Did OOTP Finally Get Smart About Defense?

The Game · 03-24-2015, 11:50 PM

I don't think i have ever seen this in previous versions. I am playing vs a great team and their C can also play RF at a GG caliber. Late in the game they pitch hit C George Lattman for 1B Mick Toner. Lattman stayed in the game at C and they moved the starting C Dan Toner to RF. So cool!

Normally i want to say OOTP would have used another player to come in as a defensive replacement or the PH would have played the same position. i could be wrong.

RchW · 03-24-2015, 11:56 PM

It's cool but a C RF combo is not an improvement IMO.

As for the substitution pattern I agree that is well implemented.

SiN8 · 03-25-2015, 12:01 AM

I'm having the opposite view. Play as GM only, I'm curious as to why Ryne Sandberg chose the following lineup.

My outfield playing away to AL team:
Snider - LF (55), RF (55)
Almonte - LF (75), CF (50), RF (55)
Raburn - LF (60), RF (60)
Mastroianni - LF (55), CF (70)
Brown - being rested

Ryne chooses to utilize DH - Snider, LF - Raburn, CF - Almonte, RF - Mastroianni. This makes no sense as Mastroianni has zero experience in RF. Logically it should be LF - Almonte, CF - Mastroianni, RF - Raburn. This almost cost me the game when the PbP blamed Mastroianni for misplaying a ball.

SiN8 · 03-25-2015, 12:13 AM

More context on above game. By strict guidelines, Mastroianni is the backup for RF. However, there should be additional logic to reshuffle the positions when the lineup changes.

The Game · 03-25-2015, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

It's cool but a C RF combo is not an improvement IMO.

As for the substitution pattern I agree that is well implemented.

He is an edited player. He was once a great C in the ABL. Both C & CF have HOFers on the Caps. RF is open.

majesty95 · 03-25-2015, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiN8

More context on above game. By strict guidelines, Mastroianni is the backup for RF. However, there should be additional logic to reshuffle the positions when the lineup changes.

I'm not sure I agree. I understand what you are saying and strictly by the ratings what you say makes sense. However, both Raburn and Almonte were playing the positions there were penciled in to start. Maybe a human manager would reshuffle the outfield positions but I'm not sure that's something we can or should expect for the CPU AI at this point...

Syd Thrift · 03-25-2015, 02:51 AM

Yeah, that's a tough one. Personally I already kind of dislike it when the AI uses the fact that it's going to use a sub as an excuse to reshuffle the entire lineup. I don't think I'd want to give it the leeway to reshuffle positions as well. It's better in this case to just, well, have a guy backing up right field who can actually play right field or else don't rest the starter.

03-24-2015, 11:50 PM	#1
The Game Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Inside The Game Posts: 30,937	Did OOTP Finally Get Smart About Defense? I don't think i have ever seen this in previous versions. I am playing vs a great team and their C can also play RF at a GG caliber. Late in the game they pitch hit C George Lattman for 1B Mick Toner. Lattman stayed in the game at C and they moved the starting C Dan Toner to RF. So cool! Normally i want to say OOTP would have used another player to come in as a defensive replacement or the PH would have played the same position. i could be wrong. Attached Images __________________ Go today don't wait for tomorrow It isn't promised, all the time you get borrowed Don't live your life for other people Don't bottle your emotions till they crack and fill a couple just sorrows Take your mind and refocus go get a paper write your goals out Throw your middle fingers to all your haters "Stay Strong"

03-24-2015, 11:56 PM	#2
RchW Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Toronto ON by way of Glasgow UK Posts: 15,629	It's cool but a C RF combo is not an improvement IMO. As for the substitution pattern I agree that is well implemented. __________________ Cheers RichW If you’re looking for a good cause to donate money to please consider a Donation to Parkinson’s Canada. It may help me have a better future and if not me, someone else. Thanks. “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit

03-25-2015, 12:01 AM	#3
SiN8 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 108	I'm having the opposite view. Play as GM only, I'm curious as to why Ryne Sandberg chose the following lineup. My outfield playing away to AL team: Snider - LF (55), RF (55) Almonte - LF (75), CF (50), RF (55) Raburn - LF (60), RF (60) Mastroianni - LF (55), CF (70) Brown - being rested Ryne chooses to utilize DH - Snider, LF - Raburn, CF - Almonte, RF - Mastroianni. This makes no sense as Mastroianni has zero experience in RF. Logically it should be LF - Almonte, CF - Mastroianni, RF - Raburn. This almost cost me the game when the PbP blamed Mastroianni for misplaying a ball. Attached Images Last edited by SiN8; 03-25-2015 at 12:04 AM.

03-25-2015, 12:13 AM	#4
SiN8 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 108	More context on above game. By strict guidelines, Mastroianni is the backup for RF. However, there should be additional logic to reshuffle the positions when the lineup changes. Attached Images