Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> PureSim Baseball



Message

KG Erwin -> Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/18/2009 11:16:49 PM)

Some guys choose to use exclusively fictional players. As a matter of fact, this is how Pure Sim was originally set up. The incorporation of the Lahman database changed everything, and this is what drew me to the game. Many of us are history geeks, so in your associations, which do you prefer?

1 vote for historical players.



puresimmer -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/18/2009 11:18:14 PM)

I can tell you that based on message board posts and support questions, Historical has become the dominant PureSim play model out there.



Wrathchild -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/18/2009 11:24:02 PM)

Definitely historical for me. This game is great for replaying history.



HotCornerDave -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/18/2009 11:42:15 PM)

I play mostly fictional player leagues. I'm currently in the process of building a new fictional player league in v1.75. It's looking good so far.

That said, I do enjoy simming a historical league now and then. My problem is I haven't been able to get over the fact that some players and/or teams just don't perform in the game like they did in real life. And unless something has changed recently, the Lahman DB doesn't account for fielding ratings, so you don't get fielding ratings that are accurate.

Maybe I just need to tweak the xml a bit to get it to my liking. I don't know. I've done a lot of work on the xml to get my fictional player leagues to generate players and stats that I like. I guess with some work I could do the same for a historical league. Or I could start an older historical league where I don't have any idea of the fielding talents of the players.



DonBraswell -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 12:55:58 AM)

KG,
I used to just play fictional leagues. You got me started with historical players. Right now I have given up on historical players. Norm Cash, John Blanchard, Vic Powers and many others importing (early entry) with 5 ratings isn't right. Pitchers are rated too low (not 5) also. Any way I'm running a fictional league right now and having a great time. I'll go back to historical players, I just want importing players to improve. Major Leaguers should never import that low and they don't improve. Most never can make the Major League level in my associations. So I split my vote between Fictional and Historical players.
Don



Jabez54 -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 3:47:39 AM)

Mates ...

As you well know from my replies - historical ball players with a minor mixture of surprises of fictional players that occassionally crop up ...

Tomas



dneely -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 4:17:13 AM)

I prefer Historical but like Don I have not been satisfied and do enjoy fictional. The problem with fictional is I tend to get lost and lose interest....

I want to do Historical.



fmonster -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 6:39:49 AM)

I would say I split my PS time down the middle. I love the game both ways. [:)]



Wrathchild -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 2:15:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HotCornerDave

Or I could start an older historical league where I don't have any idea of the fielding talents of the players.


That's what I did and it's been great fun. I started in 1900 where I had no expectations of the players or the teams. A side effect of this is that it's prompted me to do some research on the players that I see coming through and it's amazing to find out what big names some of these long ago players really were. Of course, you also get to see some legends like Honus Wagner and Ty Cobb come to life, as well. It's like having your own Field of Dreams!



jeremy7227 -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 3:14:15 PM)

Historical. 100%



33sherman -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/19/2009 4:20:37 PM)

I mostly play historical, but I recently started a fictional association (with a historical template starting in 1903) and there I things I definitely prefer about it. For one, middle of the pack players have middle of the pack ratings (i.e., between 40 and 70). So you can have pitchers with a 'stuff' ratings in the 50s or even less. In a historical association anything below 80 or so just isn't major league level. I also like how you have to test guys at the major league level to see if they can cut it. It's great to see good players 'emerge.'

I played a fictional association many Puresim builds ago and I remember one of the problems was not seeing enough true superstars--some all-stars but no occasional superstars. But I only played twenty years or so. I hope to stick with this one a lot longer, and I'm enjoying it quite a bit. But I will be tempted to go back to historical if the aging model is tweaked and the Lahman 'speed rating' import issue is addressed.



redsoxfan99 -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/22/2009 1:04:19 PM)

Both   [:)]

MOSTLY historical but like to run my own Universal Baseball League at times.



Max 86 -> RE: Preferences: Historical or Fictional Players? (6/23/2009 9:22:12 PM)

I started with fictional players but switched to historical after a short time.

Having a fictional league with real players does give me an advantage when it comes to the draft and free agency.  I mean, I know who a 22 yr old Steve Cartlon or Yogi Berra is or what they will most likely become. But I don't really care, its fun bringing together all of my favorites to make these incredible teams.

Live long and PLAY BALL![:D]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.625