Kind of a big deal: RL 2020 and 2021 Debut players do not import

actionjackson · 11-14-2022, 02:11 AM

Historical Random Debut. OOTP23. Out of the box DB. I have been known to mess around with custom DBs, but this is not one of my projects. OOTP23 should have players in it that debuted IRL in 2020 and 2021. I've started about five games with about 700 players total, in each game, and I have yet to see a 2020 or 2021 debut guy. I've seen gazillions of 2019 debut guys, but no 2020 or 2021 debut guy. Was something weird done in the default DB that messed up these guys? This is really weird, and yeah, it's an OOTP23 game breaking bug.

actionjackson · 11-14-2022, 03:33 PM

Update: Unlicense. Uninstall. Reinstall. Relicense. Start OOTP23 RD game.

Scorecard:

Players with RL 2019 Debuts: Eleventy Billion
Players with RL 2020 Debuts: Zilch, Nada, Zero, Nothing
Players with RL 2021 Debuts: Zilch, Nada, Zero, Nothing

This. Is. Ridiculous.

It's almost like the number of 2019 Debut guys is being tripled to make up for the absence of 2020 and 2021 Debut guys. It also means that playing beyond OOTP21 isn't worth it for me, and neither was the cost of OOTP22, and OOTP23. Would be nice to be able to see some of the 2022 All-Star Blue Jays in there, but because of this issue, Alejandro Kirk, Santiago Espinal, and Alek Manoah will never exist.

OOTP21 was also the last version that I could play, while basing fielding ratings on Entire Career in a Random Debut game. If I do that, pretty much any player that played in 2020 or 2021 (regardless of debut), will be terrible with the glove. The gulf is the size of the Grand Canyon, between OOTP21, and what I'm seeing in OOTP23. Nolan Arenado was a below average defensive third baseman with this setting. Yep, that Nolan Arenado. He improves to an average defensive 3B with the 3 Years or Current Season settings, which is still unacceptable, but I'll take it. This is very disappointing because I'm a huge fan of OOTP, and have bought every version since OOTPX.

So, again I ask the question. What happened in the two versions, since OOTP21, that essentially broke Random Debut for modern players?

Looking at the Master.csv file, I have my suspicions. No player that debuted in 2020 or 2021 has any values in the Draft Value column (no big deal), individual pitch ratings (massive deal, because all of those pitchers will debut with two random pitches, which means they'll never be able to be starting pitchers in their careers), experience at all positions, range, error, infield double play, arm, catcher ability, and catcher arm ratings. 2021 debut guys even have a blank spot for Ethnicity. This isn't a huge deal for those of us that use the Historical FaceGens Pack, as Ethnicity is irrelevant as to how the FaceGen will show up in game, but it is a big deal for the folks on here that don't have that Pack.

Just baffled as to how a game whose strong suit was its attention to detail could fall this far. It's not just Spritze' untimely passing, although that's a huge chunk of it. That Master file is the glue that holds everything together in an historical game. If it's (in this case), woefully inadequate for a segment of players, then those players, and thus the game, will suffer the consequences of that shoddy work. I can handle individual pitch ratings. Those are easy to do. The fielding ratings though? Oof. I wouldn't know where to begin with those, and I shouldn't have to. It should already have been done, before release. Very disappointed is putting it mildly.

actionjackson · 11-15-2022, 02:45 AM

Update. The game wakes up, and figures out these guys are there, as it progresses. They show up in amateur drafts as it moves along, but there are none in the Inaugural. Trying to wrap my brain around how those two conditions can exist. Not getting too far.

LansdowneSt · 11-15-2022, 05:11 PM

Try and narrow the odds of them being there. Do an RD using players from 2018 to 2021. Half the Inaugural should be from 2020 and 2021 as a general rule in that case. If they are only from 2018 and 2019, that's materially improbable.

actionjackson · 11-17-2022, 01:05 AM

Thanks, LSt. I'll try in the next couple of days, or so.

Sorry for my whiny attitude, for everybody looking in on this. Sometimes I forget how much I love watching this Mom 'n Pop shop kick the crap out of the corporate conglomerates again, and again, and get all wrapped up in the minutiae of the complexities of this game.

Lukas Berger · 11-17-2022, 10:18 AM

The problem with a lot of this is just that over time the historical db has become too unwieldy to manage properly.

Even one typo in one field amongst 100k+ rows and millions of fields can throw everything into chaos and it's almost impossible to hunt down some of the issues given the amount of data to work through and the loose structure we've used for the db up until now.

The good news here is that we're currently hard at work merging the historical db with the roster db (finally!)

This is a big project and not easy, and to be honest, will probably introduce some new bugs we'll have to squash during beta and early in the year next year.

Overall though it will be a huge plus for the historical db, as it will finally give us a proper db structure. It should also prevent the huge amount of duplication of effort that was involved in maintaining two separate db's, sometimes with different values and structures for the same fields in each (which is where the pitch data issues come from).

Last but not least, it will finally allow us to work through the backlist of misaligned id's and other issues that have cropped up in the historical db over time and have been reported here, but that we couldn't get to before given the difficulty in fixing this sort of thing in the old historical db structure. Plus, if and when new issues are reported, we'll be able to fix those quickly and easily, just like we can already do for the contemporary rosters. Plus it will make it a lot easier to do things like updating the Negro League stats.

David Watts · 11-17-2022, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

The problem with a lot of this is just that over time the historical db has become too unwieldy to manage properly.

Even one typo in one field amongst 100k+ rows and millions of fields can throw everything into chaos and it's almost impossible to hunt down some of the issues given the amount of data to work through and the loose structure we've used for the db up until now.

The good news here is that we're currently hard at work merging the historical db with the roster db (finally!)

This is a big project and not easy, and to be honest, will probably introduce some new bugs we'll have to squash during beta and early in the year next year.

Overall though it will be a huge plus for the historical db, as it will finally give us a proper db structure. It should also prevent the huge amount of duplication of effort that was involved in maintaining two separate db's, sometimes with different values and structures for the same fields in each (which is where the pitch data issues come from).

Last but not least, it will finally allow us to work through the backlist of misaligned id's and other issues that have cropped up in the historical db over time and have been reported here, but that we couldn't get to before given the difficulty in fixing this sort of thing in the old historical db structure. Plus, if and when new issues are reported, we'll be able to fix those quickly and easily, just like we can already do for the contemporary rosters.

What does merging the historical db with roster db mean exactly?

actionjackson · 11-17-2022, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

The problem with a lot of this is just that over time the historical db has become too unwieldy to manage properly.

Even one typo in one field amongst 100k+ rows and millions of fields can throw everything into chaos and it's almost impossible to hunt down some of the issues given the amount of data to work through and the loose structure we've used for the db up until now.

The good news here is that we're currently hard at work merging the historical db with the roster db (finally!)

This is a big project and not easy, and to be honest, will probably introduce some new bugs we'll have to squash during beta and early in the year next year.

Overall though it will be a huge plus for the historical db, as it will finally give us a proper db structure. It should also prevent the huge amount of duplication of effort that was involved in maintaining two separate db's, sometimes with different values and structures for the same fields in each (which is where the pitch data issues come from).

Last but not least, it will finally allow us to work through the backlist of misaligned id's and other issues that have cropped up in the historical db over time and have been reported here, but that we couldn't get to before given the difficulty in fixing this sort of thing in the old historical db structure. Plus, if and when new issues are reported, we'll be able to fix those quickly and easily, just like we can already do for the contemporary rosters. Plus it will make it a lot easier to do things like updating the Negro League stats.

This is absolutely brilliant! I had no idea this was going on behind the scenes. The Standard Game DB is incredibly precise with the ratings that a player starts off with. His numbers take him from there, but I was starting to do some double takes at the starting points for guys, and of course the 2020, and 2021 guys that sort of got dumped into the DB, and left to have their RL numbers sort things out. It all makes sense, now. I would imagine that Perfect Team has a great deal to do with wanting to get the Historical side of the game in order, so it could bring benefits to all Historical players, even those that don't necessarily play it.

Does that mean that historical guys, going back to 1871, are going to get the in depth type of ratings that the modern guys get? 'Cause if I have the file right (Documents\OOTP Developments\OOTP Baseball 23\players.csv), there are 182 columns of ratings goodness in there, which could lead to much more consistent, and "accurate" ratings. One other concern I have would be chugging along with a Historical Random Debut game, with its own financials, running headlong into this amalgamated DB's financials, once I reach the point where Historical crosses over into modern. That could get ugly.

Drop me a private message, if you think I can help out with anything. I can give my email too, if need be. I'm kind of a details guy. Trying to align proper birthdates, with debut dates, so guys come into my RD games at the age they're supposed to, and getting the proper IDs, so that the FaceGens, from the Historical FaceGen Pack can really pop. I've also tried to narrow my sources down to BB-Ref for the names of guys, birthdates, debut dates, etc, which do change, as info is unearthed. There's a danger in relying on one source for anything, but I think, for consistency's sake, the positives can outweigh the negatives.

This is truly a humungous amount of work, reminiscent to this outsider, of when individual pitch ratings were introduced in OOTPX. We're talking getting on for a million rows of data, which is mind boggling. I'm kinda fired up, now. I can see the potential for bugs, and other issues for sure, but also the potential, for a huge leap forward in Historical games. I know Standard games have been the go to for most folks that play this game, but I think Perfect Team changed that for the better, in terms of Historical getting the attention it's needed for the last little bit. I've also found I can troubleshoot the players whose stats get tied up, due to identical IDs in one spot, or another, of the DB, so give me a shout.

P.S. I hope that this won't be like my near non-existent flirtation with the Beta team. There were other things that affected that. This is probably more up my alley.

actionjackson · 11-17-2022, 11:29 PM

Also, Lukas. Remember the days when we could still point to the Master.csv file, and get everything we needed? When we could still edit the DB, without fancy schmancy software? Those were the days! Now, the .odb file has become unwieldy. Whoa!

actionjackson · 11-17-2022, 11:47 PM

One counter to my issue with the fielding ratings of the modern players, is that the fielding ratings of the players from the wayback machine, has drastically improved. 19th century dudes used to make 40, 50, or sometimes 60 errors in my 162 game RD seasons. Now, they're coming in, as if they've been measured against their peers first, and then adjusted for when they arrive. That's really nice to see. I mean, it's not their fault that they had to make plays with their bare hands, or the kleenex box gloves of the day. I don't know how that was done, but kudos. Always found it really annoying. My suspicion is that something was done to help clean this up for Perfect Team, which now that I think of it, is pretty darn similar to Random Debut games. Any improvements you make there, are going to help our small, but dedicated group.

lizardkingjim · 11-20-2022, 10:37 AM

Thanks for uncovering this glitch, AJ. I just started a RD game (one season in, spring training of season 2) so not truly immersed at this point. It sounds like from what you and Lukas are saying is wait until at least OOTP 24 to start a save.

actionjackson · 11-23-2022, 01:06 PM

It actually improves, as you go along, and they do start to trickle in, via your amateur drafts, but I've never seen a 2020, or a 2021 dude, in a Random Debut Inaugural Draft, which is comprised of 704 players. They've trickled in, via five round drafts, totalling 80 players (16 teams, total), and that's good to see, but I can't, for the life of me, figure out why they aren't there with the big chunk of players, at the beginning.

actionjackson · 11-23-2022, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lizardkingjim

Thanks for uncovering this glitch, AJ. I just started a RD game (one season in, spring training of season 2) so not truly immersed at this point. It sounds like from what you and Lukas are saying is wait until at least OOTP 24 to start a save.

I would still start a save though. Settings change every version, and it's good to know what's different, so you can adjust to it, when you want to get invested in a save. I'm also using it to correct FaceGen IDs in the fg_files to avoid too many hiccups with that, in future saves. That project is a massive undertaking for those that work on it. A little over 20,000 of those suckers now.

As for errors in the database, it's probably a miracle that it works as well as it does. The number of cells in there is in the millions (probably tens of millions, actually), for just the Master file, and the stats files. It is a massive undertaking, and I would imagine, a real bear to get as right/accurate, as you want it to be.

11-14-2022, 02:11 AM	#1
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	Kind of a big deal: RL 2020 and 2021 Debut players do not import Historical Random Debut. OOTP23. Out of the box DB. I have been known to mess around with custom DBs, but this is not one of my projects. OOTP23 should have players in it that debuted IRL in 2020 and 2021. I've started about five games with about 700 players total, in each game, and I have yet to see a 2020 or 2021 debut guy. I've seen gazillions of 2019 debut guys, but no 2020 or 2021 debut guy. Was something weird done in the default DB that messed up these guys? This is really weird, and yeah, it's an OOTP23 game breaking bug.

11-14-2022, 03:33 PM	#2
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	Update: Unlicense. Uninstall. Reinstall. Relicense. Start OOTP23 RD game. Scorecard: Players with RL 2019 Debuts: Eleventy Billion Players with RL 2020 Debuts: Zilch, Nada, Zero, Nothing Players with RL 2021 Debuts: Zilch, Nada, Zero, Nothing This. Is. Ridiculous. It's almost like the number of 2019 Debut guys is being tripled to make up for the absence of 2020 and 2021 Debut guys. It also means that playing beyond OOTP21 isn't worth it for me, and neither was the cost of OOTP22, and OOTP23. Would be nice to be able to see some of the 2022 All-Star Blue Jays in there, but because of this issue, Alejandro Kirk, Santiago Espinal, and Alek Manoah will never exist. OOTP21 was also the last version that I could play, while basing fielding ratings on Entire Career in a Random Debut game. If I do that, pretty much any player that played in 2020 or 2021 (regardless of debut), will be terrible with the glove. The gulf is the size of the Grand Canyon, between OOTP21, and what I'm seeing in OOTP23. Nolan Arenado was a below average defensive third baseman with this setting. Yep, that Nolan Arenado. He improves to an average defensive 3B with the 3 Years or Current Season settings, which is still unacceptable, but I'll take it. This is very disappointing because I'm a huge fan of OOTP, and have bought every version since OOTPX. So, again I ask the question. What happened in the two versions, since OOTP21, that essentially broke Random Debut for modern players? Looking at the Master.csv file, I have my suspicions. No player that debuted in 2020 or 2021 has any values in the Draft Value column (no big deal), individual pitch ratings (massive deal, because all of those pitchers will debut with two random pitches, which means they'll never be able to be starting pitchers in their careers), experience at all positions, range, error, infield double play, arm, catcher ability, and catcher arm ratings. 2021 debut guys even have a blank spot for Ethnicity. This isn't a huge deal for those of us that use the Historical FaceGens Pack, as Ethnicity is irrelevant as to how the FaceGen will show up in game, but it is a big deal for the folks on here that don't have that Pack. Just baffled as to how a game whose strong suit was its attention to detail could fall this far. It's not just Spritze' untimely passing, although that's a huge chunk of it. That Master file is the glue that holds everything together in an historical game. If it's (in this case), woefully inadequate for a segment of players, then those players, and thus the game, will suffer the consequences of that shoddy work. I can handle individual pitch ratings. Those are easy to do. The fielding ratings though? Oof. I wouldn't know where to begin with those, and I shouldn't have to. It should already have been done, before release. Very disappointed is putting it mildly. Last edited by actionjackson; 11-14-2022 at 04:00 PM.

11-15-2022, 05:11 PM	#4
LansdowneSt Global Moderator Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: From Duxbury, Mass residing Baltimore Posts: 7,586	Try and narrow the odds of them being there. Do an RD using players from 2018 to 2021. Half the Inaugural should be from 2020 and 2021 as a general rule in that case. If they are only from 2018 and 2019, that's materially improbable. __________________ Complete Universe Facegen Pack 2.0 (mine included) https://www.mediafire.com/file_premi...k_2.0.zip/file Just my Facegen Pack: https://www.mediafire.com/file_premi..._Pack.zip/file

11-17-2022, 10:18 AM	#6
Lukas Berger OOTP Developments Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France Posts: 21,365	The problem with a lot of this is just that over time the historical db has become too unwieldy to manage properly. Even one typo in one field amongst 100k+ rows and millions of fields can throw everything into chaos and it's almost impossible to hunt down some of the issues given the amount of data to work through and the loose structure we've used for the db up until now. The good news here is that we're currently hard at work merging the historical db with the roster db (finally!) This is a big project and not easy, and to be honest, will probably introduce some new bugs we'll have to squash during beta and early in the year next year. Overall though it will be a huge plus for the historical db, as it will finally give us a proper db structure. It should also prevent the huge amount of duplication of effort that was involved in maintaining two separate db's, sometimes with different values and structures for the same fields in each (which is where the pitch data issues come from). Last but not least, it will finally allow us to work through the backlist of misaligned id's and other issues that have cropped up in the historical db over time and have been reported here, but that we couldn't get to before given the difficulty in fixing this sort of thing in the old historical db structure. Plus, if and when new issues are reported, we'll be able to fix those quickly and easily, just like we can already do for the contemporary rosters. Plus it will make it a lot easier to do things like updating the Negro League stats. __________________ lukas@ootpdevelopments.com PreOrder Out of the Park Baseball 26! Need to upload files for us to check out? Instructions can be found here Last edited by Lukas Berger; 11-17-2022 at 11:11 AM.

11-15-2022, 02:45 AM	#3
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	Update. The game wakes up, and figures out these guys are there, as it progresses. They show up in amateur drafts as it moves along, but there are none in the Inaugural. Trying to wrap my brain around how those two conditions can exist. Not getting too far.

11-17-2022, 01:05 AM	#5
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	Thanks, LSt. I'll try in the next couple of days, or so. Sorry for my whiny attitude, for everybody looking in on this. Sometimes I forget how much I love watching this Mom 'n Pop shop kick the crap out of the corporate conglomerates again, and again, and get all wrapped up in the minutiae of the complexities of this game.

11-17-2022, 11:29 PM	#9
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	Also, Lukas. Remember the days when we could still point to the Master.csv file, and get everything we needed? When we could still edit the DB, without fancy schmancy software? Those were the days! Now, the .odb file has become unwieldy. Whoa!

11-17-2022, 11:47 PM	#10
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	One counter to my issue with the fielding ratings of the modern players, is that the fielding ratings of the players from the wayback machine, has drastically improved. 19th century dudes used to make 40, 50, or sometimes 60 errors in my 162 game RD seasons. Now, they're coming in, as if they've been measured against their peers first, and then adjusted for when they arrive. That's really nice to see. I mean, it's not their fault that they had to make plays with their bare hands, or the kleenex box gloves of the day. I don't know how that was done, but kudos. Always found it really annoying. My suspicion is that something was done to help clean this up for Perfect Team, which now that I think of it, is pretty darn similar to Random Debut games. Any improvements you make there, are going to help our small, but dedicated group.

11-20-2022, 10:37 AM	#11
lizardkingjim Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Sep 2020 Posts: 45	Thanks for uncovering this glitch, AJ. I just started a RD game (one season in, spring training of season 2) so not truly immersed at this point. It sounds like from what you and Lukas are saying is wait until at least OOTP 24 to start a save.

11-23-2022, 01:06 PM	#12
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,181	It actually improves, as you go along, and they do start to trickle in, via your amateur drafts, but I've never seen a 2020, or a 2021 dude, in a Random Debut Inaugural Draft, which is comprised of 704 players. They've trickled in, via five round drafts, totalling 80 players (16 teams, total), and that's good to see, but I can't, for the life of me, figure out why they aren't there with the big chunk of players, at the beginning.