AI shuffling defensive positions for no reason

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Right...tools can and should determine where you position a player, but experience should play a much larger role in a player's overall positional rating, as so primary position ratings are higher. And secondary positions are much much lower

It's a bit time consuming but I manually lower the experience of "secondary" positions for new IFA, discoveries and drafted players in my league. I keep their position that they came into the world with untouched and let the players naturally progress and change positions coming up in the minors.

The edIts make it more natural, I'll see a CF who already maxed out his experience at CF but only grade average at the position because of his tools eventually end up being switched to the corner OF during his time in the minors.

Without the edits, this same player would already have over 100 experience (out of 200) at the corner OF and already grade better than his position he has 200 experience at because he needed fewer tools for the corner OF.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by pstrickert

On a related note ...

IRL, managers of the home team will use their closers in the top of the 9th of a tie game. The logic is to keep the game tied and let the home team win it in the bottom of the 9th. (Besides, at this point, there can be no save situation for the home team.) By contrast, visiting managers will save their closer for save situations in the 9th or beyond.

Markus believes that it makes more sense, if you're a visiting manager, to use your closer in the bottom of the ninth of a tie game (even though it is not a save situation). The logic is that if you don't use your closer and a run scores, the game is over. If you do use your closer, he's more likely to keep the score tied and give the visiting team another at-bat in the next inning.

For this reason, you'll see the visiting manager AI in OOTP use a closer in a non-save situation such as the bottom of the 9th of a tie game. Markus thinks it makes sense, even though in real life it seldom if ever happens.

I just had one of my closers (GM mode) lose 20 games because of this logic I must assume.

Wouldn't it be better if the visiting team's closer came in the bottom of the 9th of a tied game in a high leverage situation instead of always coming in during the 9th no matter what the situation is? As of now closers do not seem like closers. Pretty much all of the closers in my current save have a win/loss record of a spot reliever and their ERA's are higher than usual.

[fcabanski]

A related issue to closers is that there is no second mound visit. While playing a game, I often have to switch pitchers without sending the manager to the mound. That never happens in a real game.

[Matt Arnold]

Originally Posted by fcabanski

A related issue to closers is that there is no second mound visit. While playing a game, I often have to switch pitchers without sending the manager to the mound. That never happens in a real game.

The mound visit is not the "manager goes to change pitchers" visit but the "manager goes to talk to the pitcher to plan strategy/stall for time" mound visit.