[NoOne]

That's not true. it'd be a very simple qualification for that sort of robustness from moving a #2+ to #1 in lineup. that info is readily available for use in any sort of logic you want to create.

this isn't rocket science... i bet i could come up with some 'simple' nested lop/dowhile logic to easily handle all substitutions of any kind.

compartmentalize the individual actions and it's even easier in a modular way.

heck, it could simple go through the exact same process that exists for making a lineup and exclude the hurt player... i would hope that's how the AI handles it. it wouldn't even require new code.

if you don't delegate that stuff, then it's your responsibility to act.

either way, there is nothing holding them back on this issue in regards to "barriers to entry" or being "too hard to do" excuse. they simply haven't done anything about it...

that's a neutral statement in the big picture, btw. lots of things can be worked on and limited time to work on them. but, it's defintieyl not toohard or impossible to do... in fact very little heavy lifting involved for a well-thought out process to replace current one - lots of functions can likely be re-used if they were written properly the first time.

along the smae lines it's absolutely pitiful the amount of work you have to do to use a catcher as a dh on off days and primary catcher otherwise. although the game's fatigue for catchers isn't conducive to that, if you use them less as a catcher and more as a dh they don't get tired... you can play them 150-162 games if smart about it.

with a great offensive catchers, that's a big deal. the difference between ~average and ~great for a catcher is much larger than other positions... ie greater return on improving it, ceterus paribus. ootp18 has defintieyl cut back on quality of catchers... the highest power catcher in 50years has been ~70/100 (140/200 ish). 1 other guy was 130's (excludes players with 'power' that aren't viable mlb hitters, ie low contact, no defense at catcher etc)