Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

To preface, I play 80M and mostly DH leagues. I also got new glasses and they're not quite right so my apologies if this post is full of errors

Many kinds of teams are viable. You can win a ring in any park and have a very big season while doing it. Some parks are better than others, and some cards too, but if you have a vision for a team there is a good chance it can work. When I returned to the game I was discouraged by the abundance of platoons. Most of the best players were using heavy platoon lineups and I wondered if those kinds of teams were beatable. If not, I would have packed my bags and left because I'm just not a fan of that playstyle. I will occasionally use 1 or 2 platoons, and never more than 3 - and that is a rarity for me. For the most part, I prefer 0 or 1.

With that said, I am very optimistic about the state of the game. It's nice to have so many cards to choose from and the leagues are competitive. I like to try at least a few new cards on every new team and it keeps the game fresh for me. Some things on my wish list are improved game logic for stealing and other settings, as well as some price adjustments on certain cards. But overall I'm very happy to play.

It's nice to see a good review for the game. I am also happy to forget about real life for a few minutes to check on my teams.

Despite the glitches and HAL's occasional poor decisions, it cuts both ways. Yes, I've been PO'd sometimes but it balances out.

I actually think unreliable decision making reduces the value of platoons. When HAL starts to make lefty-righty switches, it's more likely that you will end up with your backup catcher playing shortstop.

say all you want the injury system sucks ...if you have a guy with 100 PA having the same injury chance as a guy with 599 PA thats BS and nobody on here will ever have an argument that will convince me otherwise...that said why arent more players being added more often and there is a real problem with so many guys never being used in the 80mil leagues because mostly their cards suck! Strat makes guys under 300 PA look like Babe Ruth and guys like AROD look like .250 hitters with walks...this game has become very stale for me

Well said, Backfire! In particular, trying new cards and new ways to win is definitely one of the best features of the game. Looking forward to the new card drops, should be fantastic.

Steven, I think part of it has to due with below-average seasons for the players. They may have had nagging injuries, sickness, interpersonal drama, or were just in a funk. With that said, it must be difficult to perfectly create cards, I imagine it was a long learning process. Many really old cards are outdated IMO, probably some of the ones you have in mind I would like to see some adjustments. Creating tons of new cards would lose it's appeal quickly I feel, it's more of an attraction when done periodically - kinda like Christmas happening once per year instead of one Christmas with 50x presents As for the injuries, they are the baseline decision point of a card. Weighing the pros and cons of performance vs abbsence.

Hack, for a long time I was very timid about spending more than 4M on a 15 game injury risk player. I preferred consistency and stability. I'd usually do really well late season when my opponents had injury ridden teams, but early on I'd be at a disadvantage. I've opened up my game and I feel it's made me a stronger player. With that said, it can be scary when key injuries happen haha. I'm always trying to improve so I like to try new things often. It amazes me just how much there is to tinker with. Sometimes I look at the team of an elite player and think "Huh? This team looks terrible." -> 100+ wins lol. So even at a glance it is not always clear what is going on in the head of the manager.

STEVENSTEFFANNI wrote:say all you want the injury system sucks ...if you have a guy with 100 PA having the same injury chance as a guy with 599 PA thats BS and nobody on here will ever have an argument that will convince me otherwise

The argument is they are all priced accordingly. You pay for injury risk or lack thereof. Who gives a fresh fuck how many PA they had IRL, the entire game is trying to find value based on the assigned salaries. You're just risk averse but don't want to pay for less risky players. Then when injuries hit you somehow consider it an insult to you specifically, rather than the result of the risk you willingly assumed.

MaxPower wrote:

STEVENSTEFFANNI wrote:say all you want the injury system sucks ...if you have a guy with 100 PA having the same injury chance as a guy with 599 PA thats BS and nobody on here will ever have an argument that will convince me otherwise

The argument is they are all priced accordingly. You pay for injury risk or lack thereof. Who gives a fresh fuck how many PA they had IRL, the entire game is trying to find value based on the assigned salaries. You're just risk averse but don't want to pay for less risky players. Then when injuries hit you somehow consider it an insult to you specifically, rather than the result of the risk you willingly assumed.

Keep in mind the forum rules when posting.

A usage based pricing model would solve a lot of the issues people have. If players who are used more went up in price and players who are rarely used went down in price, every player would ultimately find his norm and the pricing would be "accurate".

Once Shano Collins $0.97 card hits $2 or 3 M everyone will stop using him.

Speaking of 100 wins…is there still a feeling of a curse if you win 100+? In the last Druid Memorial all the big guns have been eliminated and the under 90 win teams are advancing. I’ve had a couple 100 win teams that never won. Granted I’m still probably considered a newbie having only played 80 some teams, but it sure seems like your chances of a championship are better if you have under 90 or so wins. Regardless, it’s still challenging and fun trying to figure out HAL.

Sweet Swinging 26 wrote:A usage based pricing model would solve a lot of the issues people have. If players who are used more went up in price and players who are rarely used went down in price, every player would ultimately find his norm and the pricing would be "accurate".

Once Shano Collins $0.97 card hits $2 or 3 M everyone will stop using him.

I understand in theory the usage pricing but I’m not sure if pricing is the only reason certain cards get used over others at a similar price. Platoon players will almost always have better results than cards that play both righties and lefties at a similar price. Guys like Collins or Backman or any other sub 1m platoon player have other flaws that would make them less valuable in an everyday role like defensive range , errors or arm strength for Collins. A lefty platoon also is usually cheaper than the righty counterpart because you’ll face on average a lot more right handed pitchers. But aside from the platoon guys being “Overused” a lot of the cards being underused aren’t that good of options. I think the most underused that’s not necessarily performance or price issues are on the pitching side. Good relievers and 4 day rest starters are the ones I see not really that relevant in standard leagues. If it were up to me personally I’d make all starters the same in terms of rest needed and maybe price adjust based off that.