Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
You CAN see the effect on players, by playing the games. What you are asking for is a numerical representation of the effect on players. I personally would not want to see that in the game at all. Baseball isn't a trading card game, and not everything can, or should, be quantified.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
You CAN see the effect on players, by playing the games. What you are asking for is a numerical representation of the effect on players. I personally would not want to see that in the game at all. Baseball isn't a trading card game, and not everything can, or should, be quantified.
Pretty pedantic to make that distinction when you knew exactly what he meant lol.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
Ex: High speed and arm accuracy will raise a Center Fielders overall more than it will raise a First Basemans overall.
Therefore what your asking for is fine the way it is. Just look at arm strength/accuracy and other fielding ratings to see what positions guys are more capable of playing.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
By changing their position their overall will change. Move David Ortiz to CF and he'll probably be down 10 overall points. No other ratings should change, all thats changed is how the ratings they already have are weighed.
Ex: High speed and arm accuracy will raise a Center Fielders overall more than it will raise a First Basemans overall.
Therefore what your asking for is fine the way it is. Just look at arm strength/accuracy and other fielding ratings to see what positions guys are more capable of playing.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
No, Ramone confirmed players take a 20% hit to their fielding ratings when playing at a secondary position and a 40% hit to their fielding ratings playing completely out of position. So all p00p1 (wow is that really your username lol) is asking for is for the game to do the math so we don't have to do it in our heads.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
It doesn't make sense. But that's what they decided to go with.
To be fair, when someone asked Ramone if it was just the Fielding rating that takes a hit or if it was all fielding-related stats like arm strength and accuracy, he never responded. But at the very least we know fielding does.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
I got your point, and didn't agree with that either, but decided to just move on rather than commenting on it. But I'll go ahead...
You say you don't want a numerical representation of the hit that fielders take by playing out of position in the game... well, it already is in the game. It's 20% for secondary position or 40% for out of position, reduced fielding ratings. That's a hard and fast numerical law written into the code. So all this other guy was asking is that instead of making us whip out our calculators... "78 fielding... times .6... 46.8 fielding. OK on to arm strength... 82 arm strength, times .6..." instead of that, they might as well just put the damn numbers on the screen for us. But as for not wanting fielding struggles represented numerically, that's something that's already there I'm afraid.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
I got your point, and didn't agree with that either, but decided to just move on rather than commenting on it. But I'll go ahead...
You say you don't want a numerical representation of the hit that fielders take by playing out of position in the game... well, it already is in the game. It's 20% for secondary position or 40% for out of position, reduced fielding ratings. That's a hard and fast numerical law written into the code. So all this other guy was asking is that instead of making us whip out our calculators... "78 fielding... times .6... 46.8 fielding. OK on to arm strength... 82 arm strength, times .6..." instead of that, they might as well just put the damn numbers on the screen for us. But as for not wanting fielding struggles represented numerically, that's something that's already there I'm afraid.
If we were given a straight-up attribute that showed "current" fielding abilities, based on circumstances like position, it would completely remove this dynamic I describe, and turn a fascinating element of managerial analysis into a simple 2nd grade math problem.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
But in its current state, I can easily ignore all that. I don't think those 20%/40% numbers are explicitly listed IN the game (I haven't looked, so maybe I'm wrong). All I have to do is not think about them (and I'm a man, so I'm pretty good at not thinking about something), and I will never ever see them. I have the luxury of maintaining my preference,which is to not know exactly to what degree decision X affects player Y. It takes away from the illusion of reality and variability that should come with a simulation of a real-life sport.
If we were given a straight-up attribute that showed "current" fielding abilities, based on circumstances like position, it would completely remove this dynamic I describe, and turn a fascinating element of managerial analysis into a simple 2nd grade math problem.
I think it would be cool if the Fielding, Reaction, Arm Strength and Arm Accuracy ratings stood on their own wherever you put a player. That's most of the strategy when it comes to deciding where a player plays in the field anyway. Really strong arm, gets good jump on the ball and field fly balls well, but not great top-end speed? Put him in right field. Great reaction, instincts and glove, but weak arm? Second base. I think an arbitrary reduction is ridiculous. Should there be an adjustment period or something? Sure, but it should be 10% at the most and only last for a certain period. Other than that, let the ratings you gave the players mean something.
BUT, if they're going to make this arbitrary 20% or 40% reduction part of the game, just show me the number.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
I'm also curious about how this is calculated, specifically as it applies to OF positions. Putting an RF in LF shouldn't have a 20% impact IMO though I understand that the punishment is probably to curb people getting to field an Andre Dawson and an Al Kaline with no consequences.Comment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
There should be some sort of bonus for being a utility player tho. A guy like Brock Holt can move to any position on the diamond and still be a great fielder. Certain guys like that, although it is a small number of people, should not be penalized for playing "secondary" positions. Although I have no idea how that would be implemented into the game...BOSTON BRUINS
BOSTON CELTICS
BOSTON RED SOX
NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTSComment
-
Re: Does playing players at their secondary position cause an attribute deduction?
There should be some sort of bonus for being a utility player tho. A guy like Brock Holt can move to any position on the diamond and still be a great fielder. Certain guys like that, although it is a small number of people, should not be penalized for playing "secondary" positions. Although I have no idea how that would be implemented into the game...Comment
Comment