Quote:
Originally Posted by cdheer
You are confusing unknown with random.
Yes, there are lots of random parts of baseball. That's why we play the games, and it's why your "Excel" comment is sort of meaningless.
That doesn't mean the game should be full of made-up, unquantifiable nonsense. Should Markus add code to change the results of games based on phases of the moon? Of course not, because we can all agree that they have nothing to do with actual baseball results.
So then the question is, does "rust" actually exist and does it affect player performance in a material way? I don't think -- or at least, I cannot find with 30 seconds of googling -- that anyone has done an in-depth study on this, so we're left with anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence is awful, as a rule.
Stats are just for measuring and (in some cases) trying to predict what actually happens. A game based on stats is not automatically dry. In fact, I'd argue this is a significant difference between OOTP and, say, DMB: OOTP sims a world, and there's plenty of random variation bundled in so that you CAN'T just "run a spreadsheet."
You don't need to add made-up mysticism.
|
All I can say is thank goodness Markus isn't going down the path of no "human variables". No features unless proven with some study leaves us with no...
rust
coaches
scouts
work ethic
personality
You may think there is plenty of variation built in but if you base it solely on numbers than whoever plays the highest rated players the most is going to win more times than not. What would be the reason to play the lower rated guy? You certainly don't play him because the higher rated guy is in a slump and the lower rated guy is hot because the higher rated gut is still more likely to have the dice roll go his way. He has to there are no other variables.
No need to ever play a hunch while playing "no variables OOTP". 30 rated Joe is hot, seeing the ball well, and hitting .350 over the last 10 games. I'm still not starting him though because even though 75 rated Bill is hitting .190 over the last 15 games it doesn't mean a thing. Bill still has a better chance of getting a hit no matter what. He could even be coming back from a year long injury and not swung a bat in competition other than two rehab starts at AAA in the last 12 months. Wait a minute that's not true, there is no rust, so there is no need to get his timing back, which means he didn't need to rehab. He can just come back and play as though he was never gone. No thanks.
Again this stuff is already in the game and has been for years (thanks Markus). The effects are subtle and add just enough doubt that you wonder in the example above if it wouldn't be better to start 30 rated Joe over 75 rated Bill. If these effects weren't so subtle it would have been discovered long ago and banged on, quit rightly so, as a game breaker. The amount of time they have been in the game without comment on these boards is testament in itself that they either
(A) work as intended and don't break the game or
(B) never really existed at all but only have a placebo effect because Markus only told us they were there while never even coding the "feature"
Either way they can make you ignore the ratings you are seeing and contemplate that "human behavior" may also need to be figured into how you run your team. This is a good thing.