Flotsam and Jetsam: The Tune of the Game

[rutkap]

there are lefty bats to be had. stargell, yaz, Parker, mccovey, brett, morgan, jackson, cooper, powell, kemp, staub, mercer, oliver, aikens, b. williams, nettles, cash, mayberry, porter, and evans to name a few. add in some switch hitters like murray, singleton, smith and simmons and there are plenty of possibilities to be had.

As far as trades go - I am only at the nine game point in my two leagues - I have no Idea of what i have or need yet.

as far as the draft being predictable - i guess that I come from the 80s leagues for the most part and I am finding that there are a lot more options at every position with the exception of the middle infield. I think that this will create a bit of a drag on trades as well since it would be easier to fill a hole without giving up talent by just scooping up a new player to see if you can get a stud year from them.

sorry to hear that your seventies experience has been less than "groovy" I for one am enjoying the heck out of mine thus far.

[nycalderon]

MtheB

With all due respect, I frankly don't understand or agree with your conclusions. First let me say that my point of comparison is the 80's game as I have played very little of the other online strat games.

IF there are more injuries to factor in then your point about roster strategy is wrong. A manager must now consider how to allocate their cash... Is it better to spend on high priced guys who may be injury prone or is it better to spread the cash out and have depth. This is a major strategic choice.

IF there are few LH power hitters then logically what LH power exists becomes MORE valuable not LESS. From deciding where to place a LH power hitter on your draft card to how much LH power you stock up early on now become major strategic decisions.

I for one felt the 80's game was largely about stockpiling reverse pitchers AND hitters. IF there are fewer types of these players in the 70s game then the same rule applies as for lefty power. Scarcity makes the resource more valuable.

And as always, since it is a mystery card game, the player universe changes with each league therefore some seasons will have more abundant lefty power and reverse players than others. As you transform your roster you may stumble upon what you are looking for. If what you seek is too scarce you may need to rethink your team strategy.

[MtheB]

JPGator-thanks for your cogent comments, good stuff.
They could have made the ballparks more diverse, the singles/HR ffactors change for each year.
Yes. Good lefty power cards would be more expensive. All I was pointing out is that there were significantly more strong RH power hitting years in the game, which limits options in building different kinds of teams. You can put the top lefty power hitters in Yankee stadium, but they just don't compare with a bevy of RH hitters--i.e. one cannot take adavantage as much of the home park.
Lack of trading was relative to other games. I am an active trader, and usually average 3-4 trades a season. In the 70's game, trade talk is slim.

Nycalderon: my point about the choice to not include more LH HR years from the lefty hitters, and having only one lefty park, ---that limits options on building different kinds of teams. Was not talking about salary or allocating cash.
Your point about LH power being more valuable because there is less of it may seem logical, but the reality is that there are always plenty of LH middle range power hitters left on the FA. It is not an issue of cost, it is an issue of options to build different kinds of teams.
In ATG, owners are willing to spend 14+ mill on Mantle, even when they have plenty of other viable choices, because of the kind of team they are building and what park they are playing in.
Same as per reverse pitchers. Don't care about scarcity making something more valuable, but scarcity limits options, limits interest.
That is the overall jist of my post--options create interest, create involvment, allow owners to compete in different ways---hence why ATG3 is so successful. I remember when ATG2 and ATG3 came out how many owners were concerned that the large player pool would limit interest in the game. As we have seen, the opposite has happened, the game is hugely popular, leagues fill quickly and of course the same old owners still find their competitive edges even with the big player pool. I think it is more of a challenge getting an edge when there are more options available to everyone.

[LMBombers]

It is interesting that you say the huge player pool in ATG3 is an advantage over other SOM games. It may be to some but not to me. I find my interest in ATG3 waning due to the fact that there are way too many players in the pool. The only leagues I am playing at all are the ones where the player pool is limited in some way. I probably will stop playing ATG3 at all once my current leagues have ended and transfer my credits elsewhere. In fact ATG & Fantasim are the only SOM games that I don't care for (and I've never even tried Fantasim).

I was a little worried that the slightly increased player pool of the 70's game vs the 80's game might damage it's enjoyment but so far I think it is good.

Some people like trading more than they like trying to make the playoffs. Sometimes these things go hand-in-hand but sometimes I think people just want to trade for the sake of trading. I am a moderate trader. I will trade only if I think it might help my team. Otherwise I use what I've got or go to the free agent market.

[durantjerry]

I started playing in 1975, so I am very familiar with the second half of the 70's decade. One thing that jumps out at me is there seemed to be a big "changing of the guard" in the 1970's. I don't know if this is factual or merely an unastute observation on my part. There seem to be a lot of players who were great in the 1960's whose career was declining heading into the 1970's. These guys were still good enough to play well, but were getting old and were not able to play all the time and whose careers didn't last much into the second half of the 1970's. Guys like Frank & Brooks Robinson, Santo, Clemente, Aaron, Mays, McCovey, F Howard, Allen, Cepeda, Wynn, Killebrew, Billy Williams, Blair, Oliva, etc. I am sure there are probably more. I was also surprised to see that Morgam missed 600 PA's in one of his MVP seasons. Not sure what TSN could do abouyt any of this or if it is the cause of anything. Just my observation.

[The Conndor]

I understand a lot of the frustrations expressed in this thread, but I also think it is too early to draw too many conclusions.

The most important thing I see from this has already been mentioned; trading will not pick up steam until we all get farther into our season, and even then probably not until we all get into a few seasons at least. I enjoy trading, but it is very hard to trade when I am relatively unfamiliar with the cards and the overall talent pool. Over time I think this concern will dissipate; we are all still the same people who have successfully traded with each other before, and once we get used to the dynamics of the 70s game we will trade there too.

One thing I did want to mention; although I was not alive during Clemente's career (born 10 days after his plane crash), I am a lifetime Pirate fan and know a little Clemente lore. In his case, the reason he never played in a lot of games is that he was an incurable hypochondriac; he was always sitting out for slight or nonexistent injuries that he thought were much more serious than they actually were. This is in no way an attempt to belittle one of the greatest OF of all time, but some of the stories I've read and heard would be hilarious if they weren't unfortunately describing someone's actual life. If you ever want some interesting reading look up some stories on Clemente and his injury woes.

[yak1407]

One difference I've noticed is that the '70s game doesn't seem to have any of those real bargain players, Luis Polonia, Lonnie Smith, who put up good numbers every year at bargain basement prices.
Every single card I've looked at has at least one real bad season. So you get no bargains.
The injury factor is also a biggie. I'm just 24 games in and I think I've had half my team out with injuries. of course, having Ron Hunt doesn't help.
What does hurt, however, is that if you have a player with a high injury rating and more injury rolls, Henry Aaron, also on my team and injured, comes to mind. He has a couple of years where his injury roll is a 4, so his chances of getting injured are double. But, if his injury rating doesn't change and is based on one of those years, his number of games lost in years where he only has one injury roll will still be greater, even if he had more PAs that year.
I suspect that his is a serious flaw.
I need to wait and see how things pan out with Hunt and Aaron.

[Hakmusic]

>>I remember when ATG2 and ATG3 came out how many owners were concerned that the large player pool would limit interest in the game.<<

My feeling is that the increase in size from ATG I to ATG II was a big plus, but ATG III has taken it too far. I liked ATG II much better than ATG III, simply because, beteen the increased player size and the better pricing, I feel a certain lack of urgency. Doesn't matter if I get player A or player B, I can just go with player C and player D instead. Where in ATG II, I need to get Cobb or Speaker, or find another way to compete. I liked that sense of urgency better than a sense of comfort.

I like it in the 80's game too. I am sure I will find it here, I just don't know who those players are that I need yet, that will take time.

[PillPop]

I have to disagree. More players = more options = more ways to win = more fun. ATG3 is vastly superior to ATG2 for that reason and, once we all learn the cards, I suspect 70's will be more fun than 80's for that reason too. Compare that to 1969 where there are comparatively few desirable players. If you don't score in the autodraft, you have a tough row to hoe in 1969. (Granted, a single-season game by definition has a smaller universe than ATG or a decade game.)

Bottom line, when my team wins, 70's is great. When it loses, I hate the game! :)

[the splinter]

My opinion...

The mystery card is an abomination of all that is Strat!

I vowed to never engage in this mystery folly after suffering through several 80's leagues....but was coersed(thanks socalchiro) into trying the 70's version. What a waste of a free credit.

Call the priests and have them exorsize this demonic beast back to the hell from which it came!!!!