Travel Effect on Players

[jlaw]

Does travel/distance between cities have any effect on player morale/stamina in the game?

I'm pretty confident in real life it does but not sure if the game does have a travel effect.

[LansdowneSt]

It doesn't that I am aware of. You could build a schedule with a game in London during the day and Honolulu at night. I don't think the game has a sense of the miles. Just that it will be a doubleheader same as if you played both in Detroit.

[Brad K]

Hmmm... it seems the play worse on the road deal is simulated somewhere. Abstract is good enough.

[texasmame]

Originally Posted by jlaw

Does travel/distance between cities have any effect on player morale/stamina in the game?

I'm pretty confident in real life it does but not sure if the game does have a travel effect.

I have teams in Taiwan, Tokyo, Havana, Alaska and San Juan and never really noticed a difference.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by jlaw

Does travel/distance between cities have any effect on player morale/stamina in the game?

I'm pretty confident in real life it does but not sure if the game does have a travel effect.

Nah, there's just a generalized malus to teams playing on the road wherever they are. Ideally it'd be more pronounced IIRC at the beginning and ends of road trips and more in the first few innings than the last few, but the game doesn't really track road trip length I don't think at all and this would be kind of a heavy lift.

As for the "distance traveled" thing, that seems easy but I think it'd be really hard to implement in a way that made sense for historical games as well. If anything, it'd be a bigger deal; you just plain did not go from New York to St. Louis in the 30s without a day off because it took trains like a day and a half to get from one place to the other, and even if you did have a travel day you'd probably be tired (and to be fair the league schedules imply western and eastern "divisions" during that time; in the AL for instance you'd never just go over and play the Browns, you'd play the White Sox, Tigers, and Indians all in a row). So like at the very least you'd probably want some kind of modifier in the game screen... and how do you handle that, exactly? Make the game keep track of what city a team happens to be in on any given day so that the Mariners don't get double-dipped when they play the Marlins and then the Braves on a single road trip?

I'm not, like, totally against this, don't get me wrong, but it's a bigger ask than what it sounds like.

[BIG17EASY]

Is there still an issue with doubleheaders being scheduled due to rainouts with each game in a different city? I know this was an issue when rainouts were first introduced, which led me to turn rainouts off. If that issue still exists, I certainly hope there's no penalty to either team for "traveling" thousands of miles between games.

[Pelican]

Yeah, in theory the metrics (location, date, travel time, time zones) are all there; but translating jet lag into fatigue or downgraded performance would be something out of a medical journal. No question that these things matter. It's just how to factor them in - in a meaningful way that does not blow up the game. I recall reading an article awhile back about the advantage in rest and relaxation that some (wealthy) teams enjoyed by flying by charter or private jet. Leave on your schedule, no missed flights, no delays (except weather, of course), no TSA lines, no layovers, no connections, plenty of room, good food, privacy. That has to make a difference in play. But how much? Dunno.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Is there still an issue with doubleheaders being scheduled due to rainouts with each game in a different city? I know this was an issue when rainouts were first introduced, which led me to turn rainouts off. If that issue still exists, I certainly hope there's no penalty to either team for "traveling" thousands of miles between games.

This peculiarity goes to a financial system limitation, in that, apparently, it clubs don't get all their home games played it causes issues with the finances. This is unfortunate, as one of the aspects which makes baseball unique is that clubs sometimes don't get all their games played. (There is also the lack of single admission doubleheaders, another staple of baseball.)

Interestingly, what OOTP is doing in regards to the scenario you mentioned somewhat reflects a real-life MLB rule.

It used to be that if a game was rained out in one team's park, it might get made up at the other team's park, meaning one club would get fewer home games and the other extra home games. Beginning in 2007, the rules were changed such that if a game was being made up at the other team's park, that other team would bat first even though the game was being played at its park. The rationale was that, while one team was losing a home game, at least it would still get the effect of a home game by batting second.

Since 2007, this has only happened a handful of times (excluding the heavily modified 2020 season):

2007: the SEA at CLE game of Apr. 9th was postponed. The game was made up at SEA on Sept. 26th as the first game of a regular doubleheader, with SEA batting first. The second game had CLE batting first.

2013: the SFN at CIN game of July 4th was postponed. The game was made up at SFN on July 23rd as the second game of a regular doubleheader, with CIN batting first in the first game and SFN batting first in the second game.

2021: the ANA at TOR game of Apr. 11th was postponed. The game was made up at ANA on Aug. 10th as the first game of a regular doubleheader, with ANA batting first. TOR batted first in the second game.

2022: the DET at OAK game of Apr. 4th was postponed. The game was made up at DET on May 10th as the first game of a regular doubleheader, with DET batting first. OAK batted first in the second game.


In all instances this home team batting first occurs only during games made up as part of a regular, two-for-one, single admission doubleheader. Most of the time it is done during the first game, but on occasion it's done in the second game. I don't know why that is; perhaps the clubs involved decide which game will have it happen, or it could be a result of how make up games are defined.

Note that MLB counts the games in these sorts of doubleheaders as two home games for the team hosting the contests, despite it batting first in one of the games.

The minor leagues have adopted this 'home team bats first' rule for its postponed games being made up at the other team's park. However, it is always done in the second game of the doubleheader.


So, when OOTP is making up that postponed game, you can think of it doing what MLB is doing and having the home team batting first. You just have to ignore the references to the game taking place in the original park.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

As for the "distance traveled" thing, that seems easy but I think it'd be really hard to implement in a way that made sense for historical games as well. If anything, it'd be a bigger deal; you just plain did not go from New York to St. Louis in the 30s without a day off because it took trains like a day and a half to get from one place to the other, and even if you did have a travel day you'd probably be tired (and to be fair the league schedules imply western and eastern "divisions" during that time . . .

It's a mixed bad in terms of travel in earlier MLB years.

On the one hand, road trips tended to be much longer. In some cases, clubs were scheduled for as many as 28 consecutive games on the road. Nowadays, road trips tend to be 7 to 10 games.

On the other hand, travel by rail was, by many players' accounts, quite pleasant. Trains were essentially hotels on wheels, with players able to get a restaurant-quality meal and sleep in a bed. They could walk around, and there was ample time for them to socialize.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

So, when OOTP is making up that postponed game, you can think of it doing what MLB is doing and having the home team batting first. You just have to ignore the references to the game taking place in the original park.

I understand why OOTP does that, but it's not possible to ignore when the park factors change between games of a doubleheader. Again, not something I care about since I have rainouts off. But I think this is a non-starter when it comes to the discussion about a "travel penalty."

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

I understand why OOTP does that, but it's not possible to ignore when the park factors change between games of a doubleheader.

Good point, I forgot about the park factors aspect.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Is there still an issue with doubleheaders being scheduled due to rainouts with each game in a different city? I know this was an issue when rainouts were first introduced, which led me to turn rainouts off. If that issue still exists, I certainly hope there's no penalty to either team for "traveling" thousands of miles between games.

I thought this was fixed but waited to respond until I was sure. Just had a DH in my game that was due to a rain out in Philadelphia in May vs. Arizona. Makeup game was part of a DH in June in Arizona. First game Philadelphia was the home team at Chase Field in Arizona. Arizona was the home team in game two.

I think it's been this was since at least v22? Maybe even before?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Sweed

I thought this was fixed but waited to respond until I was sure. Just had a DH in my game that was due to a rain out in Philadelphia in May vs. Arizona. Makeup game was part of a DH in June in Arizona. First game Philadelphia was the home team at Chase Field in Arizona. Arizona was the home team in game two.

OOTP has never made up postponed games realistically ever since the option for postponed games was added.

Blame the game's financial system for this, as evidently every team has to play out its full slate of games and get all of its allotted home games (both of which are quite unrealistic, especially for earlier years).

For your example, in real life, assuming the game could not be made up in Philadelphia, the game would have been made up as Philadelphia at Arizona, giving the Phillies one less home game and the Diamondbacks an 82nd home game. Prior to 2007, Arizona would have batted second in both games; from 2007 onward, Arizona would have batted first in the make up game even though it was the home team.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

OOTP has never made up postponed games realistically ever since the option for postponed games was added.

Blame the game's financial system for this, as evidently every team has to play out its full slate of games and get all of its allotted home games (both of which are quite unrealistic, especially for earlier years).

For your example, in real life, assuming the game could not be made up in Philadelphia, the game would have been made up as Philadelphia at Arizona, giving the Phillies one less home game and the Diamondbacks an 82nd home game. Prior to 2007, Arizona would have batted second in both games; from 2007 onward, Arizona would have batted first in the make up game even though it was the home team.

Well it seemed that Big17Easy was asking if the games were being played in two separate locations in OOTP. IE from my example one game in Philly and one in Arizona on the same day. They currently aren't, and both teams are getting a "last at bat game", so question answered. I think.

While it would be nice to get every rule, based on every season played, right I'm ok with how OOTP does it, until or if it adds all of the real life possibilities. IMHO there are more important "fish to fry" but if Markus and Matt moved this to the top of the list? I'd be fine with that too.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Well it seemed that Big17Easy was asking if the games were being played in two separate locations in OOTP. IE from my example one game in Philly and one in Arizona on the same day.

But they're not really. It's an artifact of the financial system being unable to replicate a fairly common occurrence in professional baseball, and it shouldn't be taken as it appears.

Originally Posted by Sweed

While it would be nice to get every rule, based on every season played, right I'm ok with how OOTP does it, until or if it adds all of the real life possibilities.

If games getting postponed is a feature, then having that act realistically and appropriately is something the game should do.

Some postponed games not being made up, having a few less or more home games due to making up postponed games at the other team's park, and the traditional two-for-one, single admission doubleheader, are a staple of baseball and things which make the sport unique. And OOTP does not recreate them.

Those may not be that important when compared to other things, but they are nonetheless faults which detract from some fundamental realism aspects of the sport.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

But they're not really. It's an artifact of the financial system being unable to replicate a fairly common occurrence in professional baseball, and it shouldn't be taken as it appears.


If games getting postponed is a feature, then having that act realistically and appropriately is something the game should do.

Some postponed games not being made up, having a few less or more home games due to making up postponed games at the other team's park, and the traditional two-for-one, single admission doubleheader, are a staple of baseball and things which make the sport unique. And OOTP does not recreate them.

Those may not be that important when compared to other things, but they are nonetheless faults which detract from some fundamental realism aspects of the sport.

And that's all well and good but, it is a game and there will always be things that aren't going to be done the same as the real world, be it weather, financials, or something as simple as having too many pitchers who's uniform number is a single digit. Accepting that as part of a game, any simulation not just OOTP, doesn't mean one thinks the game is perfect and never wants/needs to see it changed.

It's easy to point out issues that aren't simulating real life exactly as it happens or has happened. It's harder to be the developer and decide where getting this "right" is on the to do list and where it fits into how may users benefit by doing feature A compared to feature B.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Sweed

And that's all well and good but, it is a game and there will always be things that aren't going to be done the same as the real world, be it weather, financials, or something as simple as having too many pitchers who's uniform number is a single digit. Accepting that as part of a game, any simulation not just OOTP, doesn't mean one thinks the game is perfect and never wants/needs to see it changed.

It's easy to point out issues that aren't simulating real life exactly as it happens or has happened. It's harder to be the developer and decide where getting this "right" is on the to do list and where it fits into how may users benefit by doing feature A compared to feature B.

Thank you.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Sweed

And that's all well and good but, it is a game and there will always be things that aren't going to be done the same as the real world, be it weather, financials, or something as simple as having too many pitchers who's uniform number is a single digit. Accepting that as part of a game, any simulation not just OOTP, doesn't mean one thinks the game is perfect and never wants/needs to see it changed.

It's easy to point out issues that aren't simulating real life exactly as it happens or has happened. It's harder to be the developer and decide where getting this "right" is on the to do list and where it fits into how may users benefit by doing feature A compared to feature B.

That is all well and good, and I don't disagree.

The issue is that sometimes features are introduced in what seems a halfhearted fashion, and then left that way, in some cases for years. Perhaps it would be better to get all the aspects of a feature worked out in advance and then implement it so that it is as good as possible from the outset.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That is all well and good, and I don't disagree.

The issue is that sometimes features are introduced in what seems a halfhearted fashion, and then left that way, in some cases for years. Perhaps it would be better to get all the aspects of a feature worked out in advance and then implement it so that it is as good as possible from the outset.

That would be nice. Until then we play with what we are given, or we choose to not buy. Either decision is valid. Nowhere did I defend OOTP's treatment of rain, delays or postponements, as the "be all - end all". I only answered Big17Easy's question on how OOTP currently handles some makeup games dependent on circumstances. Nothing more.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Sweed

That would be nice. Until then we play with what we are given, or we choose to not buy. Either decision is valid. Nowhere did I defend OOTP's treatment of rain, delays or postponements, as the "be all - end all". I only answered Big17Easy's question on how OOTP currently handles some makeup games dependent on circumstances. Nothing more.

I took a four-year break from OOTP, and coming back, while many things have changed in it, some are still the same.