blineimages wrote:the variety of ballparks are a wonderful part of the game, and a huge part of the strategy.
[...]
The super-reliever. The real issue, which I think STRAT misunderstood, was that players like Murray, who could win 20 games and save 30 games in the same season---created a large value gap. The ATG8 pricing of Murray, given the super-reliever strategy, was way out of whack. All they had to do, to fix the problem, was to increase Murray's salary to reflect his value. Instead, they did that, and then changed all the bullpen settings and requirements, which in turn, caused a whole bunch of unwanted consequences.
Precisely this. SOM365 is entirely and exclusively a game of maximizing value. Optimizing roster value given situations and matchups and usage, is the game. It isn't whether a card does well or not--it is whether a card was the best option per penny spent, both in the bulk macro stats and the invisible ones--types of outs, etc.
What I wish is whenever a bright idea comes up to "fix" something, just look at the pricing as a way to tune the game without changing the entire game engine which brings many unintended consequences. In fact, pricing changes are fun--it basically creates a whole new game due to the aforementioned reason of value.
Like blineimages said, the frustration is in the unpredictable variation of applied strategy that doesn't conform to the statistical expectations.
For instance, forget bullpen for a moment...the options they have for "statistical realism" and "Home field advantage" both result in changing rolled/random outcomes. Ask yourself how they add approx 10 points of BA to home teams? By flipping the dice.
For me, everything that forces us to play with loaded dice is wrong.