My Biggest wish for Historical

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I have zero problem with OOTP not being a replay game, but if that's the case the makers of the historical game need to fully embrace it and make it the best whatif game ever to grace the planet.

If it's not a replay game, the game should be created with the idea that a lot of the users will want to use a combo of recalc and development. It's not a replay game, so "miss seasons according to history" and "retire according to history" should be available, but the game should not require their use in order to produce great results. Retire according to history isn't even an option when playing random debut.

It's not a replay game, so the game really needs to develop a way to smack down guys that had brief runs of success, but little overall career success. It doesn't need to destroy superstars that head to war. It doesn't have to destroy a guy like Chris Carpenter during his real life injury years. If it's not a replay game, the only thing that should destroy Carpenter is if he had a bad OOTP injury. The development engine should take over for a guy like Britt Burns that has his real life career ended by a injury. I shouldn't have to use 5 year recalc and the fingers crossed method when it comes to Williams, DiMaggio, Greenberg and Feller.

I didn't like the Bill Murray movie Groundhogs Day, so I don't want to turn development off and watch Koafax go all Khris Davis until he's 44.

I hope at some point the game can run recalc, but also factor in the length of a players career and use some form of career season average for years when a real life player missed a season or fell below the weaken make bad thresholds. The game should be able to see that Quinton Berry only had 345 plate appearances, while Ted Williams had 9792. Quite a few years ago, the Neutered DB actually filled in the years guys like Williams missed with generic stats tha would help the player beat the weaken make bad settings. I loved that, but I think it should have been taken a step further. Instead of blah generic stats, take a look at how William's career was rolling and have the game project what he might have been for those years.

Well, the beauty and curse of OOTP has always been that it is trying to be everything for everybody.

They've added "replay" type features because that is what people have asked for and hopefully they will continue to do so since that is a significant portion of the user base.

A lot of the things you are talking about ARE in, just not necessarily in the exact way you are hoping I guess?

5-Year recalc knocks down players that had brief runs of success and prevents players who lost war years from being ruined because of it.

The game does know the number of plate appearances that Quinton Berry and Ted Williams had and allows you to set the playing time levels that get adjusted. It would be MUCH better, of course, if this was adjustable beyond that first League Setup screen.

Other suggestions you made sound great, but become head scratchers when you think about how OOTP might be able to actually go about it. What should OOTP use in Chris Carpenter's injury years to rate him? This kind of thing becomes very difficult because as you change the "rules" to "fix" one player that might "break" another. How does the game even know he was injured vs. some other reason for low playing time? There is technically an option for this (by disabling Recalc and going with the development engine), but again maybe not exactly what you want.

OOTP provides a LOT of ways to play, but it is impossible to provide EVERY way to play and every option provides a new iteration of things to consider when adding the next feature, but I do think some kind of option in between the "Straight Recalc" and the "No Recalc" worlds would be a great addition.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Well, the beauty and curse of OOTP has always been that it is trying to be everything for everybody.

They've added "replay" type features because that is what people have asked for and hopefully they will continue to do so since that is a significant portion of the user base.

A lot of the things you are talking about ARE in, just not necessarily in the exact way you are hoping I guess?

5-Year recalc knocks down players that had brief runs of success and prevents players who lost war years from being ruined because of it.

The game does know the number of plate appearances that Quinton Berry and Ted Williams had and allows you to set the playing time levels that get adjusted. It would be MUCH better, of course, if this was adjustable beyond that first League Setup screen.

Other suggestions you made sound great, but become head scratchers when you think about how OOTP might be able to actually go about it. What should OOTP use in Chris Carpenter's injury years to rate him? This kind of thing becomes very difficult because as you change the "rules" to "fix" one player that might "break" another. How does the game even know he was injured vs. some other reason for low playing time? There is technically an option for this (by disabling Recalc and going with the development engine), but again maybe not exactly what you want.

OOTP provides a LOT of ways to play, but it is impossible to provide EVERY way to play and every option provides a new iteration of things to consider when adding the next feature, but I do think some kind of option in between the "Straight Recalc" and the "No Recalc" worlds would be a great addition.

Chris Carpenter 2004, 15-5 182 innings pitched. 2005, 21-5 241.2 innings pitched, 2006 15-8 221.2 innings pitched. 2007 0-1 6 innings pitched. 2008 0-1 15.1 innings pitched. 2009 17-4 192.2 innings pitched. 2010 16-9 235 innings pitched. 2011 11-9 237.1 innings pitched. The game should be able to see that something was amiss in 2007-08 and adjust accordingly. OOTP is not a replay, so determining whether it was an injury or a bad attitude, drugs or laziness should not be a factor. The guy was a Cy Young level pitcher for 3 seasons leading up to those 2 years and Cy Young level pitcher for at least 2 seasons following those years. It should not require 5 year recalc. Also, the game doesn't destroy Britt Burns following the year corresponding to his 1985 season. In fact, I've had Burns win 300 games in a random debut. In another he won roughly 160 and pitched till he was 36 or 37. The opposite would be a guy like Mark Fidrych. Only one season of over 150 innings pitched. The adjust make bad settings should hammer The Bird.

That's what to me would make OOTP the ultimate whatif game. What if Chris Carpenter didn't get hurt during those two season. Of course, I play with injuries on, so an Out of the Park injury could derail him as well. Problem is, so much of what keeps Carpenter from getting crushed is what makes OOTP fun and random debut fun. Take out the ability of using recalc and development together and random debut is dead. Oh and I use low TCR's more often than not. The problem is the whole process is so willy nilly. Ted Williams may get to the years coinciding with the war years and just play on like nothing ever happened. Meanwhile, Joe DiMaggio will turn into a bottom of the order scrub or worse a pinch hitter. Feller will become a bullpen guy and Greenberg will remain a stud. Thing is, it will all get blamed on development being on. You can't play random debut without development unless you love Bill Murray,

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Chris Carpenter 2004, 15-5 182 innings pitched. 2005, 21-5 241.2 innings pitched, 2006 15-8 221.2 innings pitched. 2007 0-1 6 innings pitched. 2008 0-1 15.1 innings pitched. 2009 17-4 192.2 innings pitched. 2010 16-9 235 innings pitched. 2011 11-9 237.1 innings pitched. The game should be able to see that something was amiss in 2007-08 and adjust accordingly. OOTP is not a replay, so determining whether it was an injury or a bad attitude, drugs or laziness should not be a factor. The guy was a Cy Young level pitcher for 3 seasons leading up to those 2 years and Cy Young level pitcher for at least 2 seasons following those years. It should not require 5 year recalc. The opposite would be a guy like Mark Fidrych. Only one season of over 150 innings pitched. The adjust make bad settings should hammer The Bird.

That's what to me would make OOTP the ultimate whatif game. What if Chris Carpenter didn't get hurt during those two season. Of course, I play with injuries on, so an Out of the Park injury could derail him as well. Problem is, so much of what keeps Carpenter from getting crushed is what makes OOTP fun and random debut fun. Take out the ability of using recalc and development together and random debut is dead. Oh and I use low TCR's more often than not. The problem is the whole process is so willy nilly. Ted Williams may get to the years coinciding with the war years and just play on like nothing ever happened. Meanwhile, Joe DiMaggio will turn into a bottom of the order scrub or worse a pinch hitter. Feller will become a bullpen guy and Greenberg will remain a stud. Thing is, it will all get blamed on development being on. You can't play random debut without development unless you love Bill Murray,

You want to play a very specific way and I get that and think what you are describing would be a strong addition.

How things "should" work is subjective in this case, though.

I also think a basic implementation of this would cause a lot of unintended consequences/issues and thus a good implementation would be a VERY heavy lift from a logic/testing stand-point.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

You want to play a very specific way and I get that and think what you are describing would be a strong addition.

How things "should" work is subjective in this case, though.

I also think a basic implementation of this would cause a lot of unintended consequences/issues and thus a good implementation would be a VERY heavy lift from a logic/testing stand-point.

I don't disagree with you at all. But, if you read a lot of the threads on here about historical settings, you get told you should use 5 year recalc, with a certain set of adjust weaken settings. You must turn development off. You must use retire according to history. Of course, playing this way pretty much means you have to turn injuries off. You need to turn off coaching. You should set rotations to this size and set use of closers to often, even during times they weren't used, as the game will adjust. There's all these things you must do and number one on the list should be, don't have any fun, just run tests and fast sims till the next version arrives.

As the title of the the thread read...My Biggest Wish.....in the end I love how this game works and absolutely love random debut. I have so few complaints, I just want there to be a way that I don't see guys like Ted Williams turn to puke.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Other suggestions you made sound great, but become head scratchers when you think about how OOTP might be able to actually go about it. What should OOTP use in Chris Carpenter's injury years to rate him? This kind of thing becomes very difficult because as you change the "rules" to "fix" one player that might "break" another. How does the game even know he was injured vs. some other reason for low playing time? There is technically an option for this (by disabling Recalc and going with the development engine), but again maybe not exactly what you want.

Not quite the same thing, but when I've run a sim where I want replay over multiple years, but want the "what if" of Koufax not retiring after the '66 season, unfortunately due to the fact that the Retire Accdg to History feature doesn't work with historical txns enabled, I have to unretire him after every season. However, other than that annual PITA, I have had success with having Development On (something you typically wouldn't want in a replay), but having the TCR setting at 1 (the lowest possible without turning Dev off). This results in a very reasonable post-'66 career path, factoring in aging, for "The Left Arm of God."

That said, these games/results were in pre-v23 OOTP, probably 20-22. I have not tried this yet in 23...

Back maybe 8 or 10 versions ago when Retire Accdg to History (and Miss Seasons...) both worked with historical txns, I don't know what the game was doing with player development for the post-retirement and missed seasons, but it was working well. Maybe it was doing something similar to my settings noted above. I dunno. But I'd sure like to see a return to full functionality of RAH and MSAH.

I think, but am not sure, that with historical txns off and replay settings, RAH and MSAH history work as intended... At least they did in the past. So I'm wondering what the game does for the missed & post-retirement seasons in that scenario...

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I don't disagree with you at all. But, if you read a lot of the threads on here about historical settings, you get told you should use 5 year recalc, with a certain set of adjust weaken settings. You must turn development off. You must use retire according to history. Of course, playing this way pretty much means you have to turn injuries off. You need to turn off coaching. You should set rotations to this size and set use of closers to often, even during times they weren't used, as the game will adjust. There's all these things you must do and number one on the list should be, don't have any fun, just run tests and fast sims till the next version arrives.

As the title of the the thread read...My Biggest Wish.....in the end I love how this game works and absolutely love random debut. I have so few complaints, I just want there to be a way that I don't see guys like Ted Williams turn to puke.

I don't see those answers in those threads as being nearly that absolute.

Garlon gets asked for recommendations and provides them, but he isn't telling you that you "have" to do anything.

You can certainly use both recalc and development if you wish. You don't "have" to use 5-year recalc or certain adjust settings. Those are just what he thinks are the best based on his experience trying to get specific results.

I think the biggest issue currently is we are "stuck" with the Adjust/Weaken options chosen at the beginning. There are a number of good reasons to want to tweak that throughout the life of a historical simulation...and it would also make it much easier to test the various settings if you could create a league and ask it to recalc at any point based on new settings.

During war years or strike years it makes sense to have lower adjust/weaken than other seasons.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I don't see those answers in those threads as being nearly that absolute.

Garlon gets asked for recommendations and provides them, but he isn't telling you that you "have" to do anything.

You can certainly use both recalc and development if you wish. You don't "have" to use 5-year recalc or certain adjust settings. Those are just what he thinks are the best based on his experience trying to get specific results.

I think the biggest issue currently is we are "stuck" with the Adjust/Weaken options chosen at the beginning. There are a number of good reasons to want to tweak that throughout the life of a historical simulation...and it would also make it much easier to test the various settings if you could create a league and ask it to recalc at any point based on new settings.

During war years or strike years it makes sense to have lower adjust/weaken than other seasons.

Do you play historical?

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Do you play historical?

Yes.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Yes.

Good to know. Gives me another person to seek advice from. I will continue my crusade, as I still think there are some tweaks they can make to improve how things are handled when players miss seasons. Like I said earlier, at one point Neutered Stats actually offered up generic filler stats to fill the holes created by missed seasons. Maybe that's the solution. Sure some purist may cry foul at that type of thing, but it's better than Ted Williams going from the best hitter in baseball to pinch hitter.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Good to know. Gives me another person to seek advice from. I will continue my crusade, as I still think there are some tweaks they can make to improve how things are handled when players miss seasons. Like I said earlier, at one point Neutered Stats actually offered up generic filler stats to fill the holes created by missed seasons. Maybe that's the solution. Sure some purist may cry foul at that type of thing, but it's better than Ted Williams going from the best hitter in baseball to pinch hitter.

I believe that was probably one of the custom databases (maybe Spritze) that did that?

I'm not sure any of the default databases ever filled in those years, but I didn't play historical as much back in the day.

A few years ago I got back into tabletop games, which in turn got me more into historical play in OOTP.

I don't think my play style likely matches anyone else around here though lol. I tend to simulate single historical seasons, but using 5-year recalc and trades/financials disabled. I then remove the leagues and/or divisions and generate a new completely balanced schedule. Eventually, I would like to simulate through history like this, but re-set the rosters to the "real" rosters each opening day (which currently would mean manually moving a bunch of players each off-season).

Basically, I like to play a historical season with the players representing a larger sample size of their career than just that single season using the players they had in the organization on Opening Day for the entire season.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I believe that was probably one of the custom databases (maybe Spritze) that did that?

I'm not sure any of the default databases ever filled in those years, but I didn't play historical as much back in the day.

A few years ago I got back into tabletop games, which in turn got me more into historical play in OOTP.

I don't think my play style likely matches anyone else around here though lol. I tend to simulate single historical seasons, but using 5-year recalc and trades/financials disabled. I then remove the leagues and/or divisions and generate a new completely balanced schedule. Eventually, I would like to simulate through history like this, but re-set the rosters to the "real" rosters each opening day (which currently would mean manually moving a bunch of players each off-season).

Basically, I like to play a historical season with the players representing a larger sample size of their career than just that single season using the players they had in the organization on Opening Day for the entire season.

It was the neutered db that came with the game. I think Spritze and Garlon created it together.

That sounds like a fun way to play. Heck I join groups on FB for games I don't even play, so I can read about the projects other people are doing. OOTP's career play has pretty much ruined me for other games though. It's so much fun to watch a league build history over time.

[David Watts]

Rain Man, I just bumped a thread in the regular forum. Wondered if you had read Garlon's post? His suggestion sounds very interesting. Take a look.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Rain Man, I just bumped a thread in the regular forum. Wondered if you had read Garlon's post? His suggestion sounds very interesting. Take a look.

Yes, I had seen that and it is definitely interesting...but he also mentioned some of the problems it would likely cause and how there would need to be further restrictions in place to prevent weird results for players who have a lot of years of small sample sizes, etc. That is the type of unintended results I was talking about above. There would likely be a lot of those kinds of things that would crop up in any kind of implementation like that which would complicate things.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Yes, I had seen that and it is definitely interesting...but he also mentioned some of the problems it would likely cause and how there would need to be further restrictions in place to prevent weird results for players who have a lot of years of small sample sizes, etc. That is the type of unintended results I was talking about above. There would likely be a lot of those kinds of things that would crop up in any kind of implementation like that which would complicate things.

So true. As long as what we have now isn't completely ripped out from under us, I have no problem with trying something new. If it's an all or nothing either or situation, I would 100% want to stick with what we have as even though I dream of improvements, what we have works.

Maybe baby steps then. Add the option to select the type of recalc we want to use to the first page of the historical creation wizard. Then have the game give us an expert(Garlon's) recommendation as to what weaken/adjust settings to use. Also, allow the adjust/weaken settings to be changed whenever we feel the desire to do so.

[David Watts]

Went to sleep last night and got to thinking. What if you set a number for adjust hitters/pitchers but used 0 for weaken hitters and pitchers.

Got up this morning and before I had to head off to work, I created 1942. Used 110 for adjust hitters 17 for adjust pitchers. Entered 0 for weaken for both pitchers and hitters. Fast simmed 42 and advanced to opening day 1943. By appearances alone, it worked. Greenberg was still a middle of the order 5 star. Same could be said for Williams and DiMaggio. Feller was a #1 starter. Simmed 43 and while at home, I figured something was wrong. Then I looked at the actual stats for 43 and 44 and realized maybe it worked better than I thought. As could only be expected with so many players missing, stat output was down a lot in those years. Thinking it might be better to use 1941, 42 or 1946 for the war years modifiers.

[Rain King]

How do the fringe players look? My worry with those settings is that they would be over-powered. Everyone with low playing time would be getting pushed towards "average".

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

How do the fringe players look? My worry with those settings is that they would be over-powered. Everyone with low playing time would be getting pushed towards "average".

Have to do some more playing around with it when I get back home. Was in a rush this morning.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Went to sleep last night and got to thinking. What if you set a number for adjust hitters/pitchers but used 0 for weaken hitters and pitchers.

Got up this morning and before I had to head off to work, I created 1942. Used 110 for adjust hitters 17 for adjust pitchers. Entered 0 for weaken for both pitchers and hitters. Fast simmed 42 and advanced to opening day 1943. By appearances alone, it worked. Greenberg was still a middle of the order 5 star. Same could be said for Williams and DiMaggio. Feller was a #1 starter. Simmed 43 and while at home, I figured something was wrong. Then I looked at the actual stats for 43 and 44 and realized maybe it worked better than I thought. As could only be expected with so many players missing, stat output was down a lot in those years. Thinking it might be better to use 1941, 42 or 1946 for the war years modifiers.

What recalc setting did you use? Real or newt stats?

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by thehef

What recalc setting did you use? Real or newt stats?

5 year recalc and real stats.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by David Watts

5 year recalc and real stats.

I think the 5-year recalc explains things (about the War era guys performing well in 1942 and 1943) more than the weaken settings, because with 5-year recalc, none of these guys would have a total AB or IP number that is below what normal weaken numbers used for 5-year recacl would be.

1942
Williams, DiMaggio and Feller all played in '42, so that would explain them... For Greenberg I think he would be rated based upon the adjust number. Do you remember what yours was?

1943
I don't know what your adjust settings were, but let's say for batting it was 200. That means your factoring in 1941 thru 1945. In that span, Teddy and Joe both played only in 1941 & 1942. However, they each had enough AB's in those two season to exceed the 1,000 total required to avoid any adjusted AB's being applied to their totals. Therefore, their 1943 ratings would be based on their outstanding '41 and '42 stats... Greenberg, however, only had 337 AB's over that span (67 in '41, 270 in '45), so he would have 663 adjusted AB's applied to his stats, upon which his ratings would then be based. And also given that his '41 and '45 partial-year stats were not the beastly numbers that he had put up in other seasons, his '43 ratings might show him as an average player but with some power...

I'm thinking that having the weaken setting at zero, it's going to affect those guys who you want to be rated based upon the adjust number, but who had low #'s of AB's. So maybe a guy with 30 or 40 AB's that you want to be adjusted, but not weakened...