed for don't use before 8th or 9th innings, and would love to see a NEVER use against rh or lh box. [/quote:32368764a9]

[milezd]

sent a question in but I may have missed the cut off, my question was:

Would it be possible to add “Base Running” strategy to each individual player card? Similar to the “Steal More” “Don’t Steal”

Currently we only have the ability to set this on a team level (Very Aggressive, Aggressive, Normal, Conservative, Extra Conservative

It would be [b:4252fdf4e9]very[/b:4252fdf4e9] nice if this could be done on a per player basis.

thanks!