The Problem w/Strat

[TRW]

I have only played a few seasons (5) of SOM. From what I've noticed so far, there seems to be a number of problems with the game.

A couple of thoughts:

1-Managers Rankings: according to this there are approx 2000 total players in the SOM world. Of this, there are 100 hardcore players with 100+ games, 200 players with 50-100 games, & 300players with 25-50 games under their belt. No wonder why it takes a while to start a league.

2-Prohibitive Cost- this goes back to #1. At $25/a pop this game is pretty expensive, especially when there is no prize money at stake. I play fantasy baseball during the regular season. I've asked all of the owners in my fantasy baseball league if they would be interested in SOM. They all basically replied they would be if there was something at stake. Seems to me, a lower price would encourage more regular season fantasy owners to play.

3-SOM is not an easy game to master. There are a lot of nuances to take into consideration. The biggest problem, I have, is ballpark effect. There should be a rating on the F/A screen for this. Just like the ballparks have ratings of 1-20, players should have the same type of rating. This would be a huge help for new owners. There should also be a rating for player lineup position. This could be on the line-up screen (post-draft) & would tell how effective a player is in hitting in a certain line-up slot. (At the very least, I think they should be options that a league could opt for when they start a league.)

[modmark46]

Just some thoughts concerning your comments:
1. Mgr Rankings. It's fun "window dressing" to look at. Fun to needle each other with, as guys like to do. Shouldn't be taken seriously, or anguish over, IMO.
2. Cost. Nothing to argue about. $25 is $25, which is a lot for some, and not a big deal for others. I guess if you have fun with it, it's worth it, if not, it's money poorly spent. I look at it that you could drop $25 or more on one trip to a movie for you and your wife, for two hours. Here, you get 8 weeks, not counting pre-season, to compete and banter with others who share a like interest.
3. Definitely a hard game to master, for most of us (counting myself here). But, that's what keeps me coming back, partly. It's the desire to improve, learn from my mistakes, and measure myself against really good competition. Plus, I just love the fantasy of the whole concept, seeing the Babe, the Iron Horse, the Splendid Splinter, et al go "head to head". Not sure what you mean about the ballparks; the BP effects for singles and HRs are listed for every park when you choose a park. I have found that, if you ask, the community here is wonderfully sharing and friendly, and will offer you TONS of info, insights, strategies, etc. to help you improve. IMO, the community makes this the best sports game on the net. Yeah, the game could use some tweaking, some rules could be explained better, etc. But, I think any game structure can be critiqued and found lacking.
Hope you keep playing, but in the end, every one has to decide how best to spend their discretionary income. :)

[TRW]

I was using the manager rating screen to gauge how many owners were playing SOM. My point being that SOM relies heavily on approx 300 hard core players to fill its leagues. I think if the cost were lowered it would entice more regular season fantasy players to join. I think that increased game playing by more players would mean greater revenue for SOM. It would also bring new competition & challenges to existing owners. I understand your point about entertainment value of $25 over 8 weeks is worth it. However, most regular season fantasy players are looking for a pay-off. There would need to be sometthing to draw them in. My comments on ballpark effect pertained to player performance. Foe instance, a recent posting questioned the effectiveness of Mel Ott. My suggestion is that there be a rating of 1-20 on the F/A screen & player card that would give you an idea if the player will perform better in pitchers parks or hitters parks.

[MtheB]

All that player info is available via Diamonddope.
There is no problem with strat, except it is there to play.
Clearly it does not have near the high volume appeal of the fantasy games, but the engine/programming requirements are much higher, which would make the cost significantly higher.
just imagine though, if we had to go back to the board game.
yikes.
I am thrilled strat is online, in the old days, it took a huge amount of time just to play one season.

[sschu]

Appreciate the input and discussion, it is valuable.

If they did drop the price, perhaps a lot of newer players would join. What happens, I believe, is that newer players join up, get crushed due to inexperience (much like I did for the first 10 seasons) and find the game too complex for their tastes, so they move on.

To that end, I think Strat could increase usage by sponsoring their own league challenges with prizes, offer prizes/incentives to high useage managers and by helping managers who want to sponsor multi-season "challenge" formats incentives to create and manage them. Case in point, the Barnstormers tour or the recent Alphabet Challenge where there will be hundereds of teams started could use some financial incentives to help get filled.

FWIIW, sschu

[memphisjohn]

If they lowered the price, I'd play in more leagues.

[cpugs22]

Folks,

The competition costs you twice as much as STRAT. There are a number of us who came over here because it was cheaper. This is capitalism, after all. Whatever the market will bear, and $25 is pretty good.

[Bunze0]

i have played both espn and yahoo. i won my league in espn 2 seasons in a row. and that head to head league was won from making moves during week . which most managers dont take the time to do. the 2 championship tshirts look real good with the paint all over them. plus you gotta watch for friends joining league together and making lopsided trades. hence the no salary capo restrictions. i have played yahoo regular and yahoo plus. and won titles in them. the yahoo plus you have to pay to play. what did i win for that. nothing. you didnt have enough teams in your private league. funny that we had to pay the same price for the season though. I'll take the chance to make friends like here and get credits to play other seasons. I dont make all kinds of money,average income guy but I consider the money spent here and the entertainment value gained here is the best there is.

[Bunze0]

but i do like the idea of more value buys. maybe once every other month have a sale on 5 paks.

[TRW]

I think the majority of players would agree with memphisjohn. Existing players would play more games at a lower cost. Cpugs22, I work for a brokerage firm & I'm all for capitalism & making money. However, I would think even a modest drop in price to $20/game would increase demand & revenue. I would play in more leagues at a lower price. But at $25/ a pop, I would prefer to play an extra CDM challenge where I have a decent shot at getting something back. (You can argue that it's a different type of game/challenge (Sim vs Fantasy), & that's fine, but I'm just stating my opinion.

I agree with Sschu about potential new fantasy players getting crushed due to inexperience & getting turned off. I think he's right about it taking 10 seasons to really learn the game. This would also be another reason why a lower price would benefit SOM.