OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

WestCoastGuy · 08-19-2020, 12:57 AM

Thanks for your response. I have to admit that I was basing what I said more on two other factors.

One was my simply looking at who the AI would put in the role of closer on any given day and often seeing somebody with 80 stamina and a star rating that should make them the team's #1 or #2 starter. However, it turns out that, in the end, the season-end individual statistics are not too far off of the real-life ones as far as games started and innings pitched go. Pitchers with those characteristics - high stamina and high star rating - ended up not being season-long closers. What I'm saying is that I was looking more at the trees than at the forest.

Second, I've experimented with a football-type one-game-a-week schedule for the 1901, 1902 and 1903 seasons. Had each team have a 1-man pitching staff and, other than that, didn't change any related settings. I also had real-life transactions and injuries turned on. So, in this world, especially in those years, a team would normally be expected to throw their ace week after week after week and have him rack up nearly all of that team's innings pitched for the season. What happened instead is that I have, for example, the Giants usually putting Christy Mathewson as its closer and him barely seeing any action when he should be the team's ace. Specifically, over three 14-game seasons, he threw 56-2/3 innings, averaging 19 innings a season, when he should have averaged around 126 a year. He started six games, two each season. Conversely, one area where this setup did mostly work was that Boston did start Cy Young in nearly every game. In three seasons, he racked up 369-1/3 innings, an average of 123 a season. He started 41 out of 43 possible games (Boston had a tiebreaker game, a 15th game, in 1901).

But this issue is not just with the Giants. Right now, on opening day in 1904, the Boston Beaneaters have all four pitchers on their staff with 80 stamina, but the two-star pitcher, the worst of the four, is the team's lone starter. The White Sox have a 2-1/2-star pitcher as their starter with two 3-1/2 star throwers in the bullpen instead, all with 80 stamina. And Christy Mathewson, his team's closer, is a four-star pitcher while the other three on the Giants staff are three stars or lower.

But I know that in playing a one-game-a-week setup, I'm going against how OOTP is designed, going against teams playing nearly every day, so I suppose it's understandable to run into issues like these. And when I looked more so at the big picture, end-of-season stats and how they compared to real-life ones for 140- and 154-game seasons, the issue wasn't nearly as significant as I had thought it was. But, even if this isn't as big of an issue as I had originally believed when regular schedules are used, it is essentially game breaking in my created one-game-a-week world, so, for that reason, I would still like closers to either be removed entirely or have AI treat relievers as unimportant in years where closers and relievers are used "very rarely" or "rarely."

08-19-2020, 12:57 AM	#3
WestCoastGuy Minors (Double A) Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: American in Europe Posts: 196	Thanks for your response. I have to admit that I was basing what I said more on two other factors. One was my simply looking at who the AI would put in the role of closer on any given day and often seeing somebody with 80 stamina and a star rating that should make them the team's #1 or #2 starter. However, it turns out that, in the end, the season-end individual statistics are not too far off of the real-life ones as far as games started and innings pitched go. Pitchers with those characteristics - high stamina and high star rating - ended up not being season-long closers. What I'm saying is that I was looking more at the trees than at the forest. Second, I've experimented with a football-type one-game-a-week schedule for the 1901, 1902 and 1903 seasons. Had each team have a 1-man pitching staff and, other than that, didn't change any related settings. I also had real-life transactions and injuries turned on. So, in this world, especially in those years, a team would normally be expected to throw their ace week after week after week and have him rack up nearly all of that team's innings pitched for the season. What happened instead is that I have, for example, the Giants usually putting Christy Mathewson as its closer and him barely seeing any action when he should be the team's ace. Specifically, over three 14-game seasons, he threw 56-2/3 innings, averaging 19 innings a season, when he should have averaged around 126 a year. He started six games, two each season. Conversely, one area where this setup did mostly work was that Boston did start Cy Young in nearly every game. In three seasons, he racked up 369-1/3 innings, an average of 123 a season. He started 41 out of 43 possible games (Boston had a tiebreaker game, a 15th game, in 1901). But this issue is not just with the Giants. Right now, on opening day in 1904, the Boston Beaneaters have all four pitchers on their staff with 80 stamina, but the two-star pitcher, the worst of the four, is the team's lone starter. The White Sox have a 2-1/2-star pitcher as their starter with two 3-1/2 star throwers in the bullpen instead, all with 80 stamina. And Christy Mathewson, his team's closer, is a four-star pitcher while the other three on the Giants staff are three stars or lower. But I know that in playing a one-game-a-week setup, I'm going against how OOTP is designed, going against teams playing nearly every day, so I suppose it's understandable to run into issues like these. And when I looked more so at the big picture, end-of-season stats and how they compared to real-life ones for 140- and 154-game seasons, the issue wasn't nearly as significant as I had thought it was. But, even if this isn't as big of an issue as I had originally believed when regular schedules are used, it is essentially game breaking in my created one-game-a-week world, so, for that reason, I would still like closers to either be removed entirely or have AI treat relievers as unimportant in years where closers and relievers are used "very rarely" or "rarely."