Curious and Curiouser

Thank you for the clarification Mr. Moderator and resident fact checker.

What conclusions did I jump to? I made no conclusions, just pointed out some curious anomalies and raised questions. And as far as your patronizing "do some research" comment, I am only interested in ATG and have no interest in searching through other versions of SOM 365.

And as far as SOMwillis1 goes, welcome to ATG. Looks like you will be a force to be reckoned with.

If he's a force to be reckoned with now, just wait until he's played the same set 500 times.

I suppose a golfer on the senior tour would not know intimately every player on the GPA TOUR.

Not a golf enthusiast at all, but one thing I have noticed is that no matter how much golf you play, even on the same course, the conditions are never static and it never seems to play the same way twice. Interesting how that works. Then there is the variable of the different competitors and so on and so on. Then here's biorhythms and so many other factors to consider....just so many things


I do like All-Time Greats though...it is fun...I may branch out to other parts of SOM one day, but right now exploring ATG 9 is enough.

And as far as SOMwillis1 goes, welcome to ATG. Looks like you will be a force to be reckoned with.

If he's a force to be reckoned with now, just wait until he's played the same set 500 times.
I suppose a golfer on the senior tour would not know intimately every player on the GPA TOUR.

Once again opening the kimono to show a lack of critical thinking capacity.
Somehow, RB's inherent bias causes him to miss the obvious.

To play devil's advocate just because you are fixed on this inane point of view for years now--it is plausible there is much less "skill" in playing a set that only has a couple quality players at key positions that give an advantage to whoever gets them in the draft. It is all about the draft. So, if you consider picking the same guys everyone wants as the primary skill in SOM, I guess that works for you. Not to mention, there is much less stadium diversity, so there is measurably less variation to be concerned with when sizing up league opponents. Not to mention, there is also no significant cap variation possible.

If you get a bad draft in 20XX you are typically screwed. In ATG, there is an infinite number of ways to construct a winner or a loser. Not so in 20XX--there are specific combinations in any given year. In ATG at most caps except the extremes, the focus is less on the draft and much more on constructing a roster that complements the stadium and opposition.

So, while I think it is uselessly silly to have this male banter over unanswerable questions, your conclusion is diametrically opposed to the facts based on your argument.

I am not sure why you think new cards are something mysterious. It is quite easy to evaluate a card--game's been around a while. Doesn't matter what name is at the top. A SI** on a 7 is still 6 instances of a single on a 7. Seriously, that is not too hard. I realize it is easier--you have less stadiums to plan for, less choices to make on strategy, less cap strategies to worry about. And the same sampling of a few decent players at each position. So you play the same game every year hoping for a good draft. Good for you.

Instead of disparaging others, just play the ATG game and get waxed. The banter is why I and others have you blocked and I only peeked at this because it is like a car wreck.

“In the future, instead of jumping to the wrong conclusion, do some research.”

Seriously?

Mr. Moderator - in the future before making such inane utterances in public, perhaps you ought actually read the OP you are in theory replying to.

… which made no conclusions, but did make a supposition that “Perhaps he was a filler player for Moose to ensure those leagues filled - that might explain him not being on the Tournament Standings List.”

… which Moose confirmed in the post above yours.

So why make such a snarky, condescending and wrong post, which was unnecessary in any event, since Moose had already confirmed the supposition?

In the future, instead of making such an embarrassing post, perhaps you ought not do so.

… or if you did not mean your reply to be to the OP - you ought make that clear

… because you did not do so

I suspect if you only play 20XX you will not have a full appreciation of ATG; and vice-versa. I have played 200+ plus 20XX games and only about 15 ATG games so obviously I know 20XX better. I do like the way you can really max out on strategies in ATG because there are so many cards and outlier stadiums. I guess you could fall into a rut because the set doesnt change that much but there are many, many different ways to play the game so I dont see that as being a valid criticism. And diamonddope is a nice toy that does not have an alternative in 20XX. You have to be more concerned about scarcity in 20XX, so ranking your players is more important but there is a lot more to the game than that and you can still survive a poor draft. I guess I appreciate both games.

I kind of thought I might gravitate to ATG given diamonddope and the ability to max out/fine tune the stategies, but I do seem to get drawn back to 20XX. I like the greater energy and interest in ATG, though.

Oh I agree freeman--I started with this online thing in the 20XX game and there were superb managers playing at the time and still are--and they were very helpful/serious with strategy. One recently migrated here for a bit--J-Pav.

I would never think of disparaging "skills" of a different game group--it's just silly and not sure why it is fun for him. But--back to blocking. Was just exposing the latest, but consistent, buffoonish and banal commentary.