Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:30 pm
These are the facts:
1. In the CD-ROM version of the game, you can play your players out of position.
2. In the online game you cannot play your players out of position voluntarily.
3. In the online game, if an outfielder is forced to play out of position, the online game uses the CD-ROM rules for assigning the out-of-position outfielder a rating.
Nobody is arguing points 1 or 2. The online game FAQ clearly states that point 3 is correct. Arguing that point 2 somehow means SOM is lying to us and any outfielder forced to play out of position is automatically a 5 defies all logic. Is RB really suggesting this; I hope not!
Probably a big point RB is missing is that Strat-O-Matic is a "sandbox" game. There is no "right" way to play it out of the box; you have to decide what you are going to do with it. Thus, you can't help but have what are essentially house rules that determine how you will play the game. Here are some examples:
1. Which teams will play?
2. Will you have a replay or a draft league? Or will you simply play some non-league games?
3. Will you limit the number of at bats and innings pitched? What will the limit be? 100% 110% 150?
4. Which version of the game will you play? Which super-advanced rules and maximum rules (if any) will you use?
5. What kind of schedule will you use? Will there be rest days?
6. Will you let managers play players out of position without restriction?
The online game even has its own set of house rules. Here are just a few of them:
1. No restriction on players use.
2. Relief-underlined-Starter pitchers in the CD-ROM version may not start in the online game. (They get listed as only pure relievers.)
3. No rest days during the regular season.
4. You must carry two catchers.
5. Your second catcher won't get injured if the first catcher is injured.
6. Players may not play out of position voluntarily.
Make no mistake. These are "house rules." Arguing that just because the CD-ROM allows it means that it should be allowed in the online game is a flawed argument. As I said before there are other good arguments for allowing it, but there also at least equally valid reasons for not doing so.
RB is obviously passionate about his opinion--frankly, much more so than I am about mine. However, that doesn't make my opinion (or anyone else's including SOM's opinion) any less valid.
Note to Radagast Brown: I hope you don't take offense at my use of "RB" in referring to you. It was not intended as a slight.
Note to fakesportsfan: Even though your thread got sidetracked, please keep us updated with your little experiment.
