Must have to have a top of the line game.

Randystu · 09-14-2014, 01:25 PM

I am well into my 3rd season of OOTP15. It, as Curt Shilling said, is addictive. But with this addiction comes in depth analysis of the game.

I would consider myself a amateur historical baseball person especially from the 1970's and before.

I can only imagine the difficulties of coding to get a baseball simulation correct. In is in this understanding that I ask for these corrections to the game. Not only will it make it more accurate but more enjoyable to play with better over time in my mind.

The bottom line on any baseball stimulation is to get the stats right. You have 2 general settings I would like to address on how the game plays. You can have the AI evaluation and pure stats settings. I have tried both and don't find they do what needs to be done for this simulation to play accurately. Maybe there is another way to adjust but that really isn't my main point. See below.

The area of the simulation that I hope gets addressed in future versions is how the player stats perform accurately and the star rating system.

There are very many players, such as Heinie Manush, Harry Heilman, Sam Rice, Early Wynn, Don Mattingly, and I could go on and on that are rating very low with stars, 1 or 2 at best. Yet these players have fantastic stats. Mostly some of the earlier historical players batting in the high 300's or even 400's are rated so low. Yet, some modern players with very bad stats in comparison are rated very high in stars from 3 to 5 stars. So I would conclude the designers are more bias toward modern players than historical players with the exception of some all time greats like Ty Cobb and the like.

Upon closer inspection of the historical baseball player's stats one will find many players with fantastic stats that are rated with stars way too low as mentioned above. And some with very high star ratings have very inaccurate specific stats. Players such as Walter Johnson, who is rated with high stars, only has a fastball rating of 80. Are you kidding? He is considered to throw in the 100 mileage range and was considered by Ty Cobb and such as almost un-hittable because of his fast ball. Sandy Koufax would be another one, rated 86, who was the best in the league at his time. Yet players like this are rated low, not in stars, but in specifics of their skills. This needs to be fixed too.

I would be happy to put together more accurate ratings on these historical players if you should so choose to request this.

As I mentioned earlier, I can only imagine the difficulties in coding a game of this magnitude. So I see it as a work in progress in fine tuning. Your designers have done so much great work to produce such a fantastic simulation. I hope my issues get addressed to keep this game playing well into the future.

Randy

Randystu · 09-14-2014, 01:27 PM

Almost forgot, where is Ernie Banks? Mr. Cub. I can't find him as a player anywhere when you play a game with the greatest players of each team.

Pacoheadley · 09-16-2014, 01:04 PM

There is no bias. The ratings for historical players are purely based on the stats that they put up. Some of the specifics such as individual pitches will not be accurate, as we don't have stats to import their ratings from.

The Game · 09-16-2014, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacoheadley

There is no bias. The ratings for historical players are purely based on the stats that they put up. Some of the specifics such as individual pitches will not be accurate, as we don't have stats to import their ratings from.

Also use 100% Scouting and ratings and stats will be closer to what they should be. a 5 star guy is going to hit .300 30 100 whereas the 1 star guy will be lucky to hit .250.

Randystu · 09-17-2014, 03:30 AM

Well that is my point. There are many great players that when they played were much better than some current players playing today. And they are rated 1 star. That ain't accurate and if I use the 100% rating, they will hit .250 when they have lifetime batting averages in the .320 and .330's. Seems like a bias to me.

Randystu · 09-17-2014, 03:30 AM

And where is Ernie Banks?

The Game · 09-18-2014, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randystu

Well that is my point. There are many great players that when they played were much better than some current players playing today. And they are rated 1 star. That ain't accurate and if I use the 100% rating, they will hit .250 when they have lifetime batting averages in the .320 and .330's. Seems like a bias to me.

I havent seen that. Ruth, Banks and many others are 5 stars. which league are you playing that doesn't have Banks? Have you checked ratings under League Setup? post some screen shots.

Lukas Berger · 09-24-2014, 12:10 AM

No offense intended at all, but based on what you're describing, you're doing something wrong, maybe changed some settings, are using a modified db or something else is wrong. Because pretty much none of what you describe is actually an issue with the default historical db and historical game mode that ships with OOTP.

Can you maybe describe exactly how you go about setting up a historical game, so we can help you get things working correctly?

sprague · 09-24-2014, 02:47 PM

My guess is that he is playing random debut.
Then some old time guys get burned based on how the stats are read by the AI, no real adjustment of many areas based over time

oldtime OF often lose a star based on "bad" fielding ratings- and oldtime pitchers lose k ratings so don't match up with an average modern player because of it.
My guess that is the issue. I don't play random debut for those very reasons- modern players have a huge advantage.

Lukas Berger · 09-24-2014, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprague

My guess is that he is playing random debut.
Then some old time guys get burned based on how the stats are read by the AI, no real adjustment of many areas based over time

oldtime OF often lose a star based on "bad" fielding ratings- and oldtime pitchers lose k ratings so don't match up with an average modern player because of it.
My guess that is the issue. I don't play random debut for those very reasons- modern players have a huge advantage.

Ok, gotcha. That makes sense then. That being said, I've seen a lot of oldtime guys, especially pitchers, be pretty dominant in random debut leagues posted in the dynasty section, though I've never done my own.

sprague · 09-24-2014, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Ok, gotcha. That makes sense then. That being said, I've seen a lot of oldtime guys, especially pitchers, be pretty dominant in random debut leagues posted in the dynasty section, though I've never done my own.

I agree with that too. Generally it seems pitchers from 1880-1899 become super domanent, while stars between 1900-1930 tend to just be above average.

I had am in the process now of re-rating all of baseball's star players for the rating system for ootp 14-15 which is much different than the past. Has taken some time to find the right modifiers for each era. Too bad those couldn't be easily put into a DB for game uploading- just the way the AI reads the DB means a lot of years have to go in to get the read I would be hoping comes up.

David Watts · 09-24-2014, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprague

I agree with that too. Generally it seems pitchers from 1880-1899 become super domanent, while stars between 1900-1930 tend to just be above average.

I had am in the process now of re-rating all of baseball's star players for the rating system for ootp 14-15 which is much different than the past. Has taken some time to find the right modifiers for each era. Too bad those couldn't be easily put into a DB for game uploading- just the way the AI reads the DB means a lot of years have to go in to get the read I would be hoping comes up.

I've had guys like Addie Joss, Ed Walsh, Noodles Hahn and Mordecai Brown have really nice careers in random debut leagues. I pay very little attention to ratings and stars, so I'm no help in that regard. You're right about 1800 guys. I was one of the ones begging Markus to add the option allowing us to set minimum and maximum years for player imports.

RchW · 09-24-2014, 04:34 PM

One thing to keep in mind is that the offensive game was 10%- 20% better in the 1920's and 1930's. League batting averages in the 0.280's and pitchers allowed more hits than innings pitched. The 0.300 hitter of that era is somewhat equivalent to a 0.260 hitter today. Relief pitching historically was less effective than SP vs today's game where it is better by 10%.

I think that is one of the reasons fictional works best for me. The idea of DiMaggio as a 0.270 hitter is odd.

09-14-2014, 01:25 PM	#1
Randystu Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2014 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 38	Must have to have a top of the line game. I am well into my 3rd season of OOTP15. It, as Curt Shilling said, is addictive. But with this addiction comes in depth analysis of the game. I would consider myself a amateur historical baseball person especially from the 1970's and before. I can only imagine the difficulties of coding to get a baseball simulation correct. In is in this understanding that I ask for these corrections to the game. Not only will it make it more accurate but more enjoyable to play with better over time in my mind. The bottom line on any baseball stimulation is to get the stats right. You have 2 general settings I would like to address on how the game plays. You can have the AI evaluation and pure stats settings. I have tried both and don't find they do what needs to be done for this simulation to play accurately. Maybe there is another way to adjust but that really isn't my main point. See below. The area of the simulation that I hope gets addressed in future versions is how the player stats perform accurately and the star rating system. There are very many players, such as Heinie Manush, Harry Heilman, Sam Rice, Early Wynn, Don Mattingly, and I could go on and on that are rating very low with stars, 1 or 2 at best. Yet these players have fantastic stats. Mostly some of the earlier historical players batting in the high 300's or even 400's are rated so low. Yet, some modern players with very bad stats in comparison are rated very high in stars from 3 to 5 stars. So I would conclude the designers are more bias toward modern players than historical players with the exception of some all time greats like Ty Cobb and the like. Upon closer inspection of the historical baseball player's stats one will find many players with fantastic stats that are rated with stars way too low as mentioned above. And some with very high star ratings have very inaccurate specific stats. Players such as Walter Johnson, who is rated with high stars, only has a fastball rating of 80. Are you kidding? He is considered to throw in the 100 mileage range and was considered by Ty Cobb and such as almost un-hittable because of his fast ball. Sandy Koufax would be another one, rated 86, who was the best in the league at his time. Yet players like this are rated low, not in stars, but in specifics of their skills. This needs to be fixed too. I would be happy to put together more accurate ratings on these historical players if you should so choose to request this. As I mentioned earlier, I can only imagine the difficulties in coding a game of this magnitude. So I see it as a work in progress in fine tuning. Your designers have done so much great work to produce such a fantastic simulation. I hope my issues get addressed to keep this game playing well into the future. Randy

09-24-2014, 12:10 AM	#8
Lukas Berger OOTP Developments Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France Posts: 21,349	No offense intended at all, but based on what you're describing, you're doing something wrong, maybe changed some settings, are using a modified db or something else is wrong. Because pretty much none of what you describe is actually an issue with the default historical db and historical game mode that ships with OOTP. Can you maybe describe exactly how you go about setting up a historical game, so we can help you get things working correctly? Last edited by Lukas Berger; 09-24-2014 at 12:11 AM.

09-24-2014, 04:34 PM	#13
RchW Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Toronto ON by way of Glasgow UK Posts: 15,629	One thing to keep in mind is that the offensive game was 10%- 20% better in the 1920's and 1930's. League batting averages in the 0.280's and pitchers allowed more hits than innings pitched. The 0.300 hitter of that era is somewhat equivalent to a 0.260 hitter today. Relief pitching historically was less effective than SP vs today's game where it is better by 10%. I think that is one of the reasons fictional works best for me. The idea of DiMaggio as a 0.270 hitter is odd. __________________ Cheers RichW If you’re looking for a good cause to donate money to please consider a Donation to Parkinson’s Canada. It may help me have a better future and if not me, someone else. Thanks. “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit

09-14-2014, 01:27 PM	#2
Randystu Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2014 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 38	Almost forgot, where is Ernie Banks? Mr. Cub. I can't find him as a player anywhere when you play a game with the greatest players of each team.

09-16-2014, 01:04 PM	#3
Pacoheadley All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Kincheloe, MI Posts: 521	There is no bias. The ratings for historical players are purely based on the stats that they put up. Some of the specifics such as individual pitches will not be accurate, as we don't have stats to import their ratings from.

09-17-2014, 03:30 AM	#5
Randystu Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2014 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 38	Well that is my point. There are many great players that when they played were much better than some current players playing today. And they are rated 1 star. That ain't accurate and if I use the 100% rating, they will hit .250 when they have lifetime batting averages in the .320 and .330's. Seems like a bias to me.

09-24-2014, 02:47 PM	#9
sprague All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 1,947	My guess is that he is playing random debut. Then some old time guys get burned based on how the stats are read by the AI, no real adjustment of many areas based over time oldtime OF often lose a star based on "bad" fielding ratings- and oldtime pitchers lose k ratings so don't match up with an average modern player because of it. My guess that is the issue. I don't play random debut for those very reasons- modern players have a huge advantage.