ATG 8 vs ATG 9 - After 2 years playing experience

Two years have now passed since the introduction of ATG 9 (how time flies!)

I mostly like the improvements in player salaries in ATG 9. They improved balance and made it more challenging.....however, the ATG 9 bullpen settings and logic are and were a substantial step BACKWARDS IMO.

I would like us to go BACK to the ATG 8 pitching engine with the ATG 8 bullpen settings and KEEP the ATG9 bump in reliever pitcher pricing. Honestly if they would have just increased the RP pricing as they did between ATG 8 and ATG 9 that would have provided enough of a disincentive for owners to abuse the super reliever at caps below $100 million, where the real abuse was happening anyways.

Think about it...there would not be much of an advantage, if any, of getting 200 innings out of Sutter if you had to pay his $7.75 ATG9 salary.

It would then be a choice between a 7.71 Schoolboy Rowe and 7.75 Sutter (for one example) which would be pretty close to a WASH as to their dominance in a $80 or $100 million league. 200 innings of Sutter' .87 WHIP compared to 230 innings of Rowe's .98 WHIP are comparable.

Totally and completely agree, and I would strongly urge STRAT to do just what nomadbrad is suggesting.

The problem with the top relievers, was not that they were used as super-relievers, it was that they were way underpriced for their value....i.e. there were seasons where Murray won 20 games and saved 30. The value of that card needed to be reflected in the salary.

Most of the salary changes from 8 to 9 were good, the cost of many mid-range starting pitchers came down to realistic levels, so they actually started getting used......

I didn’t like the change in pitcher settings, but in some respects I feel like it’s up to the managers to learn new things, adapt and overcome. The problem I’m having is that it seems like the settings are being tweaked in real time. So I have the feeling, real or perceived, that my teams are Strat’s experiments and not my own. Even though the settings have always been somewhat black box, in the past I had a handle on what I thought was going on. Since I’m no longer learning from my “mistakes”, I’m having a harder time enjoying managing.

I have to say I agree with you guys as well.

I would like us to go BACK to the ATG 8 pitching engine with the ATG 8 bullpen settings and KEEP the ATG9 bump in reliever pitcher pricing. Honestly if they would have just increased the RP pricing as they did between ATG 8 and ATG 9 that would have provided enough of a disincentive for owners to abuse the super reliever at caps below $100 million, where the real abuse was happening anyways.

Agree.

I didn’t like the change in pitcher settings, but in some respects I feel like it’s up to the managers to learn new things, adapt and overcome. The problem I’m having is that it seems like the settings are being tweaked in real time. So I have the feeling, real or perceived, that my teams are Strat’s experiments and not my own. Even though the settings have always been somewhat black box, in the past I had a handle on what I thought was going on. Since I’m no longer learning from my “mistakes”, I’m having a harder time enjoying managing.

I have to say I agree with you guys as well.

I get that vibe too. More often now I have studs rot in the bullpen despite being well rested in favor of scrubs. Two nearly identical rosters will perform totally differently from league to league,

this was my suggestion from another thread---I don't think it should have to be an either or---

One of my thoughts and maybe this is been suggested and shot down is the following: I do not understand why if one creates a league that the commissioner could not have much broader powers to alter some of the in game settings which will include Bullpen management but also roster rules. In other words the internal logic wouldn’t change but if I wanted to have a league which allowed for multiple bullpen settings and that was understood by everyone going in then I could set it up that way. If I wanted to eliminate bullpen settings all together we could do that as well. Even roster sizes and requirements. Why not allow people to create leagues that don’t require nine pictures— go back to eight like it used to be. if I want to require 11, I could do that too. Maybe I want to prohibit 3 day rests...etc. It would really open up the game in my opinion.

It can’t be that difficult to give the commissioners much broader powers. We could then have multiple leagues with multiple settings going. People could pick the leagues they like and if it turns out that the super reliever isn’t a problem in leagues designed like nomadbrads above then we have our answer.

I mostly like the improvements in player salaries in ATG 9. They improved balance and made it more challenging.....however, the ATG 9 bullpen settings and logic are and were a substantial step BACKWARDS IMO.

I would like us to go BACK to the ATG 8 pitching engine with the ATG 8 bullpen settings and KEEP the ATG9 bump in reliever pitcher pricing. Honestly if they would have just increased the RP pricing as they did between ATG 8 and ATG 9 that would have provided enough of a disincentive for owners to abuse the super reliever at caps below $100 million, where the real abuse was happening anyways.

Agree that the ATG9 reprice of position players was an improvement. Also agree that there is now a price/usage mismatch for relievers. I would prefer to see ATG9 bullpen stay substantially the same, but have Strat reprice relievers to match the usage restrictions. ATG9 bullpen settings are more challenging and intricate. That gives an edge those who are willing to take the time to understand the new settings, and that's a good thing.

On the most basic of levels, pitching should cost $0.022 per inning ($80 mil cap, $32 mil in pitching divided by 1450 innings, more or less).

300 innings = $6.60 mil (*SP) starter
100 innings = $2.20 mil reliever

The “settings” are what allows managers to exploit the game engine, and lower the cost per inning, and improve the pitching statistics to above average. More control over the settings should benefit the better managers. However, I’m wondering if TOO much control ultimately makes the outcomes and usage unwieldy.

Maybe a simpler is better approach?

Put me in the group that feels like there are constant bullpen tweeks going on. Same situations dont seem to result in the same pitching changes being made.

I used to use lots of settings, but I have really scaled back because I feel like HAL is ignoring my settings at time anyways, and all I can do is screw it up.

Brad--agree--I'd be happy with BPv2/ATG8 algorithm and keeping the ATG9 pricing. The pricing, with maybe a handful of notable exceptions that are open secrets, is much improved.

J-Pav--I get that. Definitely see your point

goffchile/Chris
And put me in the camp of those who have also scaled back the bullpen settings. I did a fair bit of testing on this in various scenarios and environments and came to the conclusion that HAL performs best when he has a mostly free hand or said another way--lots of options. HAL seems to suffer from over-specification sickness which means the more I specify limits, the worse the outcomes.

There is some logic behind why that can be the case in over specified systems, but it certainly was not as prevalent in the prior BP algorithm/ATG8.

But it should be "easy" to allow more league customization using a parameter file or however league characteristics are already captured. And that would go a long way in understanding what's going on too.