What made you do this??

ForeverRoyalKC · 07-18-2019, 02:12 PM

Hey gang,

This is going to be kind of a "deep" question, but I was wondering about what made you pick the franchises and dynasties you did. Why did some of you pick an MLB team to GM and/or manage? Why a complete fictional league and team? Why MLB teams with fictional players? Why did you start in the year you did? Why did/didnt you do an MLB fantasy team?

I ask this to see what made your enjoyment click. What is the enjoyment you find in the decision you made?

Me, I still have to get a new computer (hopefully by the end of this month) and I will get OOTP 20. I am stuck in what I want to do with it for a long run. I thought your thoughts and why you made the decisions you did would have some impact and influence on me.

Rizon · 07-18-2019, 02:45 PM

For my fictional universe I chose Philly from the old NES Bases Loaded game since that was my favorite team of the game back in the day. Not sure why I originally choose Philly; maybe because they were the losing team on the startup animation (underdog angle), or that they had the best pitching.

battists · 07-18-2019, 05:40 PM

I've always played fictional. I suppose part of this was growing up on fantasy/sci-fi books and games, so I've always loved that whole 'alternate reality' thing.

But for a few baseball-specific reasons:

I find MLB overwhelming. Too many teams, too many minor leagues. I just can't "know" the league as well as I want when I play MLB.
Playing fictional absolves me of my preconceptions about how certain players are "supposed" to play. So, I don't get upset when Giancarlos Stanton has a bad year, because I don't have any preconceptions about what he's supposed to do.
I like to be able to customize everything about my league. Team names, cities, logos, unis, etc.

cheo25 · 07-19-2019, 09:14 AM

I like to sit back and be commissioner of a league, which really means to watch Real-Time Simulation of every day of the season except Saturdays. On Saturdays, I watch a full game play out as my "NBC Game of the Week" since I grew up in the '70s and '80s. And that's usually the time frame of my leagues. The Game of the Week is whatever the Game of the Week was for that particular season (506sports.com has a list of historical national baseball TV broadcasts). The GOW gives me a chance to experience 3D play, the look and feel of the stadiums used and also a deeper dive into individual players and the seasons they're having.

I'm trying to work up to the current day, but usually every year, something comes up that prompts me to start over from the advent of divisional play in 1969. I use to play games as a kid with dice, the card game "Battle" or the random number generator on a calculator to determine a team's wins and losses. I would play National League seasons (with schedules I made up once I ran out of magazines with actual NL schedules) based on those results.

When I manage or GM a team, it's always an Astros team. Usually, it's from the '60s or '70s, but I've done the 2013 team, too.

Syd Thrift · 07-19-2019, 09:56 AM

I like using fictional players in historical settings because like battists I don't really like going in "knowing" that Player X is going to be a star or scrub. Yes, talent change randomness fixes a lot of that, but I really prefer going in thinking "ok, I have two first basemen who both field the position well, but one is a high-average, medium power guy and the other looks like he's not going to hit for average but could have a lot more power... who do I play?" to "I have Mark Grace and Rafael Palmeiro, who do I play?".

I also do the thing where I manage/GM all of the teams in the top level of my league, although in my current dynasty I'm simming out everything instead of playing all the games from the 7th inning on, which I've done in the past. I like doing the latter because that's basically when all of the important in-game decisions are made. The interesting thing to me is watching the universe as a whole emerge - who become the stars, who have one or two great seasons and then become scrubs, who get found relatively late in their careers after scorching the minor leagues, etc.

Déjà Bru · 07-19-2019, 10:25 AM

"Why MLB teams with fictional players?" This is me. Fictional, for the reasons battists and Syd give. But MLB is a must because I am a lifelong Yankees fan. (Emphasis on "long" in that I go back to when they truly stank and they struggled with attendance.)

I tried to play the game in the way that battists describes - of course, my team was always the NY Knights

- but I need MLB for a grounding in reality. I could not get into the Omaha Wombats winning the World Series.

But definitely, definitely, fictional players. So many complaints here are from dilettante players who do indeed expect Giancarlo Stanton to perform exactly as he does IRL and are disappointed because - and thank goodness it does - the game provides for some variability.

Also, one piece of advice while I am on my soap box: Slow down and play out your games. My enjoyment of OOTPB was greatly and permanently enhanced when I discovered this principle. Otherwise the seasons go by and you are left with a bunch of artificial results and statistics with no emotional involvement in them.

battists · 07-19-2019, 11:11 AM

I think one of the coolest things about fictional players is that you can make up your own backstories about them without kind of running roughshod over real life people. But then, I’ve always been attracted to the “fictional stories” aspect of fictional leagues.

I think one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen in the OOTP world was the story one guy on the forums wrote to explain why OOTP kept demoting and promoting these marginal players.

Here it is because this can never be shared enough:

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=152735

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NoOne · 07-19-2019, 12:53 PM

too long? Short story -- sick of horribly run local teams. i like to see what happens with a rational, long-term approach. Fictional mixed with nonfiction, always. in other simulations, i start with real players too. i just don't like the transition of real-to-fictional in ootp and how the stats and AI settings work in that context.

change of eras in ootp would be smoother if the ratings were more absolute and the modifiers became fixed. the different stats of different eras should be about increasing power or contact ratings etc... otherwise, your players that exist between eras are funky and the stats are funky etc etc. maybe this was thought out before the historical aspect was brought in? otherwise, it's a huge mistake in logic from the start, lol. overly complicated for otherwise simple things this way.

Since my childhood and the advent of atari / nintendo etc, Detroit sports teams generally are horrible. So, a fictional team isn't so hard for me to enjoy, but i typically retain the city/nickname.

when it comes to lions, tigers and pistons, more years than not they are crap during my life. a midwest small-ish market, but they compound their problems with obstinate sports-business practices from the 1950's. refuse to adapt and do so begrudgeonly and in a way that makes it fail miserably. We still rub dirt on injuries and tell them to go limp it out, ruining their careers (hello, grant hill, et al.).

i play detroit teams to give them some f%ing competency, lol. i dream of them being run well and efficiently, but alas, that's never going to happen.

--the red wings dominated only during a pre-salary cap era, because they were willing to spend more than anyone else. they clung to a playoff streak even though it clearly wasn't a stanley cup-capable squad. We lost a great coach over that nonsense. We won't know about blashill until he has a squad capable of something other than a losing record.

--The tiger's last resurgence has the same aroma (pay to win), except the owner forced a competent old-school GM's hand too many times with stupid contracts. even though he was obstinate about analytics when it was important to be building that organizational knowledge, dumbrowski was otherwise a great GM. between a dying owner and a stubborn GM stuck in previous decades sophistications, or lack of, they did a number on the tiger's future, and current present.

--The pistons were great with the badboys. the wallace-era was pure luck. heck, wallace was a no-name throw in as part of the grant hill sign-and-trade. dumars was a horrible drafter and i think he just 'winged' it like Matt Millen with the lions. he got lucky, but long-term success was never possible with him. Proof? look at what he did toward the end... reaching, grasping, failing. That team's attitude was the steady transition to the norm among millenial athletes now, but without the force that social media has become. every second about yourself and telling people about it, lol.

--The lions... <repressed memories, redacted, censored, you name it -- NSFW> why do i still watch the lions? i took 2 years off, and somehow started watching them again a few years ago.... ffs... I was almost free...

i do hope they give the current gm enough time, though. he got forced by another 'detroit owner' to keep some coach that didn't fit the future plans. we drafted the wrong type of players for what was inevitable for 2 years... WTF?!? sh%$ or get off the pot. pick a rational path and have a spine, ffs.

These things... these things are why i play detroit teams. i do it right, lol. i don't mortgage the future. i don't whimsically change directions every week. i don't let some inbred billionaire tell me what to do. LoL! I don't irrationally apply value where there is none. in real life, no one wants to move to detroit, but they could at least be similar to tampa bay or oakland in competency.

it's all a reaction to what i don't like in my local teams and how i wish they'd be run and how they'd value assets more rationally with a longer-term approach. in their defense, no team takes a long-term approach, but htey should. maybe the patroits do. They mirror the closest behaviours to what i've done since the 1980's in sports sims. => pragmatic and realistic.

nielsoncp · 07-19-2019, 01:26 PM

One of the things I started in 19 and have done in XX is simming out 16-20 years and expanding the MLB from 30 to 40 teams (and relocating the Florida teams) along the way, then taking over one of the last batch of expansion teams. I find that it helps to have some familiar names in the sunset of their careers, but I also don't get distracted by the real life players that I know should be performing at X or Y level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I could not get into the Omaha Wombats winning the World Series.

And, in my current, simulation, I just led the Omaha Herd to the championship, so sorry to break the realism for you Deja...

cbbl · 07-19-2019, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by battists

I've always played fictional. I suppose part of this was growing up on fantasy/sci-fi books and games, so I've always loved that whole 'alternate reality' thing.

But for a few baseball-specific reasons:

I find MLB overwhelming. Too many teams, too many minor leagues. I just can't "know" the league as well as I want when I play MLB.
Playing fictional absolves me of my preconceptions about how certain players are "supposed" to play. So, I don't get upset when Giancarlos Stanton has a bad year, because I don't have any preconceptions about what he's supposed to do.
I like to be able to customize everything about my league. Team names, cities, logos, unis, etc.

Yep. All of that.

cbbl · 07-19-2019, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by battists

I think one of the coolest things about fictional players is that you can make up your own backstories about them without kind of running roughshod over real life people. But then, I’ve always been attracted to the “fictional stories” aspect of fictional leagues.

I think one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen in the OOTP world was the story one guy on the forums wrote to explain why OOTP kept demoting and promoting these marginal players.

Here it is because this can never be shared enough:

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=152735

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep. All of that also.

LOL

ForeverRoyalKC · 07-19-2019, 03:20 PM

These are great answers, folks! Just what I was looking for. Naturally, we as individuals have our own feelings and opinions, but I was wondering why you did what you did to see if your ideas might spring me to do something. I am heavy leaning towards an MLB fantasy team because a game like this makes the impossible possible. I drool at the thought of Acuna and Vlad Jr. together on the Royals!

I remember doing fantasy on Earl Weaver Baseball and I LOVED it. But, then again, I kinda like the challenge of running an MLB team and having to go through the pain and excitement of rebuilding a Royals team.
I did do a fictional Midwest league back when I had OOTP '16 and it was kinda fun. I almost got the feeling it was real because I used places I know, visited and lived in. I can see why fictional can seem real.
Please keep the responses coming. They are pretty fascinating!

Andy · 07-19-2019, 03:36 PM

I'll let you know why I play the way I play when I figure out what kind of league I want. I only want one full time league because with two girls aged 1 and 3 I don't have much time to play anymore, yet I have 4 saves. I have a completely fictional league, fictional players with real teams, real MLB as an expansion team and just a regular real MLB league. I'll play one for a week or two and decide I want to do one of my other leagues full time. It's a vicious cycle and very frustrating.

cbbl · 07-19-2019, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

I remember doing fantasy on Earl Weaver Baseball and I LOVED it.

You'll find a lot of us who are old enough to have played computer games in the '80s played EWB. I was a big Orioles fan at the time and found the game because of Earl Weaver more than being a computer game fan. But it was an awesome game! My friend and I created a league and each took a couple of teams to play ... letting the computer run the remaining teams. (He was a Royals fan by the way! All about George Brett back then...with maybe a little Bo Jackson sprinkled in!)

At the end of each season, I printed a ton of reports on my dot matrix printer, and put them in a binder. We only played two full seasons, but I still have both stats books in my box of childhood memories!!

Even with Earl Weaver, we played fictional. We based the players and teams on real players/teams, but changed the player's names so we could have our own pretend universe. I guess, for me, all the reasons we did that still hold today ... I'm 100% a fictional league player.

gemini615 · 07-19-2019, 07:35 PM

I enjoy fictional worlds with fictional teams and fictional players. I like starting with no history whatsoever and watching how the world evolves. I love seeing the first players inducted into the hall of fame, and I love looking back at the stats after 20 years or so to see what hitter or pitcher gets an award named after them. Cy Young didn't exist, but Riley "the Shark" Smalls sure did. Every year the best pitcher in each of my leagues gets the coveted Riley Smalls Trophy.
I like immersing myself into my own world. So this way of playing is best for me.

Scipio Africanus · 07-19-2019, 08:09 PM

Like a lot of people above, I play fictional so I don't have the knowledge and history with the real teams and players. I like the fresh start.

But the biggest reason I play fictional is because I can't stand the financial disparity of real baseball. My fictional league is set up so every team gets the same amount every year and a salary cap keeps them from going nuts and plunging themselves into massive red ink.

damientheomen3 · 07-20-2019, 08:50 AM

I play exclusively fictional for similar reasons that others have outlined: whereas I won't throw a fit if Giancarlo Stanton (the consummate example in this thread) doesn't perform well, knowing that, for example, Joey Gallo has a high chance of being an inexpensive long term big bat is the type of stuff that I don't like to deal with as it makes things too easy. At the end of the day, the ratings are based on a player's perception at the time, and while those ratings can ultimately vary, I prefer having a blank canvas for players rather than having a good idea of where their ratings/potentials currently lie based on their leaguewide perception.

So I play fictional with fictional teams, as I also find MLB has way too many minor league teams for me to manage (I usually avoid even having 5 levels of minors). My fully preferred style of play is a fictional league with one or two minor league levels, and careers either abbreviated to 5, 8 or 10 seasons. I have to play on OOTP 17 for this as in 18 teams will just completely ignore the age limits necessary to make this work, and in 19 teams would immediately rid themselves of players who age out of range during the season rather than keep them until the end of that season, making GMing less fun (I haven't tested this in 20 yet). Overall it's a really fun way to play, a lot of roster turnover, although there are house rules you have to employ or you can set another franchise back a decade because they won't value starting pitching prospects correctly.

Tram2Whitaker · 07-20-2019, 02:28 PM

I like to play mid-market teams; small market teams are too frustrating, and large market teams are too easy. I do not play my teams (Detroit Tigers and Tampa Bay Rays), because I do not want to 'mess' with them. I like to see what I can do with a somewhat limited budget. I usually take Kansas City or Houston, or whatever team (depending on version, I've been playing since Season Ticket 2/OOTP 3) is in need of a rebuild.

Regarding fictional sims: I have a tendency to get super involved in world building, and invariably end up ruining the experience.

For OOTP 20, just before I bought it, people were getting really excited about rebuilding the Marlins, so I wanted to try it. I had some success, but like I said; it was annoying at first, because I had no budget, and then it got boring, when I was given an unlimited budget (my team relocated in 2025 to a market that was considered big).

07-18-2019, 02:12 PM	#1
ForeverRoyalKC All Star Starter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Hop, skip and a jump from Stockton Lake, MO. Posts: 1,128 Blog Entries: 3	What made you do this?? Hey gang, This is going to be kind of a "deep" question, but I was wondering about what made you pick the franchises and dynasties you did. Why did some of you pick an MLB team to GM and/or manage? Why a complete fictional league and team? Why MLB teams with fictional players? Why did you start in the year you did? Why did/didnt you do an MLB fantasy team? I ask this to see what made your enjoyment click. What is the enjoyment you find in the decision you made? Me, I still have to get a new computer (hopefully by the end of this month) and I will get OOTP 20. I am stuck in what I want to do with it for a long run. I thought your thoughts and why you made the decisions you did would have some impact and influence on me.

07-18-2019, 02:45 PM	#2
Rizon Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: SF Area, California Total Posts: 531,691 Posts: 2,363	For my fictional universe I chose Philly from the old NES Bases Loaded game since that was my favorite team of the game back in the day. Not sure why I originally choose Philly; maybe because they were the losing team on the startup animation (underdog angle), or that they had the best pitching. __________________ JML MILKSHAKES

07-18-2019, 05:40 PM	#3
battists Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 18,506 Blog Entries: 7	I've always played fictional. I suppose part of this was growing up on fantasy/sci-fi books and games, so I've always loved that whole 'alternate reality' thing. But for a few baseball-specific reasons: I find MLB overwhelming. Too many teams, too many minor leagues. I just can't "know" the league as well as I want when I play MLB. Playing fictional absolves me of my preconceptions about how certain players are "supposed" to play. So, I don't get upset when Giancarlos Stanton has a bad year, because I don't have any preconceptions about what he's supposed to do. I like to be able to customize everything about my league. Team names, cities, logos, unis, etc. __________________ Come check out my dynasty report, Funky Times!

07-19-2019, 10:25 AM	#6
Déjà Bru Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: United States Posts: 10,456	"Why MLB teams with fictional players?" This is me. Fictional, for the reasons battists and Syd give. But MLB is a must because I am a lifelong Yankees fan. (Emphasis on "long" in that I go back to when they truly stank and they struggled with attendance.) I tried to play the game in the way that battists describes - of course, my team was always the NY Knights - but I need MLB for a grounding in reality. I could not get into the Omaha Wombats winning the World Series. But definitely, definitely, fictional players. So many complaints here are from dilettante players who do indeed expect Giancarlo Stanton to perform exactly as he does IRL and are disappointed because - and thank goodness it does - the game provides for some variability. Also, one piece of advice while I am on my soap box: Slow down and play out your games. My enjoyment of OOTPB was greatly and permanently enhanced when I discovered this principle. Otherwise the seasons go by and you are left with a bunch of artificial results and statistics with no emotional involvement in them. __________________ - Bru

07-19-2019, 11:11 AM	#7
battists Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 18,506 Blog Entries: 7	I think one of the coolest things about fictional players is that you can make up your own backstories about them without kind of running roughshod over real life people. But then, I’ve always been attracted to the “fictional stories” aspect of fictional leagues. I think one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen in the OOTP world was the story one guy on the forums wrote to explain why OOTP kept demoting and promoting these marginal players. Here it is because this can never be shared enough: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=152735 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________ Come check out my dynasty report, Funky Times!

07-19-2019, 09:14 AM	#4
cheo25 All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Louisiana Posts: 707	I like to sit back and be commissioner of a league, which really means to watch Real-Time Simulation of every day of the season except Saturdays. On Saturdays, I watch a full game play out as my "NBC Game of the Week" since I grew up in the '70s and '80s. And that's usually the time frame of my leagues. The Game of the Week is whatever the Game of the Week was for that particular season (506sports.com has a list of historical national baseball TV broadcasts). The GOW gives me a chance to experience 3D play, the look and feel of the stadiums used and also a deeper dive into individual players and the seasons they're having. I'm trying to work up to the current day, but usually every year, something comes up that prompts me to start over from the advent of divisional play in 1969. I use to play games as a kid with dice, the card game "Battle" or the random number generator on a calculator to determine a team's wins and losses. I would play National League seasons (with schedules I made up once I ran out of magazines with actual NL schedules) based on those results. When I manage or GM a team, it's always an Astros team. Usually, it's from the '60s or '70s, but I've done the 2013 team, too.

07-19-2019, 12:53 PM	#8
NoOne Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,167	too long? Short story -- sick of horribly run local teams. i like to see what happens with a rational, long-term approach. Fictional mixed with nonfiction, always. in other simulations, i start with real players too. i just don't like the transition of real-to-fictional in ootp and how the stats and AI settings work in that context. change of eras in ootp would be smoother if the ratings were more absolute and the modifiers became fixed. the different stats of different eras should be about increasing power or contact ratings etc... otherwise, your players that exist between eras are funky and the stats are funky etc etc. maybe this was thought out before the historical aspect was brought in? otherwise, it's a huge mistake in logic from the start, lol. overly complicated for otherwise simple things this way. Since my childhood and the advent of atari / nintendo etc, Detroit sports teams generally are horrible. So, a fictional team isn't so hard for me to enjoy, but i typically retain the city/nickname. when it comes to lions, tigers and pistons, more years than not they are crap during my life. a midwest small-ish market, but they compound their problems with obstinate sports-business practices from the 1950's. refuse to adapt and do so begrudgeonly and in a way that makes it fail miserably. We still rub dirt on injuries and tell them to go limp it out, ruining their careers (hello, grant hill, et al.). i play detroit teams to give them some f%ing competency, lol. i dream of them being run well and efficiently, but alas, that's never going to happen. --the red wings dominated only during a pre-salary cap era, because they were willing to spend more than anyone else. they clung to a playoff streak even though it clearly wasn't a stanley cup-capable squad. We lost a great coach over that nonsense. We won't know about blashill until he has a squad capable of something other than a losing record. --The tiger's last resurgence has the same aroma (pay to win), except the owner forced a competent old-school GM's hand too many times with stupid contracts. even though he was obstinate about analytics when it was important to be building that organizational knowledge, dumbrowski was otherwise a great GM. between a dying owner and a stubborn GM stuck in previous decades sophistications, or lack of, they did a number on the tiger's future, and current present. --The pistons were great with the badboys. the wallace-era was pure luck. heck, wallace was a no-name throw in as part of the grant hill sign-and-trade. dumars was a horrible drafter and i think he just 'winged' it like Matt Millen with the lions. he got lucky, but long-term success was never possible with him. Proof? look at what he did toward the end... reaching, grasping, failing. That team's attitude was the steady transition to the norm among millenial athletes now, but without the force that social media has become. every second about yourself and telling people about it, lol. --The lions... <repressed memories, redacted, censored, you name it -- NSFW> why do i still watch the lions? i took 2 years off, and somehow started watching them again a few years ago.... ffs... I was almost free... i do hope they give the current gm enough time, though. he got forced by another 'detroit owner' to keep some coach that didn't fit the future plans. we drafted the wrong type of players for what was inevitable for 2 years... WTF?!? sh%$ or get off the pot. pick a rational path and have a spine, ffs. These things... these things are why i play detroit teams. i do it right, lol. i don't mortgage the future. i don't whimsically change directions every week. i don't let some inbred billionaire tell me what to do. LoL! I don't irrationally apply value where there is none. in real life, no one wants to move to detroit, but they could at least be similar to tampa bay or oakland in competency. it's all a reaction to what i don't like in my local teams and how i wish they'd be run and how they'd value assets more rationally with a longer-term approach. in their defense, no team takes a long-term approach, but htey should. maybe the patroits do. They mirror the closest behaviours to what i've done since the 1980's in sports sims. => pragmatic and realistic.

07-19-2019, 03:20 PM	#12
ForeverRoyalKC All Star Starter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Hop, skip and a jump from Stockton Lake, MO. Posts: 1,128 Blog Entries: 3	These are great answers, folks! Just what I was looking for. Naturally, we as individuals have our own feelings and opinions, but I was wondering why you did what you did to see if your ideas might spring me to do something. I am heavy leaning towards an MLB fantasy team because a game like this makes the impossible possible. I drool at the thought of Acuna and Vlad Jr. together on the Royals! I remember doing fantasy on Earl Weaver Baseball and I LOVED it. But, then again, I kinda like the challenge of running an MLB team and having to go through the pain and excitement of rebuilding a Royals team. I did do a fictional Midwest league back when I had OOTP '16 and it was kinda fun. I almost got the feeling it was real because I used places I know, visited and lived in. I can see why fictional can seem real. Please keep the responses coming. They are pretty fascinating!

07-19-2019, 03:36 PM	#13
Andy Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 2,256	I'll let you know why I play the way I play when I figure out what kind of league I want. I only want one full time league because with two girls aged 1 and 3 I don't have much time to play anymore, yet I have 4 saves. I have a completely fictional league, fictional players with real teams, real MLB as an expansion team and just a regular real MLB league. I'll play one for a week or two and decide I want to do one of my other leagues full time. It's a vicious cycle and very frustrating.

07-19-2019, 07:35 PM	#15
gemini615 All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 671	I enjoy fictional worlds with fictional teams and fictional players. I like starting with no history whatsoever and watching how the world evolves. I love seeing the first players inducted into the hall of fame, and I love looking back at the stats after 20 years or so to see what hitter or pitcher gets an award named after them. Cy Young didn't exist, but Riley "the Shark" Smalls sure did. Every year the best pitcher in each of my leagues gets the coveted Riley Smalls Trophy. I like immersing myself into my own world. So this way of playing is best for me. __________________ Hiram College Terriers Blog "The Dog Park"

07-19-2019, 08:09 PM	#16
Scipio Africanus Major Leagues Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 367	Like a lot of people above, I play fictional so I don't have the knowledge and history with the real teams and players. I like the fresh start. But the biggest reason I play fictional is because I can't stand the financial disparity of real baseball. My fictional league is set up so every team gets the same amount every year and a salary cap keeps them from going nuts and plunging themselves into massive red ink.

07-20-2019, 02:28 PM	#18
Tram2Whitaker All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 619	I like to play mid-market teams; small market teams are too frustrating, and large market teams are too easy. I do not play my teams (Detroit Tigers and Tampa Bay Rays), because I do not want to 'mess' with them. I like to see what I can do with a somewhat limited budget. I usually take Kansas City or Houston, or whatever team (depending on version, I've been playing since Season Ticket 2/OOTP 3) is in need of a rebuild. Regarding fictional sims: I have a tendency to get super involved in world building, and invariably end up ruining the experience. For OOTP 20, just before I bought it, people were getting really excited about rebuilding the Marlins, so I wanted to try it. I had some success, but like I said; it was annoying at first, because I had no budget, and then it got boring, when I was given an unlimited budget (my team relocated in 2025 to a market that was considered big). __________________ 404'd!