At the Intersection of the New Injury System and the Old GM Only Dynamic Lies a Little Issue...

[Charley575]

I am a preorder customer and I have been playing the game since Monday. I'm really enjoying it so far. I like the new detailed injury system overall. I do have one small issue with it, and it has to do with the GM Only "rules" that the game operates under.

So here's the situation: I play as GM only. My manager does not allow me to "interfere" with his lineups and depth chart decisions. My 3B has a DTD ankle injury. Manager plays him daily anyway. Today I get an email that that says the player is not healing because he's playing too much. What can I do about this? Well, not much. I can ignore it, or DL the player. This is all I am empowered to do. There should be a third option: rest the player. Use him as a pinch hitter late in tight games only and let somebody else get the starts until he heals.

I've always had an issue with the fact that GM's are given 0% influence over playing time, and I feel this is a major flaw in the "GM Only" experience. I don't want to write the full lineup card, but I should have INFLUENCE over who gets playing time. Now, this new injury system exposes another flaw which is that AI managers do not react to DTD injuries. Near as I can tell, DTD injury status has no impact on the way AI managers handle playing time.

Did this subject come up in beta? Can a fix for this be implemented?

[Sweed]

I would agree that the GM should have a way to suggest a way to use or not use a player that the manager could either do or not do based on his profile.

As to how the AI managers are or are not reacting to dtd injuries, how deep is your data tracking this? Is it just your impression from your team or a study of your league showing all dtd players are still playing?

It will be good to hear from developers or betas on this issue to clarify how it's supposed to work and if it is indeed working as intended. I hope it isn't based on a player should automatically sit. Instead a variety of things should be considered. In a playoff run, 3% chance of doing harm compared to 25% chance, maybe the manager's job is on the line and he's a selfish moron , etc.

[Matt Arnold]

We'll keep looking into ways to improve the interaction. One of the things I wanted to do, but didn't get around to, was basically if the manager takes full control, that you could still set some of the same strategies, but they would be more "suggestions" than directives. So you can say, "sit him if injured", but there's a chance the manager would ignore that setting for the guy and play him anyways. But maybe he'd listen to you

The AI will sit injured players. We'll keep looking into the AI to make sure they're acting appropriately.

[Charley575]

I don't have that data, but it's my observation with my own team, going back several versions of the game, that DTD injuries seem to have no effect on playing time. I sim 1 day at a time and usually read the box score for each game before moving on.

[Charley575]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

We'll keep looking into ways to improve the interaction. One of the things I wanted to do, but didn't get around to, was basically if the manager takes full control, that you could still set some of the same strategies, but they would be more "suggestions" than directives. So you can say, "sit him if injured", but there's a chance the manager would ignore that setting for the guy and play him anyways. But maybe he'd listen to you

The AI will sit injured players. We'll keep looking into the AI to make sure they're acting appropriately.

I was thinking about adding a post to the suggestion forum, but never got around to it, that I think there should be some kind of influence system. Managers can be influenced by GM's, to a more or lesser degree, depending on their personalities, reputation, whatever. Seems like currently once a manger develops a positive rep, he locks you out completely. My idea was that there should be a kind of scoring system, which I assume already exists, that the manager uses to "score" players, and the GM can influence this though the introduction of a modifier, the magnitude of which could be effected by several factors, such as the managers reputation, GM reputation, experience, personality traits, etc.

[BBGiovanni]

Originally Posted by Charley575

I don't have that data, but it's my observation with my own team, going back several versions of the game, that DTD injuries seem to have no effect on playing time. I sim 1 day at a time and usually read the box score for each game before moving on.

I think so too, I play out games but every time the AI sticks the DTD player in the starting lineup (assuming he's a starter) regardless of that injury.

Also, if you watch MLB (like me, normally Giants and Mets) you will see guys playing that should by all rights be resting or are less effective. In some cases that's because the player fibs to the manager to trainer, and in some cases it's because the manager asks the player "hey, can you go today, it's a big game" etc, and the player decides to force himself. There's a good passage in Jim Bouton's Ball Four talking about Mickey Mantle and his interactions with the manager like that. "Well skip, my leg fell off, but I'll scotch tape it back on and I can play."

I don't think that's what's being simulated by the game, however.

[MizzouRah]

My SS was injured DtD and Matheny never played him until he was fully healed. I wonder if it's tied to the manager and his tactics?

[injury log]

It's the Manager, not the GM, who would be deciding in real life if a banged up player needs a day off. I think users who want control over that should be playing in GM+Manager mode, or in GM (legacy mode) ; the options are there if you want input into lineup decisions as a GM. If I play GM-only, it's because I don't want to deal with that kind of stuff.

[Charley575]

Originally Posted by injury log

It's the Manager, not the GM, who would be deciding in real life if a banged up player needs a day off. I think users who want control over that should be playing in GM+Manager mode, or in GM (legacy mode) ; the options are there if you want input into lineup decisions as a GM. If I play GM-only, it's because I don't want to deal with that kind of stuff.

Well you wouldn't have to. You can just let him make the decisions and live with them. I don't want to knit pick over this stuff, either. I just want to correct some of the head scratching decisions the AI manager makes. And I've seen no indication that the AI managers react to DTD injuries appropriately or properly utilize the emergency starter.

[injury log]

That's not true. If I play in a GM-only online league, if managerial options are available in that mode, I'd be at a disadvantage if I ignored them.

The thing is, in GM mode, you are not supposed to like everything your Manager does. If you really don't like him, you're supposed to fire him. That's kind of the point of the mode - you're the GM, you only have control over GM things. Users who want managerial control can play in another mode, and use the many Team Control Settings to delegate to the AI any tasks they don't want to deal with.

[Roy Tucker]

i think this could be addressed by adding another tendency slider to the manager's profile, the tendency to play or rest dtd players.

[Charley575]

Originally Posted by injury log

That's not true. If I play in a GM-only online league, if managerial options are available in that mode, I'd be at a disadvantage if I ignored them.

The thing is, in GM mode, you are not supposed to like everything your Manager does. If you really don't like him, you're supposed to fire him. That's kind of the point of the mode - you're the GM, you only have control over GM things. Users who want managerial control can play in another mode, and use the many Team Control Settings to delegate to the AI any tasks they don't want to deal with.

I just think the system, as currently constituted, is clunky, and does not provide a very immersive experience.

Let me put it this way... I don't like it for the same reason I don't like musicals. I go to the movies to become immersed in a great story and forget whatever is going on in my life for 90 minutes or so, but when the cop starts singing and dancing with the mugger, I'm suddenly very much aware that I'm sitting in a movie theater, because cops don't sing and dance with muggers. Likewise, when my manager lets me interfere in any way I want to as long as his reputation is substandard, but refuses to take any direction whatsoever from me just the instant that his reputation becomes even slightly positive, well, it's the cop dancing with the mugger all over again. No Bueno.

[frangipard]

Originally Posted by Charley575

I was thinking about adding a post to the suggestion forum, but never got around to it, that I think there should be some kind of influence system. Managers can be influenced by GM's, to a more or lesser degree, depending on their personalities, reputation, whatever. Seems like currently once a manger develops a positive rep, he locks you out completely. My idea was that there should be a kind of scoring system, which I assume already exists, that the manager uses to "score" players, and the GM can influence this though the introduction of a modifier, the magnitude of which could be effected by several factors, such as the managers reputation, GM reputation, experience, personality traits, etc.

This is a good idea. In theory, some decisions are the GMs and some are the Managers and those don't intersect. In reality, there's a lot of gray area, and a GM and a Manager work together on these of decisions, and some GMs are more standoffish and some are more involved. This can be something that is marked on the manger's profile -- "insists on total control of lineup," "more/less open to suggestion"

I can also see this being the kind of thing where the GM/Manager relationship gets monitored the same way the Manager/Player relationship does -- you keep overruling your manager, he's gonna get pissed,and there will be consequences to that.

IMO, these kinds of things make OOTP more of a true management sim, and less of a straight statistical baseball sim.

[Charley575]

Originally Posted by frangipard

This is a good idea. In theory, some decisions are the GMs and some are the Managers and those don't intersect. In reality, there's a lot of gray area, and a GM and a Manager work together on these of decisions, and some GMs are more standoffish and some are more involved. This can be something that is marked on the manger's profile -- "insists on total control of lineup," "more/less open to suggestion"

I can also see this being the kind of thing where the GM/Manager relationship gets monitored the same way the Manager/Player relationship does -- you keep overruling your manager, he's gonna get pissed,and there will be consequences to that.

IMO, these kinds of things make OOTP more of a true management sim, and less of a straight statistical baseball sim.

I more or less agree with you. The biggest problem with the current system is that you hire a manager who does not insist upon total control and then later he does, often times mid season. Whenever his reputation improves.
It feels like a difficulty setting, as opposed to an immersive experience.

[frangipard]

Originally Posted by Charley575

I more or less agree with you. The biggest problem with the current system is that you hire a manager who does not insist upon total control and then later he does, often times mid season. Whenever his reputation improves.
It feels like a difficulty setting, as opposed to an immersive experience.

Well, ISTM in some cases, a successful manager might well start feeling more assertive and wanting more say in things; sometimes successful partnerships do break up over control issues. But you're right, it shouldn't be so automatic and inevitable, and there should be some steps in between "the manager is okay with having no say about X" to "the manager now demands total control over X"

[Charley575]

The player in question. The injury was sustained on the 4th of June. The 9th, 14th, and 21st of June were team off days, as was July 5th. As you can see, Mr. Dauphin has not sat out one single game since sustaining the injury over a month ago.

Edit: Correction. He was sat on July 3.

[Hotwheelz]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

We'll keep looking into ways to improve the interaction. One of the things I wanted to do, but didn't get around to, was basically if the manager takes full control, that you could still set some of the same strategies, but they would be more "suggestions" than directives. So you can say, "sit him if injured", but there's a chance the manager would ignore that setting for the guy and play him anyways. But maybe he'd listen to you

The AI will sit injured players. We'll keep looking into the AI to make sure they're acting appropriately.

I could get on board with that. It would be nice to be able to influence that relationship with the manager. Maybe have the manager occasionally make a request for a position upgrade or something like that and if the GM tends to listen to those requests the relationship approves and works with the GM. Listening to suggestions and all that.

[injury log]

Originally Posted by Charley575

Let me put it this way... I don't like it for the same reason I don't like musicals. I go to the movies to become immersed in a great story and forget whatever is going on in my life for 90 minutes or so, but when the cop starts singing and dancing with the mugger, I'm suddenly very much aware that I'm sitting in a movie theater, because cops don't sing and dance with muggers. Likewise, when my manager lets me interfere in any way I want to as long as his reputation is substandard, but refuses to take any direction whatsoever from me just the instant that his reputation becomes even slightly positive, well, it's the cop dancing with the mugger all over again. No Bueno.

I don't think you really should be able to interfere with Manager strategies either - you should need to take care when hiring a Manager to pick a guy who will use strategies you like. If the game worked like that, it seems that would resolve the issue you're having.

In general, if you're saying "the AI should not do inexplicable things that make me realize I'm playing with a computer algorithm and that break the immersion for me", then we agree.

OT but there are, by the way, a lot of musicals where people don't just stop what they're doing and start singing at each other (though the most famous musicals seem mostly to be like that). In any backstage musical, for example, the music comes up naturally, as part of the plot. Not saying you'd like those either, no idea, but they're not like what you described. Not something I ever thought I'd talk about on this forum.