Can you top this

Hiya guys--I didn't mean to imply the relievers are set to F0--I meant--clumsily worded--that the way the R1 guys are arranged on that team in that park means they are going to be fatigued to FO often from overuse. Look at Kittrdege as an example--I think he came in at F0.

Sorry Steve but yes--it is your gameplay choices and spare you? You are the one that complained to an open forum that the whole game is crap because you lost. What did you want out of that? Pity parties don't help improve.
You can ignore HAL, but to blame it on dice rolls is assurance you will never improve. Dice roll karma watching is a losing strategy.

So Bill pointed to this... this is a known phenomenon with the progressive fatigue system mixed with the BPv3 antics--you may get HAL into a lot of cases where he is unsure how to "comply" and ends up screwing his options down worse--creating a continuous cycle of perpetually fatigued relievers due to them exceeding pitch count limits on successive days. And PC limits are unknown BTW...so the trick is you can have R1--maybe 1...but either need massive starters with low hits and XBH or some reliver endurance help.

Further, OK McClure is a non R1. But he is a .59 guy and has faced 10 lefties and 12 righties as a 4L.

And what Hack and Bill said--exactly. Simply put--if you go with a light bullpen of specialists, you use the 4xSP* or 5xSP stud approach and set them to maybe F3 or below. Those guys aren't stud starters--so are getting lit up. Now there may be stretches where the fatigue will work out because you will score a lot of runs and HAL won't be quick to reach into the BP, but it is the most likely makings of a .500 season at best in that case and in my opinion. Of course, you could outperform the most likely expectation.

Especially if you tweak your settings, from the look of it. Set those starters so that their arms fall off and set the relievers on short hook, aggressive and avoids for their weak side. Save the highest price reliever for a couple roles in this case for highest leverage situations so he doesn't end up getting overused in blowouts.

Oh and I'll say one other thing--the idea that there is a static formula for a certain pitcher cost or reliever cost or whatever that always works is hogwash

So, can you use Hilton Smith? Sure (now I think he isn't a great value, but that aside)...you could. But he needs defensive extra help.And since he is one of your highest price pitchers, you better make sure you do what you can to get him lots of innings. It is all about balance. Those WP 20 ratings are also big trouble when you will have lots of people on base in that park with that staff.

Spending lots on hitting when those hitters are all premier defenders means you can spend less on pitching overall. But it depends on the park and the league and DH or not--it is not an exact science my friend--sorry it is just some trial and error and educated guessing.

Which is why I think being able to pay for sim time with any card variations would be VERY COOL to pin down the proclivities of the AI, the cards, the combinations of emphases, all of it.

So Bottom line--if it were me, I'd change the pitcher and team settings as described below because the roster is not terrible and could be competitive.

It may feel better if everyone accepted the pity party invitation but instead I think honest critical analysis may be more helpful because it is hard for us to see it ourselves sometimes.

Hiya guys--I didn't mean to imply the relievers are set to F0--I meant--clumsily worded--that the way the R1 guys are arranged on that team in that park means they are going to be fatigued to FO often from overuse. Look at Kittrdege as an example--I think he came in at F0.

Sorry Steve but yes--it is your gameplay choices and spare you? You are the one that complained to an open forum that the whole game is crap because you lost. What did you want out of that? Pity parties don't help improve.
You can ignore HAL, but to blame it on dice rolls is assurance you will never improve. Dice roll karma watching is a losing strategy.

So Bill pointed to this... this is a known phenomenon with the progressive fatigue system mixed with the BPv3 antics--you may get HAL into a lot of cases where he is unsure how to "comply" and ends up screwing his options down worse--creating a continuous cycle of perpetually fatigued relievers due to them exceeding pitch count limits on successive days. And PC limits are unknown BTW...so the trick is you can have R1--maybe 1...but either need massive starters with low hits and XBH or some reliver endurance help.

Further, OK McClure is a non R1. But he is a .59 guy and has faced 10 lefties and 12 righties as a 4L.

And what Hack and Bill said--exactly. Simply put--if you go with a light bullpen of specialists, you use the 4xSP* or 5xSP stud approach and set them to maybe F3 or below. Those guys aren't stud starters--so are getting lit up. Now there may be stretches where the fatigue will work out because you will score a lot of runs and HAL won't be quick to reach into the BP, but it is the most likely makings of a .500 season at best in that case and in my opinion. Of course, you could outperform the most likely expectation.

Especially if you tweak your settings, from the look of it. Set those starters so that their arms fall off and set the relievers on short hook, aggressive and avoids for their weak side. Save the highest price reliever for a couple roles in this case for highest leverage situations so he doesn't end up getting overused in blowouts.

I don't know how to view league standings, A quick check of individual team results shows the home-away records after 15 games reflect the extreme BP differences in that division. It was a different story when those two teams played at Braves Field.

You are exactly right--yeah I went on a rant I admit in a way that was unhinged at spots.
But this idea of woe is me because of rolls is just something I'd expect out of my kids so I admittedly ignore that part and get straight to the analytics.

It was one game in a park that was bound to have those results. I originally thought that was Steve's home park which is not right, but the general premise of my response still applied.

You are exactly right--yeah I went on a rant I admit in a way that was unhinged at spots.
But this idea of woe is me because of rolls is just something I'd expect out of my kids so I admittedly ignore that part and get straight to the analytics.

It was one game in a park that was bound to have those results. I originally thought that was Steve's home park which is not right, but the general premise of my response still applied.

I was actually responding to the OP's complaint. Your analytics is spot on. In the CDTLB league I love using Ray Caldwell's S9* card hoping to give the BP a day off.