A pitcher who has the propensity to give up lots of HRs in real-life is just like that pitcher who gave up very few. The pitchers seem rather generic when compared to SOM and their A-D, and the rarely used A/B and A/C pitching grades have no effect on EBHs. What bothers me most about APBA basic is it's pitching system. Another thing that bothers me in SOM basic is that its impossible for an error to occur on sacrifice bunts, squeeze plays, stolen bases and hit and runs. His OBP will be too low and he won't be as valuable of a player to you as he should be. This can especially be a big deal for players like Ron Hunt who had many HBPs in real-life but will end up with ZERO in the basic game.
That's the main weakness of SOM's 50/50 system, it has a difficult time reproducing those performances of players (both batters and pitchers) that have unusual/extreme stats.Īnother thing that bothers me about SOM basic is that HBPs are completely overlooked, they can never occur! Some might find this as just a minor omission on SOM's part but in many/most MLB seasons, especially modern ones, HBPs are a more common event than Triples! So would you play a game that did not include Triples? I don't think so. In Strat-O-Matic, hitters who hit zero or just a few HRs or Triples could easily hit too many because even though it may be impossible to roll for those hits on their own cards, it's possible to roll those hits on the pitcher's card which is referred to 50% of the time. Choosing which company's basic game I prefer, however, is more difficult to answer.īoth basic games are fantastic and fun but they both have some things that bother me. I find SOM's "advanced" and even "super-advanced" versions to be less clunky than APBA's Master Game. If you were to ask me which game company's "advanced" game I prefer, it would be an easy answer - Strat-O-Matic.
0 kommentar(er)
