|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jun 19, 2018 5:59:51 GMT -5
I'm pretty much in this camp. No problem with cosmetic changes, but I don't want people feeling forced to post to keep up. One functional thing I can get behind is boosting fan loyalty/interest or local popularity of players, since that would tie into having a more active public relations department. Stadium changes don't really fall under that, but I wouldn't mind having some mechanism for that (within reason) since they've been static for decades.
If you mean "park factors" have been static for decades, that's incorrect. But it's amazing how often it comes up in conversation when the discussion anywhere turns to rewards programs outside the game.
The very nature of OOTP is to emulate baseball. If you have an MLB ballpark (by name) then your park factors change (a little or a lot) with the release of every single version of OOTP as the game tries to emulate real-life.
As PBL is based on MLB, with real stadiums (aside from Montreal and Carolina I guess - I didn't check every single one), virtually every park has changed with each version. I'll use Washington as the example:
Nationals Park in PBL - OOTP 17
Nationals Park in PBL - OOTP 19 (to which we have just moved)
If you strictly mean attendance, then that would only fluctuate if a real life park renovated I suspect, but my guess is that would also be reflected in the game
So...
Unless you are going to "fictionalize" every stadium... Then decide which park factors to use (the current ones or some random GM-picked set)... Then implement your annual program of being able to change one or more factors... Then set rules so that the factors don't swing to the bizarre just because somebody "thinks" that will be a magic bullet formula to success... Then anything you do implement will be lost with each successive version of OOTP. Which is why I am a fan of just leaving things alone ( not just because I appear stubborn).
This may very well also be a contributing factor to bigger things than just park factors. If they ALL change, for example and without the knowledge of the GM, and then some of the team stat totals look wonky, then everybody starts looking at their stats and finds issues, and then the Commissioner starts to change the overall factors to "correct" the perceived problem AND then a new version comes out... You end up chasing your tail (and that's before any artificial program outside the game itself to change things further). Again, why I am a fan of just playing the game.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Jun 19, 2018 9:15:40 GMT -5
I'm pretty much in this camp. No problem with cosmetic changes, but I don't want people feeling forced to post to keep up. One functional thing I can get behind is boosting fan loyalty/interest or local popularity of players, since that would tie into having a more active public relations department. Stadium changes don't really fall under that, but I wouldn't mind having some mechanism for that (within reason) since they've been static for decades.
If you mean "park factors" have been static for decades, that's incorrect. But it's amazing how often it comes up in conversation when the discussion anywhere turns to rewards programs outside the game.
The very nature of OOTP is to emulate baseball. If you have an MLB ballpark (by name) then your park factors change (a little or a lot) with the release of every single version of OOTP as the game tries to emulate real-life.
As PBL is based on MLB, with real stadiums (aside from Montreal and Carolina I guess - I didn't check every single one), virtually every park has changed with each version. I'll use Washington as the example:
Nationals Park in PBL - OOTP 17
Nationals Park in PBL - OOTP 19 (to which we have just moved)
If you strictly mean attendance, then that would only fluctuate if a real life park renovated I suspect, but my guess is that would also be reflected in the game
So...
Unless you are going to "fictionalize" every stadium... Then decide which park factors to use (the current ones or some random GM-picked set)... Then implement your annual program of being able to change one or more factors... Then set rules so that the factors don't swing to the bizarre just because somebody "thinks" that will be a magic bullet formula to success... Then anything you do implement will be lost with each successive version of OOTP. Which is why I am a fan of just leaving things alone ( not just because I appear stubborn).
This may very well also be a contributing factor to bigger things than just park factors. If they ALL change, for example and without the knowledge of the GM, and then some of the team stat totals look wonky, then everybody starts looking at their stats and finds issues, and then the Commissioner starts to change the overall factors to "correct" the perceived problem AND then a new version comes out... You end up chasing your tail (and that's before any artificial program outside the game itself to change things further). Again, why I am a fan of just playing the game.
Pretty sure he was referring to the dimensions of a stadium. This is a fictional league, all stadiums should be set to fictional quite frankly if that is even doable.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jun 19, 2018 9:35:59 GMT -5
The dimensions of the stadium are irrelevant, cosmetic, play no role. The park factors dictate how stadiums play. Frankly not sure if this would be as simple as changing the name of every stadium to a fictional name OR if that is eventually overwritten by the game setting the "real life" stadium for the "Washington Nationals" with the release of each new version. If the latter, then you would then have to change the name of every team to a fictional one (and quite likely one that was never used historically either) - The Washington Fictionals
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Jun 19, 2018 9:48:39 GMT -5
The dimensions of the stadium are irrelevant, cosmetic, play no role. The park factors dictate how stadiums play. Frankly not sure if this would be as simple as changing the name of every stadium to a fictional name OR if that is eventually overwritten by the game setting the "real life" stadium for the "Washington Nationals" with the release of each new version. If the latter, then you would then have to change the name of every team to a fictional one (and quite likely one that was never used historically either) - The Washington Fictionals Park factors are driven by dimensions. I have thoughts on this but do not have time for a full response now. I will elaborate this evening.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jun 19, 2018 9:58:28 GMT -5
The dimensions of the stadium are irrelevant, cosmetic, play no role. The park factors dictate how stadiums play. Frankly not sure if this would be as simple as changing the name of every stadium to a fictional name OR if that is eventually overwritten by the game setting the "real life" stadium for the "Washington Nationals" with the release of each new version. If the latter, then you would then have to change the name of every team to a fictional one (and quite likely one that was never used historically either) - The Washington Fictionals Park factors are driven by dimensions. I have thoughts on this but do not have time for a full response now. I will elaborate this evening. Externally, using a third-party program of some kind to calculate park factors based on a change in stadium dimensions, yes. Simply changing dimensions in the game itself, no. But changing the "park factors" in the game does have an effect.
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Jun 19, 2018 13:10:45 GMT -5
I agree, only the park factors matter. Not the dimensions. I am not a fan of changing the parks either. You can build your team to suit your park. You DON'T have to change the PARK to suit your team.
Seems like a lazy cop out to me.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Jun 19, 2018 18:52:01 GMT -5
In the PBL, we are about 30 years into the future. In MLB, 24 of 30 ballparks have been built within the last 30 years. Only 6 ballparks are more than 30 years in age.
It seems that a GM in the PBL should have the option of building a new ballpark. Doing so should be an expensive venture, but it should be an option.
In my other league, we use a spreadsheet that translates distances, wall heights, wind direction into ballpark factors. Once a GM designs and purchases a new stadium, he submits the spreadsheet to the Commish, who enters the updated dimensions and factors.
The system works well and modifications are infrequent.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Jun 19, 2018 19:09:37 GMT -5
I know I promised the unveil of the updated rewards program soon. I want to run some tests to make sure the park changes work as I think they do. Was hoping to do that this evening before the sim but had to work late and just walked in the door. I will get everything wrapped up and published soon but it might still be a couple of days.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Jun 19, 2018 19:12:05 GMT -5
I agree, only the park factors matter. Not the dimensions. I am not a fan of changing the parks either. You can build your team to suit your park. You DON'T have to change the PARK to suit your team. Seems like a lazy cop out to me. Building a stadium to fit your team would be pretty short sited. Rather I would expect people to build a park for the type of team they prefer and merge the two. I will drop the spoiler that modifications will require banking credits for several seasons. A better strategy would be to start building a team towards a stadium you could have in the future.
|
|
|
Post by BlueJaysGM_Fin on Jun 19, 2018 20:05:52 GMT -5
I have remained relatively quiet on this topic. I like to write about my team and what goes on around the league, but if i choose to write something, I want it to add value to the league and i want to do a good job with it. But then i read what the Rockies and Athletics and Reds write, and enjoy it so much there is no way I can add value the way they do. So i prefer to put my trust in Ron, who always makes well thought out decisions and has the league's best interests in mind at all times. He knows how to navigate the PBL into new era so we all need to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. That will be my contribution to the league. Do i get writing credit for this? lol Just kidding.
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Jun 20, 2018 5:57:43 GMT -5
Personally, I find the "we shouldn't be punishing the GMs who don't write" argument persuasive. I think that the number of points you get from exporting every single sim and voting in every single awards ballot should be considered the max. As it is rare to actually achieve that max, the contribution of articles can be used to ensure getting the maximum number of points without skewing things too much.
But that's just my two cents; I'm quite happy to go along with this however it goes.
|
|