Broken Bat - Suggestions: Manager Ideas

Forum >> Suggestions >> Manager Ideas

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function

#14193	01/31/2015 11:39:12 am
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	The problem with just hitting the default button for us "GM wannabes" is that it just trots out the theoretically best lineup/rotation right now, without taking into consideration that the young guys won't get better without a concerted effort towards getting them playing time. Thus us "GM wannabes" are forced to do some managerial decisions until the default manager is capable of making forward looking decisions. Perhaps the options for the manager to concentrate on player development or "win now" as suggested above.

#14194	01/31/2015 11:46:19 am
Dcmrulz Joined: 02/14/2013 Posts: 588 Inactive	That would be an interesting second default option: for teams that want to win now, that default currently in place seems to trot out the best lineup, while there would be a "develop players" option that has your youngest major league ready guys higher in the lineup and your older players could be benched.

#14212	01/31/2015 8:52:10 pm
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	Yes, I would appreciate more managerial options. Besides the obvious problem of requiring a lot of programming time to do so, though, is the issue that the standard managerial decisions aren't up to par right now. It seems like it would make more sense to wait until that baseline gets moved to major league quality before allowing us opportunities to tweak in-game decisions. That being said, making such decisions is fairly complex. I think we all should understand even with dozens of options we could never get the manager to behave exactly as we would.

#14249	02/01/2015 10:07:58 pm
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	The are really two issues here: 1. What should the roll of the manager (for human) teams be. 2. How to improve management settings and the game engine. Steve

#14254	02/02/2015 3:46:02 am
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive	I already gave my input regarding question #1 and I have a few ideas regarding question #2 I will post when I have the time to put them on "paper". For now, I just want to add this: When it was asked for more search filters in FA to save time doing tedious things, some people were against it because those who spend more time in there going through players one by one should be rewarded for the effort they put in it. Following this same logic, those who spend more time doing lineups and tweaking management options should also be rewarded for their efforts. Therefore, there shouldn’t be any bot managers with “win/development” settings.

#14255	02/02/2015 4:49:39 am
nobodyjones Joined: 12/28/2011 Posts: 170 Seattle Rickey IV.1	Steve, I think we should consider limiting the availability of active position players. Right now the limit is 17. I think it should be 14, with the remaining three (15, 16, 17) available to swap in and out, but unavailable for pinch hitting, platooning, etc.. Basically, the 3 players would be a DL, without adding to the total roster size. While on (in) the DL, these players should not get any experience or training of any kind. Also, Bot teams should only swap in and out once per week, so some mechanism to ensure that they have 9 healthy players would be needed. There are many reasons why I believe that this is important. Just to name a quick few; 1. better statistical accuracy to mlb, a game that we trust and respect. 2. borderline 25 year old prospects will go to teams who need them more, resulting in a rule 5 type of talent distribution. 3. pitching handedness becomes more important with less available bats. 4. enhancement of roster building and lineup strategy. editing... An easier way to do this would be to just limit the max to 14, and use AAA as a DL. (I don't understand why people have used that logic against me in the past.) Updated Monday, February 2 2015 @ 5:26:37 am PST*

#14256	02/02/2015 5:47:48 am
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive	Don’t worry about that. The way financials are going, pretty soon not many teams will be able to afford to fill the major league roster.

#14257	02/02/2015 6:18:14 am
nobodyjones Joined: 12/28/2011 Posts: 170 Seattle Rickey IV.1	The managerial ideas that I have are 1/2 hearted with a 30 man roster so I will refrain.

#14259	02/02/2015 6:56:53 am
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	The reward for hard work would be equal in both cases. The rewards for free agent searching have been laid out in other posts, so I won't rehash those here. The reward for a manager who spends time tweaking each managerial option would be (with some assumed knowledge or insight into the effects of those settings) that they would hold an advantage over the manager who chooses to use the less precise global settings for expediency or from a lack of knowledge. In both cases, any "work" put in should improve results. Work should always be rewarded as long as the more casual player isn't being overly penalized. Reward/penalty for work/casual seem reasonable and fair in both cases. Updated Monday, February 2 2015 @ 7:23:38 am PST

#15170	02/22/2015 5:01:49 pm
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	Totally different manager idea: how about a manager records page? Most wins? Most losses? Thought came to me on the occasion of Emilio "Skipper" Pagan getting his 1000th career win.