|
||||
| ||||
|
|
#1 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Sudden player rating drop bug still exists
I was under the impression that one of the recent patched had fixed the sudden player ratings drop bug, but it appears to still exist. This is with 9.2.2 in an online league. The online league is a much faster pace than normal online leagues, so the entire season happens in one night.
This happened to one of the owners in the league to their prize stud youngster (24 year old): Ratings prior to the season: ![]() Ratings after the season: ![]() And if anyone is interested in the "Real numbers" from the editor... Ratings prior to the season: ![]() Ratings after the season: ![]() This league has injuries off (even though due to the lefty/righty split after the fact, this obviously isn't injury related anyways). From the looks of it, this bug almost seems to be somehow occuring when a player gets "too good" in one rating, and it increases beyond 250/250. Instead of stopping at 250/250 as it should, it seems to wrap and start over again at 1/250. I have league saves from before and after the season as well if they would be useful. |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Major Leagues
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 361
|
Weird.. I remember markus saying this was fixed.. And attributed ratings drops to scouting variance
Last edited by Isura; 11-16-2008 at 03:34 AM. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Major Leagues
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 361
|
BTW, were you commisser when looking at the ratings editor? It might only show scout ratings if you're not commissioner
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: College Park, Md.
Posts: 5,024
|
I believe the magic number is 255 but that it wasn't supposed to do that anymore. Maybe it doesn't do it for stats, but does it for ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Quote:
Also I forgot to mention in my first post, scouts are turned off for this league and not used. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Our league just had another one of these occur.. No one officially has responded to this yet.. is there anything that can be provided to help in looking at this? It really is an annoying bug to have players just magically go from 100 rating to 12 rating only vs left handed batters.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 6,156
|
The game says these values have ratings from 0-250, but because it is stored as a byte it can store 0-255 - it does however look like the player is improving to above 255 and thus rolling around back to 0.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 6,156
|
I set all the players in a test league to have overall, overall vs L and overall vs R and potential to be 250 in batting.
I simmed a season. On Jan 1, 2009 I looked at the batting ratings For Eye of the 54 players who had a vs R eye rating of less than 10, they had an average vs L eye rating of 218.03 For Gap of the 25 players who had a vs R gap rating of less than 10, they had an average vs L gap rating of 225.88 For Power no players had vs R power less than 10, but this is accounted for by the fact that power ratings actually go up to 350!!! What is odd is that apart from power there are no ratings of 251 to 255!!! Makes me think that possibly the roll-over is coded (or a value greater than 250 is being carried over to the next byte which is why power has the capacity for more than 250... |
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 6,156
|
I've emailed Markus about this and asked for his comments on what I found.
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mass.
Posts: 1,963
|
Did you ever get any word back from Markus on this one? With the 9.2.11 patch being listed as the official "last" patch, I assume this bug won't be looked at? Or am I just misunderstanding the patch dialogue on the release notes?
I'm a little frustrated, but could use some clarification to know if we need long term plans to resolve any time this bug hits in the future. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 6,156
|
Hi Alan,
I've not had any word back from Markus on this issue, so I'm not sure what the latest on this is. I'm guessing that it'll only be looked at now for OOTP10 |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,326
|
For all users of OOTP9: The bug mentioned in this thread appears to be fairly common, and most of you likely have players effected by it now in your OOTP9 leagues. Since it does not appear that the bug will be fixed until a future version of the game then the only work around I can think of would be for online league Commishes who use a 'player dev change' tracking utility (so you can find the players rating went from 100 to 2 versus a player whose rating never had been above 2!).
If that description fits you then you could: - Do periodic searches for players with very high talent. - Study that players ratings screen for bizarre ratings that do not belong (EG: An SP with a 100 rating versus LHB and a 1 rating versus RHB). - Check the players dev page changes to confirm that the rating in question definitely "rolled over". - Manually adjust this players impacted rating in the game. You might want to lower the players rating a bit so that it does not roll over again right away. For solo or online league users without access to a 'player dev change' tracking utility this is going to be more difficult, as you may have to guess the correct player ratings in some cases. Hopefully this bug gets fixed in some future version of the game .
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 6,156
|
This is something that will be looked at for v10.
__________________
This signature is intentionally blank |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|