What I don't like to see is disputes between WIS customers (Baseball "owners") over a strategy that is usable ONLY because the WIS "program" or algorithum (whatever) allows it. It is entirely caused by "imperfections" within the program that allows owners to use (REAL baseball NON-realistic) strategy to "game" the system to win HERE at WIS at the expense of realism..........which SOME of us players want more than just winning this WIS "game" and getting more credits.

For me, this applies to the use of "cookies" and "deadball era" pitchers to gain a WIS game outcome advantage, too!

I don't even like the usage of 2 man rotations. I think it's unrealistic. Back when Pitchers threw that many pitches per year, they were NOT facing the talent level of modern era hitters/lineups!!  IF they tried to pitch 350 IP+ innings against the hitters from 1930 (or so) on they'd get hammered!!  Repeatedly.

In WIS, that just doesn't happen.

I just hope that with any NEW "update" they come up with a way to eliminate these "flaws" that allow folks to "game" things at the expense of realism.
I could care less about winning all the time at a "game" just to get credits.

What I desire is a completely realistic "program/game" that allows me to actually GM/Manage real historical players using their real life stats with an accurate SIM algorithum.

IF we could achieve THAT, all these petty disagreements about "acceptable" strategy would just go away!!!  Problem solved.

And a more realistic baseball experience for ALL of us users would be at hand!!
Then I wouldn't have to try to figure out more complex (other) games/sites. The simpler approach used by WIS would then be quite sufficient for me, and I'd likely play (and spend $$) forever (as long as I can breathe and move a mousey!)

My 2 cents!

LB

I agree with all the good and logical points made about my post. I think the "issue" deals with my usage of the word "realistic".  What I actually mean is more baseball "realistic outcomes".  I also understand about OL's and mainly play in progressives because of that very fact. I find the results more believable.

Still, part of the fun is assembling a "team" and seeing how well they do over a whole season--so I do occasionally play an OL.  Usually at a bit of a disadvantage because I refuse to employ (what I believe to be) gaming of the system.  (HoJo, 3 deadball era starters, etc)  That's OK, it's my choice.

What I object to are the "unbelievable" (for the most part, as a real-life outcome) results. Like, I won a game awhile ago by a 70 -1 margin.  ?????
Ridiculous.  Also, IMO too many walks occur (for real life ML-like results).  And, I'm not whining or ******** about anyone's experimenting with odd strategies to win at WIS.  You are right, nobody forced me to join that league with the parameters set up for that league.

However, as OL's seem to be the main vehicle for competition anymore, what with the dearth of new players and the lack of ability to get new owners into progressives, it does present an on-going issue. Particularly for any newbie "looking" for perceived realism.

Have a poor team with your 1st purchase that loses 100+ games, and gets repeatedly hammered through the usage of "non-baseball logic" strategies by scores of 27-1, or 70-1, or with several 9th inning meltdowns of 7 or more runs to lose a game that was seeming "locked up" as a win,---or any of a myriad of other seemingly non real-life type occurances, and you likely have a former newbie and former customer who may NEVER try the more realistic outcome of progressive leagues containing rosters of AVERAGE (not all all-star) players. Progressives (in my experience) are NOT where the problems like marginally believable outcomes occur. (except there are still too many BB's IMO)

Anomalies and incongruance will always occur. So will folks who attempt to game the system to gain an advantage. That's NOT going to be 100% solved, ever. However, IMO, they should be infrequent, and adjustments should periodically be made to foil the "gamers" who exploit inconsistancies that cause a "cookie" to over-achieve.

Now, I'm no purist. Haven't used the missionary position in years. :-)
I certainly am no puritan.  People should be allowed to "play" however they like.  But, tanking and throwing games purposefully to gain some weird competitive advantage because of HOW the fatigue system works at WIS is decidedly (IMO) not fair, or real baseball like.

Besides, newbies would NEVER know HOW to use that strategy as they would NOT understand the fatigueing methods/results yet.
This works to the advantage of the WIS long-termers and would seem to greatly discourage new players from "keepin' on" and providing us more players for themes and progressives.

Sorry that's more than 2 cents. Plus, I realize many of you know far more than me about the "ins and outs" of WIS.

I do try to avoid leagues where these (Somewhat annoying to me) strategies are employed.
Makes me a happier user.   LOL

LB

Laramiebob, before I played my first mlb full season, I knew several of the OL strategies -because I read the forums-. What evidence do u have that there are too many walks?

Very well put laramie 

I wouldn't say I was "upset" by the 70 - 1 score. But then, I had the 70.   :-)
I would say it's kinda unbelieveable. I do read the box scores.  It was fun/interesting reviewing the outcome of that one, but (again) I had the 70.

As to Crazy's 3 questions.  I agree with him. I would answer no to his examples as well.

I guess that means what I'm after isn't realism.  OK and Touche.  I'll buy that.

Let me put it another way.  I want believable results/outcomes.  Not weird 54 - 23 so-called baseball game sims.

I particularly agree with Crazy's base stealing analogy.  To NOT set a base stealers attempt rate at a 0 when he was thrown out tons of times and had a very poor success rate is just baseball stupidity, NOT doing so misses an obvious chance to make a good management decision.  So, I'm obviously NOT wanting to re-create the stealers actual real-life result.  However, to reverse his analogy and use a base stealer who had a perfect stealing season BUT with very limited attempts (say less than 7 or 8) and then be able to use him as a starter and set his attempt rating to 5 and have him steal say 50+ steals in a season is also NOT what I'd want to see. To me, that's gaming, so.................

Perhaps, what we could use is some kind of commissioner setting to determine minimum appearances for un-dampened results and a default setting of reducing outcome for too much usage of too little used R/L statistical results.  Hope that made sense.?  Then let the leagues themselves allow and post their own rules and interpretations of the variables.  I think OOTP has some of these variable adjustments available to the commissioner.

As to the walk frequency question posed to me.

The answer is just anecdotal.  My belief in too many walks is based on my experience in however many leagues I've played in----as well as conversations with others who've played much longer who have observed the same thing.  On my favorite/main progeressive team that I've manged for like (about) 5 seasons, the results have been pretty consistent.  Consistently about 2 to 2.5 walks per 9 innings HIGHER than their R/L walk per 9 inning ratio.  Others in the same league have concurred with that assessment, at least in that league!!  It's easy to compare your several season stats with the individual Pitcher's R/L stats for the same seasons and it's always been the same on any of my teams. More walks than real life.  Don't know why this is.  Others with long term experience could likely explain the logic as to why this occurs. I'm just fairly confidant that it does.

These are all (IMO) quite MINOR complaints over-all, and I want to make that clear.  Progressives are (generally) fun and usually have few weird occurrences.
I have NOT (as yet) found a better baseball SIM experience than WIS and hope that IF they do update this "game" it only improves.

LB

Posted by laramiebob on 3/3/2014 2:48:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't say I was "upset" by the 70 - 1 score. But then, I had the 70.   :-)
I would say it's kinda unbelieveable. I do read the box scores.  It was fun/interesting reviewing the outcome of that one, but (again) I had the 70.

As to Crazy's 3 questions.  I agree with him. I would answer no to his examples as well.

I guess that means what I'm after isn't realism.  OK and Touche.  I'll buy that.

Let me put it another way.  I want believable results/outcomes.  Not weird 54 - 23 so-called baseball game sims.

I particularly agree with Crazy's base stealing analogy.  To NOT set a base stealers attempt rate at a 0 when he was thrown out tons of times and had a very poor success rate is just baseball stupidity, NOT doing so misses an obvious chance to make a good management decision.  So, I'm obviously NOT wanting to re-create the stealers actual real-life result.  However, to reverse his analogy and use a base stealer who had a perfect stealing season BUT with very limited attempts (say less than 7 or 8) and then be able to use him as a starter and set his attempt rating to 5 and have him steal say 50+ steals in a season is also NOT what I'd want to see. To me, that's gaming, so.................

Perhaps, what we could use is some kind of commissioner setting to determine minimum appearances for un-dampened results and a default setting of reducing outcome for too much usage of too little used R/L statistical results.  Hope that made sense.?  Then let the leagues themselves allow and post their own rules and interpretations of the variables.  I think OOTP has some of these variable adjustments available to the commissioner.

As to the walk frequency question posed to me.

The answer is just anecdotal.  My belief in too many walks is based on my experience in however many leagues I've played in----as well as conversations with others who've played much longer who have observed the same thing.  On my favorite/main progeressive team that I've manged for like (about) 5 seasons, the results have been pretty consistent.  Consistently about 2 to 2.5 walks per 9 innings HIGHER than their R/L walk per 9 inning ratio.  Others in the same league have concurred with that assessment, at least in that league!!  It's easy to compare your several season stats with the individual Pitcher's R/L stats for the same seasons and it's always been the same on any of my teams. More walks than real life.  Don't know why this is.  Others with long term experience could likely explain the logic as to why this occurs. I'm just fairly confidant that it does.

These are all (IMO) quite MINOR complaints over-all, and I want to make that clear.  Progressives are (generally) fun and usually have few weird occurrences.
I have NOT (as yet) found a better baseball SIM experience than WIS and hope that IF they do update this "game" it only improves.

LB

this would be a good theme but not applicable to a OL. i for one like the different strategies i can use in the OL i have a cookie team a HR team deadball pitcher team and a SB team i also have 3 progs and i like them alot too.  i think the point of the OL is to be able to play around with stratigies, that being said i would encourage the more experienced owners when you see a newbie sitemail them and encourage them to go to the forums encourage them to learn the system before they give up