"Makeup almost definitely doesn't affect gameplay in any way."
I now concur, despite any correlations that may or may not be coincidence.

per the user guide- "Makeup is similar to work ethic and plays a key role in a player's ability to improve and hold off decline." , hence
a 35 year old rookie with sub-optimal ratings could miraculously emerge into an effective ML reliever

How could you not know what that means. It means exactly what it says, why do you need it spelled out for you

Again, I disagree that pitchers are "intended" for any particular relief role.  If you have a pitcher who is 50/20 DUR/STM, then you can recognize that that player isn't going to be able to pitch more than once every 2-3 games, on average, if he's throwing 20 pitches a game.  It takes longer for that pitcher to recover than other relievers.  That doesn't mean that he should be any particular role, however.  He's not "meant" to be a closer, or a set-up man.

But that's not the same as what the user guide says at all...

Posted by pjfoster13 on 2/26/2014 3:08:00 PM (view original):
"Makeup almost definitely doesn't affect gameplay in any way."
I now concur, despite any correlations that may or may not be coincidence.

per the user guide- "Makeup is similar to work ethic and plays a key role in a player's ability to improve and hold off decline." , hence
a 35 year old rookie with sub-optimal ratings could miraculously emerge into an effective ML reliever

How could you not know what that means. It means exactly what it says, why do you need it spelled out for you

I don't know how you get "miraculously emerge into an effective ML reliever" out of that definition.

The pitcher below has been in the "Setup B" role for me ever since I called him up.  What role was he "meant" to be in? 

 Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Henderson Ducati

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2014 3:10:00 PM (view original):
Again, I disagree that pitchers are "intended" for any particular relief role.  If you have a pitcher who is 50/20 DUR/STM, then you can recognize that that player isn't going to be able to pitch more than once every 2-3 games, on average, if he's throwing 20 pitches a game.  It takes longer for that pitcher to recover than other relievers.  That doesn't mean that he should be any particular role, however.  He's not "meant" to be a closer, or a set-up man.

The durability and stamina ratings define the pitchers fatigue and recovery patterns, and nothing else.  Clearly, some guys by the nature of their DUR/STA combo are inherently "designed" to be used as starters/long relievers, and others are inherently "designed" to be used as short relievers.

It all just defines a usage pattern (fewer but longer outings versus more but shorter outings).  But there's nothing that further defines them as starter/long relief/mopup, or setup/closer.  That's all left up to the manager.

Though there's also nothing in the game that prevents one from using starter-type DUR/STA combos as short relievers.  There's no inherent penalty for doing so, other than the possibility of not getting the maximum number of innings out of his arm.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/26/2014 3:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 2/26/2014 3:10:00 PM (view original):
Again, I disagree that pitchers are "intended" for any particular relief role.  If you have a pitcher who is 50/20 DUR/STM, then you can recognize that that player isn't going to be able to pitch more than once every 2-3 games, on average, if he's throwing 20 pitches a game.  It takes longer for that pitcher to recover than other relievers.  That doesn't mean that he should be any particular role, however.  He's not "meant" to be a closer, or a set-up man.

The durability and stamina ratings define the pitchers fatigue and recovery patterns, and nothing else.  Clearly, some guys by the nature of their DUR/STA combo are inherently "designed" to be used as starters/long relievers, and others are inherently "designed" to be used as short relievers.

It all just defines a usage pattern (fewer but longer outings versus more but shorter outings).

Though there's also nothing in the game that prevents one from using starter-type DUR/STA combos as short relievers.  There's no inherent penalty for doing so, other than the possibility of not getting the maximum number of innings out of his arm.

And, similarly, under the engine itself there isn't any inherent penalty for having 9 innings thrown by 9 different pitchers (1 inning each).

It was an added control by Admin to require a minimum pitch count for SP after people complained, but it was simply adding that min. #, not a change to the engine itself.

OK, I saw "minor league stats" and just skimmed everything after that.

Was that a good call?

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
OK, I saw "minor league stats" and just skimmed everything after that.

Was that a good call?

For the most part, yes.

Personally, I think it would be awesome if make-up played a part in "clutch" situations.  That would add a nice little wrinkle to the game.   But I'm almost certain it doesn't.

I wonder what role Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Rafael Arias is meant to be in.    He did much better as a SP but, with my group of low stamina pitchers, he was difficult to work with because my bullpen would get taxed too much.

Honestly some of you guys can be so smug sometimes. A new user with 7 posts asks a question that most new users face, and since the same 5 guys respond to every post, you give answer-less responses- tec's response boiled down to "[you] can deploy them however you want" and everyone else's response boiled down to "use them both as setup because setup is awesome!"  It also aggrevates me that despite the fact that you guys knew for a fact that the devs have addressed the Makeup statistic, you told me to go find player examples anyways, just so that you could discredit them without any actual evidence, but just by saying "Nope." or "that guy doesn't count." or "it bothers me when newbies hypothesize things."  Instead, why not just identify the moment that I brought up Makeup and say "hold your horses, pj, the devs posted about that, let me post that link on here-" rather than saying "Jeez can't you guys use the internet?"  You guys act like a-holes and  then wonder why nobody aside from the 10 die-hard posters participates in the forums or keeps the site alive.

Anyways, I digress-
Setup pitchers are indeed over-powered on WIS, but it's helpful for new users to understand why setup is over-powered, and to actually define what is a setup Player Type and what is the Setup Role as configured with those silly drop-down menus.  It humors me when I am told "maybe you should do the work" when I so neatly explained how dur+stam correlates to pitch count capabilities and therefore innings pitched.  That's a better answer than "set everyone to setup because setup is awesome! heart <3"

Burnsy- Ducati was a DITR so he was intended to be minor league long relief / tandem B that you could inactivate, but because he developed into an actual guy I shall give you the tec answer of "use him however the hell you want".

Mike- Arias has a starter framework but 18 durability regenerates health so damn slowly, 18+67=85 is annoying.  You could create a role for him as a mopup, or a ML 6th starter, or a 5th starter that you could skip over regularly?  Players with weird milos like that are square pegs that can only be forced into roles based on the context of the guys around him.  If he was a 30 durability, that would reflect in his overall and you would happily use him as a regular 3rd/4th starter, but... you have to settle him into a lesser role that can compliment the rest of your staff the best it can

I also wish the devs still accepted suggestions, because I would make this one-

Have [dev+stam] be an absolute value, but allow [dur] and [stam] to fluctuate individually on an inversely proportional basis.
So like Arias would always be an 85, but based on the year-by-year usage, Mike could mold him to a guy who had 50 dur and 35 stam. It could be formulaic based on the ratio of IP to games played.  You could convert starters to relievers and vice versa. That would create a definition for a guy like John Smoltz, who went from 30 dur 80 stam to 80 dur 30 stam and then back again, and would allow for a more fluid game experience. 

That is all. I apologize for misunderstanding Makeup, thank you all for enlightening me and for providing player examples, it helps to see players in other worlds.

You call it "smug" but you made a statement that most of us believe to be false.

"From the players I've studied, any Makeup rating over 90 seems like it may counteract any type of deficiency in Control or R/L  Thoughts?"

I gave you my thoughts.   If you don't want them, don't ask for them.    As burnsy referred to, you made a declaration that's inaccurate.   New owners read what's written and, maybe, they don't do their due diligence.   Then maybe they load up their pitching staff with 98 make-up and 44/51/47 type pitchers on long-term deals.   All of a sudden, they're getting blown up.    Now they have a decision.   Mark it as lesson learned and tough it out, drop the team and move on or says "Screw this stupid game" and never come back. 

As someone who reads these boards regularly looking for information I can use to get better at this game, I have learned to be very wary of misinformation. Especially because there have appeared to be a few posters who purposely spread misinformation just to keep us noobs struggling for as long as possible. Paranoid? Sure. Have you noticed how many players cheat at this game given an opportunity?

So when someone posts what appears as a theory in the form of an absolute, yeah that tends to make the regular posters request that you show your work.