Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49

Thread: Removing Position Restrictions?

  1. #1
    Beloved Former Owner Malificent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    5,384

    Default Removing Position Restrictions?

    There has been some call to remove the roster restrictions for position players, as they were designed to defeat v3 defense exploits that no longer exist. Pitching restrictions are still necessary, imo, even in v5.

    Also, with removing the position player restrictions, it would also probably be ok to remove the restriction on players learning other positions.

    Thoughts?
    Selling my fine art photography at Fragilescape and blogging about it at Fragilescript.

  2. #2
    Beloved Former Owner TRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    9,239

    Default

    Definately FOR position learning.

    While I don't think position restrictions are necessary any longer, I do think it adds to the strategy of team building. I'm indifferent but wouldn't mind seeing the restrictions stay.

    Edit: Perhaps keep the James scale but allow it for starting players too, not just backups.

    Owner/GM - Alabama Pink Elephants

  3. #3
    FOBL Owner/GM frozenrope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    8,869

    Default

    If we remove the position learning ban, and ST stays the same, what would be the end result? Can we assign any player to learn a new POS in the minors, and if so, do they automatically pick it up? Do they fail? Do they lose other abilities if they're learning something else? Do we just have the AI let us know that a player has learned a new position?

    I'm actually for this, I'm just curious.


    'Tragedy is when I stub my toe. Comedy is when you fall down a manhole and die." - Mel Brooks

    "Prophet Harold Camping who predicted the end of the world has died. That's kinda sad but its not the end of the world" -
    Eric Idle

  4. #4
    Beloved Former Owner Malificent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    5,384

    Default

    Here are the restrictions as they stand now:

    A. Unless otherwise noted, the following provisions related the restrictions in this Section VII will apply to both the regular season and playoffs.

    B. Teams must keep at least 25 players on the major-league roster (i.e., the “Active Roster”) at all times. This number should be comprised of at least 12 position players (i.e., non-pitchers), and 10 pitchers.

    C. Position players may be placed as either a starter or a backup at any position for which they have an assigned defensive range rating.

    D. All position players (save the DH) must have an assigned backup player. The backup player must have an assigned defensive range rating for the position that they are backing up or be eligible to play a position for which they are not listed according to the following defensive scale (a player with listed range at a position can back up any position to the right of, and on the same row as, their position):

    C > 1B
    SS > 2B > 3B > 1B
    CF > RF > LF > 1B

    Backups for C, SS, and CF must have a range at that position.

    E. There is no limit to the number of defensive positions a player can back up if they have a listed range for the position in question. A player with no range at the defensive positions they are backing up (according to the scale) can back up no more than one such position.

    F. Backup position players who have a range at the position they are backing up may have a playing time percentage setting from 0-99%. Otherwise, the playing time percentage setting must be set to 0%.
    Selling my fine art photography at Fragilescape and blogging about it at Fragilescript.

  5. #5
    FOBL Owner/GM kurtism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Noblesville, Indiana
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Rope:

    You can play a prospect out of position in the minors. Sometimes, they will learn the new position, but usually with less skill than their old one (especially in the infield). In the HBL, I have converted a SS or two to 2B, and they almost always have worse range at 2B. As far as whether these attempts fail, I'd guess that they sometimes do, but cannot back it up with any evidence (even anecdotal).


    2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Solecismic Series Champions
    2008, 2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Vaughan League Champions
    2008 - 2010, 2016 - 2022, 2028 - 2033 Calzone Division Champions
    2040-2042 Ice Cream Sandwich Division Champions


    Vivat Grendel!
    2006, 2036-37, 2039 FOFL Champs
    2004, 2007 - 2010, 2013, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2024, 2028 - 2030, 2033 - 2037 AC South Champions

  6. #6
    Owner and GM, Washington Piledrivers and Virginia Woodchucks Subby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Chocolate City
    Posts
    17,773

    Default

    Here is the main reason I am for removing position restrictions:

    Less administrative burden on the BOG.
    I am still in favor of the pitching restrictions, however.
    Virginia Woodchucks 2001-2035, 2039-present
    2004, 2010 Solecismic Series Champions
    Gindin League Champions (4) 2004, 2010, 2032, 2060
    Wilderness/Skates Division Champs (9) 2001, 2004, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2045, 2048, 2058, 2060



  7. #7
    Beloved Former Owner Malificent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    5,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frozenrope
    If we remove the position learning ban, and ST stays the same, what would be the end result? Can we assign any player to learn a new POS in the minors, and if so, do they automatically pick it up? Do they fail? Do they lose other abilities if they're learning something else? Do we just have the AI let us know that a player has learned a new position?

    I'm actually for this, I'm just curious.
    Nobody is quite sure. You'd basically just assign a player in the minors to play in a position that they don't know. I don't think the learning is automatic. It is unknown whether their development rate slows if they are learning another position or whether it doesn't make a difference.

    Lots of unknowns.
    Selling my fine art photography at Fragilescape and blogging about it at Fragilescript.

  8. #8
    Beloved Former Owner TRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    9,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frozenrope
    If we remove the position learning ban, and ST stays the same, what would be the end result? Can we assign any player to learn a new POS in the minors, and if so, do they automatically pick it up? Do they fail? Do they lose other abilities if they're learning something else? Do we just have the AI let us know that a player has learned a new position?

    I'm actually for this, I'm just curious.
    Players would have to learn the spot in the minors (done by playing them out of position). This is at the risk of actual deveopment time. Any learned positions would stay and you'd be notified via in-game email.

    They can and will fail.

    Owner/GM - Alabama Pink Elephants

  9. #9
    FOBL Owner/GM kurtism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Noblesville, Indiana
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Dola:

    IIRC, supposedly, learning a new position will slow development. In addition, some positions are obviously harder to learn than others. I have never tried to teach anyone CF, SS, or C, so I cannot speak to how the game handles these positions.


    2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Solecismic Series Champions
    2008, 2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Vaughan League Champions
    2008 - 2010, 2016 - 2022, 2028 - 2033 Calzone Division Champions
    2040-2042 Ice Cream Sandwich Division Champions


    Vivat Grendel!
    2006, 2036-37, 2039 FOFL Champs
    2004, 2007 - 2010, 2013, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2024, 2028 - 2030, 2033 - 2037 AC South Champions

  10. #10
    Beloved Former Owner Malificent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    5,384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subby
    Here is the main reason I am for removing position restrictions:

    Less administrative burden on the BOG.
    I am still in favor of the pitching restrictions, however.
    If we don't change the positional players restrictions, I'm going to create a couple of Roster Czar positions to be filled by volunteer owners to do the checking for me, since I'm a lazy ass who always forgets.
    Selling my fine art photography at Fragilescape and blogging about it at Fragilescript.

  11. #11
    FOBL Owner/GM frozenrope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    8,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kurtism
    Dola:

    IIRC, supposedly, learning a new position will slow development. In addition, some positions are obviously harder to learn than others. I have never tried to teach anyone CF, SS, or C, so I cannot speak to how the game handles these positions.
    Kurt, if that's true, then that sounds like we would have to be more strategic in our rebuilding efforts.

    Wow.

    That sounds actually..........................





    Cool.


    'Tragedy is when I stub my toe. Comedy is when you fall down a manhole and die." - Mel Brooks

    "Prophet Harold Camping who predicted the end of the world has died. That's kinda sad but its not the end of the world" -
    Eric Idle

  12. #12
    Beloved Former Owner alhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    3,252

    Default

    I worry about how allowing position switching effectively inflates our talent pool even more than it is already inflated.

    Our current rules are artificial and unrealistic, but they have an elegance to them, and I don't want to change that.


    Mars Martians: FOFL Champions 2007, 2008

  13. #13
    Beloved Former Owner TRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    9,239

    Default

    From my experience, turning a slugging 1B into a SS is not very common so I don't see how it changes the talent pool.

    In fact, most changes that I'd be interested in are moving players like McIntosh away from SS and into being a 1B.

    Owner/GM - Alabama Pink Elephants

  14. #14
    Beloved Former Owner alhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    3,252

    Default

    I think where it would come up is situations like we have now with 2b vs. 3b. The league has a pretty large number of 2b, but a relative dearth of 3b's. I haven't tried it in v5, but in v4, switching 2b's to 3b's wasn't too hard to do.

    The net effect is that it becomes easier and easier to fill every position.

    The other place it comes up is in the OF. Position learning of the different OF positions is quite easy in OOTP (as it is in real life). Again, however, I'm not sure if this makes our game better because it simply elminates another strategical component to how we play.

    Allowing position switching is definitely realistic in theory, but I don't think it makes the FOBL game better. The problem is that OOTP isn't realistic enough to make it work right. A 5' 6'' second baseman probably couldn't convert to a 3b in RL, but in OOTP they can, because the game doesn't really differentiate between players. As far as I can tell, it just converts range on some sort of James Scale in a fairly unifrom manner (although there may be a random number in there somewhere).

    In other words, position switches are a bit too easy and the added liquidity in having lots of players play multiple positions essentially results in the inflation of your talent pool, which we definitely don't need.

    Lastly, I'm worried about cheeze tactics. For instance every team taking all their mediocre minor leaguers and teaching them 6 or 7 positions. Don't tell me it won't happen, because it will. I don't really want to see a bunch of frankenstein utility men roaming around the league. If they do, then it won't reduce our current enforcement at all because we'll have to make new roster rules to take into account the fact that a team can back up most of their positions with one guy.

    I always felt like position switching was an unnecessary feature that Markus stuck on to the game. Before position switching, some players already had the ability to play multiple positions. In a sense, position switching had already been factored in: if a player had SS and 3b range, it meant he was capable of being switched, if he had only SS range, it means a switch wouldn't work out for him. You just know it in advance.

    We've now had 13 seasons, and one of the things that the league is built around is having to find players to play each position. I think allowing position switching really waters that down and significantly changes the basic on-the-field ruleset we've used for a long time. I never felt like this was a big problem and haven't sensed that it bothered anyone else too much either.

    Just doesn't seem like anything is majorly broken, but a big change could potentially cause a bunch of unforeseeable problems.


    Mars Martians: FOFL Champions 2007, 2008

  15. #15
    Beloved Former Owner TheDawgsAreOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alhill
    A 5' 6'' second baseman probably couldn't convert to a 3b in RL.
    They don't because people don't perceive them as being able to. If that 5-6 player has enough of an arm to play third base, there's no reason he could not.

    Height and weight are dramatically overrated by all sports leagues. Handedness as well.

    I think OOTP drastically underrates the versatility of most major-league backups. Think of your favorite team. Odds are they probably have at least one player who can play both the infield and the outfield. (Willie Bloomquist, in my case.) How many OOTP players do you know like that?

    I don't really rank "filling out a roster" high on my list of value-added things about FOBL. *shurg*
    Prairie Division Champions - 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2023
    Gindin League Champions - 2011, 2013, 2023
    FOBL Champions - 2013, 2023

  16. #16
    FOBL Owner/GM kurtism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Noblesville, Indiana
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Count me in with TDAO on this one, I'd much rather be able to run a team where I can convert my E range bopper of a SS to 1B than one which embraces some "elegant" artificial rule we have shoved into the mix.

    In addition, while learning new positions may be somewhat easy, it bears noting that players virtually always learn the new position with reduced range. As long as we are in OOTP5, range matters. Not sure I can see the value of having a big hitter who can play five positions poorly...


    2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Solecismic Series Champions
    2008, 2016, 2021-2022, 2030, 2042 Vaughan League Champions
    2008 - 2010, 2016 - 2022, 2028 - 2033 Calzone Division Champions
    2040-2042 Ice Cream Sandwich Division Champions


    Vivat Grendel!
    2006, 2036-37, 2039 FOFL Champs
    2004, 2007 - 2010, 2013, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2024, 2028 - 2030, 2033 - 2037 AC South Champions

  17. #17
    FOBL Owner/GM Bing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Spring City
    Posts
    3,280

    Default

    Seems to me that if we don't know how the game will react to particular situations, it would be rash to remove the restrictions.

    And I'm with Al. I see the removal of some of the restrictions causing more contraversy than overall benefit.

    I hate excessive rules as much as anyone, but I don't think removing this one would work out at this point. With extensive testing and evidence, my mind could be changed, but with a largely anecdotal case, I can't support it right now.
    Milwaukee MicroBrewers: Winning in Small Batches since 2001

    2020 Vaughan League Champions
    2021, 2023, 2024, 2026 Darn Tootin' Champions

  18. #18
    Beloved Former Owner Daimyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Berkeley
    Posts
    4,168

    Default

    I definately think the idea has merit. The current restrictions were designed when we used v3 and players out position didn't lose anything (and sometimes actually performed like they had A++++ range).

  19. #19
    FOBL Owner/GM pbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    6th place
    Posts
    4,816

    Default

    I fully support removing position restrictions.


    ANARCHY!

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Trenton Roadkill - 2040 FOBL Champions


  20. #20
    FOFL Commissioner cuervo72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    22,951

    Default

    Well, Kurt does have some experience with it from HBL from what I've picked up in the lounge. Kurt, have there been any averse effects over there?

    Ok, I'm new at this, but I think it would add a nice wrinkle to the game. Nice to have a few more Tony Phillips types around. I don't think it would be particularly effective to do this with the majority of players, because if their bat was worth it to begin with they'd likely already be in the majors. Maybe if you limited the chain of positions that could be learned to the paths that are already defined by the constitution, or a slight modification of that?


    Blue, blue, the sky is blue, the grass is green and your heart is true,
    You got more colors than I ever seen, pink, red, yellow and in between.

  21. #21
    FOBL Owner/GM clintl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    5,948

    Default

    I support removing the restrictions. If not all of them, then at least some of the ones that were nonsense in the first place, like not being able to play a CF in LF or RF, or not being able to play a SS at 3B or 2B. I'd also like to allow at least some position learning.
    FOBL Santa Cruz Sea Lions
    2008 Solecismic Series Champions
    2008, 2030 Gindin League Champions
    2008, 2012, 2016 Dola Division Champions
    2041 DEFCON Division Champions
    2009, 2019, 2029, 2030 Gindin League Wild Card

    FOFL Davis Toads
    2033, 2034 NC Conference Champions
    2012, 2019, 2023, 2031, 2033, 2034 NC West Champions
    2004, 2005, 2006, 2035, 2038 NC Wild Card

  22. #22
    FOBL Owner/GM Drake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    8,603

    Default

    I don't mind removing these restrictions, but I don't mind keeping them, either. I'll follow what seems to be the will of the league on this one.

    On the other hand, half my team is made up of what most teams would consider crap position restriction fodder, so this probably wouldn't do anything for me but reduce the micromanagement headaches.
    Nemesis of sporr *to be named later

  23. #23
    Beloved Former Owner Shucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    933

    Default

    While I am not one in favor of excessive rules, I think the position restrictions simply make a lot of sense and I would not support their repeal.

  24. #24
    Beloved Former Owner alhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    3,252

    Default

    If the issue for a lot of people is simply the time of checking rosters, I will volunteer to be roster czar.


    Mars Martians: FOFL Champions 2007, 2008

  25. #25
    FOBL Owner/GM Buddy Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    9,839

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kurtism
    Dola:

    IIRC, supposedly, learning a new position will slow development. In addition, some positions are obviously harder to learn than others. I have never tried to teach anyone CF, SS, or C, so I cannot speak to how the game handles these positions.
    I am pretty sure that Markus backed down from that design decision in ootp v4 due to complaints from folks who, perhaps rightly so, could not understand why batting talent should suffer if a player played out of position. I could probably find some posts where he confirms that this option (negative effect of playing a guy out of position) was never implimented.

    When Markus first added this feature (in v4) it was very easy for any player to learn all positions in the minors. Due to a landslide of complaints (mine included) this was changed in the last v4 patches and all the versions of ootp5. Now it is still pretty easy to learn all positions except catcher, but it takes a lttle longer than it did in v4. The only exception would be guys drafted as DH's, they have great difficulty learning any extra position. Some guys will never learn the catcher position, but although it's by far the toughest position to learn, it's still possible.

    Some pros of reducing these restrictions:
    - Less admin crap to do (this is a monster reason).
    - Easier for GM's to play within the rules.

    Some cons of reducing these restrictions:
    - Dramatic change of player values, some current players only value is their defensive versatility.
    - Fewer fines!

    I would have voted dead against this idea 5 seasons ago, but I'd support it now, on the condition that it was an all or nothing proposal. If the main benefit is reducing admin work lets not propose a compromise rule where a team can teach players 2 new positions per season since that nullifies any admin time saving benefits. Keep in mind that this means we'd see plenty of guys like this or this or this in the FOBL.
    Last edited by Buddy Grant; 04-21-2004 at 11:41 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion - Removing Position Backup Requirements
    By Morgado in forum Suggested Amendments
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 09:25 AM
  2. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-25-2012, 09:24 PM
  3. Discussion: Removing Rule VII - H (roster restrictions - injuries)
    By Buddy Grant in forum Suggested Amendments
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-10-2012, 10:57 PM
  4. Position Restrictions
    By clintl in forum FOBL General Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-05-2007, 12:05 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •