Give us numbers to control HAL

[seyclops]

Last night Pete Rose laid down a 9th inning bunt with men on 1st and 2nd and nobody out. To my way of thinking (that is, what I imagine is Earl Weaver's way of thinking), there's already a man in scoring position. I'd rather risk the double play and go for the RBI hit under any circumstances.

However, I was up by 8 runs at the time. I would never, EVER bunt up OR down eight. And yes, my bunting is set at extra conservative. What do I need to set it at to get Petey to swing away, fascist?

If they really are working on ATG III, I suggest pushing for number-driven manager settings. For bunting, it could be:

Bunt when tied or ahead by ___
Bunt when tied or behind by ___
Do not bunt before inning # ___

For my offense oriented teams, my settings would likely be 1, 1 and 8.

Similar menus can be used for stealing and taking the extra base, which both should have a separate setting for two outs.

Stealing
With none out, go at ___
With one out, go at ___
With two outs, go at ___

Depending, I'd set these at 14, 13, and maybe 12 for stealing. You do it however you want. SOMers are used to split numbers, but these would work just as well expressed as percentages.

Running could work the same way. If I have the cards in front of me, I'll take more chances to get someone in scoring position, or try for home, with two down. If you have someone batting ahead of Ruth or Williams, who may just homer or walk behind them, they can be set more conservatively than a lead-off or #9 hitter. If Sanguillen is up next, you can set the runner to literally run for his life before 6-4-3 kicks in.

With these kind of sensible controls, which you'd think would make programming easier, I will have only myself to blame the next time Del Rice gets caught stealing in extra innings.

[Simon31]

seyclops, I had a post like this one not long ago suggesting the same thing. I used to play in a play-by-mail league where the directions were very much like the ones you have above. It shouldn't be that hard to incorporate as it's number specific. I don't know for sure though as I'm not a programmer. The other night I had HAL rifle through three of my relievers, then insert Coveleski, who is in my starting rotation, BEFORE he put my last reliever Beggs in. Thats one I hadn't seen before! :?

[Valen]

Did you have the don't bunt property set for Pete on the individual settings?

[seyclops]

Mr. Rose is allowed to bunt -- I don't want to take away the option in a tie game when playing for one run is exactly what HAL should decide to do. So my setting is basically bunt extra-conservative, and everyone rated C or D is set to never bunt.

Bunting with an eight run league isn't ultraconservative, or ultraliberal, or anything. It's grounds for incarceration in the Abner Doubleday Home for the Strategically Impaired.

So my grid idea will give HAL explicit instructions on how I want my team managed. Kinda like George Steinbrenner used to be with Bob Lemon.

[rjohaire]

Maybe it's just perspective. But being up by 8, isn't it the conservative thing to do (bunt) and stay out of the DP?
Maybe conservative doesn't mean do it less often.

[Free Radicals]

There are so many setting we could use for this game . But to make them work for each game and its individuality I think would be to much for Hal to handle . There are some basic things I'd like to see . Like a "never pitch to RH or LH " instead of avoid . Horacio Pena pitching to Gehrig is a bad thing . Or a " situational setting " . For times when Hal would do the above but you would do the opposite. Hopefully they will upgrade the setting in the next version . I wouldn't look for alot more control out of it though .

[seyclops]

RJOH said "Maybe it's just perspective. But being up by 8, isn't it the conservative thing to do (bunt) and stay out of the DP?
Maybe conservative doesn't mean do it less often. "

Thanks, RJOH, for weighing in. But therein lies the problem, does it not? Two rational human beings look at the same menu option and come up with diametrically opposed interpretations. If SOM gives us %/split deck options, we at least know what we're aiming to do.

I also realize that there is no way to get ultimate field manager control -- this is a general manager game all the way. Obviously, HAL would have to have room to maneuver outside our numerical suggestions.

Simple transparency would be appreciated, period. Supposedly the closer rating is not in use, but every time anyone in our league has designated an (N)-rated reliever as a closer, it has guaranteed that the guy will lucky to pitch his 10th inning by midseason.

On my rookie team, I thought that, all things being equal, if I selected a pitching staff composed of starters hitting either 6N, 7N, or 8N, that would be an edge over other teams empoying 1Ws. I went for Dizzy Dean, Steve Carlton, Earl Wilson -- guys like that. Then I read here a while back that pitchers hitting ratings aren't used. ???!!!

I'm not suggesting that my idea at the top of this post is the ultimate bunt menu -- I am suggesting that the ATG II community could come up wtih menus that are both understandable to the player and computer-programmer friendly, on both the offensive and pitching/defense sides. And we can all use some certainty on what parts of the cards are or are not being used.

And with pure relief pitchers in short supply due to their virtual non-existence for teams prior to the '50s, we need for the programmers to go back and add closer ratings for guys like Sr. Smoke, or really not use the ratings at all.

There are other things I could mention. Why are park factor symbols used on the cards? They're supposed to be for kids/weak-minded people who don't use ballparks. We all have to use a ballpark. So why not just put ^SI/lo(ss) and #HR/f(lf)B on the card and be done with it?

My real point is that going to ATG III is a good time to retool the entire package -- and it's a good time for ATG expert players to try to influence that process. I love this game and will play whether they make changes or not -- but we should rise up and try to improve it, because that's the American way!

(insert your favorite patriotic anthem here).

[bkoron]

Sorry, chief, it won't happen here.

But I know where it IS happening.

~BK 8)

[DizandMiles]

I have had HAL replace my third baseman with a Tom Brookens and then Mike Gallego at the same time -
I had listed Tom Brookens as my preferred d replacement at 3rd and Gallego at 2nd - and then Gallego also listed at 3rd after HAL pulled a weird switch on me early in the season -
I had Boggs at 3rd and Brookens was a slight upgrade in late innings (and was hitting .340 in spot duty) so I put Gallego down as the backup to the backup - and HAL dutifully puts in Gallego immediately after putting in Brookens -
I switched the settings.

My question - since when does listing a player as a preferred defensive replacement mean bring him in the late innings even if the guy in front of him fields better?

[Sheikyerboudi]

I just had an injury to Aaron in my last series & Hal replaced him with Denny Walling in RF - and played his platoon-mate, Ray Knight, at 3b vs a RH starting pitcher. Oh, and did I mention? I had Pete Fox and Harry Walker on the bench. To top it off, Hal pinch ran for Knight late in the game and replaced him at 3B with Risberg (who isn't rated at 3B!!!) - again with Fox & Walker sitting on the bench HAL plays Walling (4 (+2) e9) in RF with Risberg (whatever they give a guy when he isn't rated) at 3B, and Fox & Walker sitting on the bench. Classic!!!! Rack him!!!! (As Jim Rome would say 8)