POLL REGARDING ATG8 vs ATG9 Pitching Programming

I did not answer, I only played 5 seasons of ATG 8 but I think that having one RP set for every possible position in a bullpen is also ludicrous. I think there needs to be some kind of compromise in there and I don't think just raising the prices of said super relievers and going back to the ATG 8 setup is the answer. No 4 starters throwing 360 innings is not the best answer either.

I play bc I really like the game and want to learn how to win, not bc it is super realistic.

Just my .02

I did not answer, I only played 5 seasons of ATG 8 but I think that having one RP set for every possible position in a bullpen is also ludicrous. I think there needs to be some kind of compromise in there and I don't think just raising the prices of said super relievers and going back to the ATG 8 setup is the answer. No 4 starters throwing 360 innings is not the best answer either.

I play bc I really like the game and want to learn how to win, not bc it is super realistic.

Just my .02

Wholeheartedly agree. Going back to v2 is short-sighted - why would Strat ever take another shot at actually making a usable bullpen engine after falling back to v2?

I know I am seriously in the minority here (and I also said I was off of this subject, OK, I lied, too bad), but I still believe the biggest issue with v3 is that it is not right-priced. And because it is not right-priced, it has not been seriously exercised. And because it has not been seriously exercised, no one knows how it really works.

Right-price v3. Use it. Try the 2-role limit with right-priced relievers. Evaluate it with an eye to what comes next. It won't be perfect, but it should at least open up pitching strategies beyond 4 stud starters. And most importantly, it's not the dead end development path that reverting to v2 is.

geeze, stay on topic please.
just vote on this particular issue.
if you wish to propose a different option, feel free to start a new thread......

I hate to seem indignant here, but I really don't understand why you would not want someone's true opinion, versus just an answer to a very limiting question with only 2 results that does not even approach the true nature of the problem, as opposed to just a bunch of guys who want to go back to the old ways.

I absolutely feel free to insert my relatively uninformed opinion into any discussion I see fit, in any way I see fit.

If you were indeed being facetious, that is not the way it came across. You may demand what you want, but you will get what people want to say.