Quote:
Originally Posted by luckymann
I will say here what I have said in various ways elsewhere on these boards: the issue raised in the OP is not a matter of sim accuracy, although it certainly plays its part because of how the engine works; it is a matter of game play. So it's no use seeking out sample sizes or statistics. If you sim games or seasons this problem does not exist. If, however, you play games out - I have only ever played in one-pitch mode, never pitch-by-pitch, so I am only speaking from that experience - there is a fundamental flaw in the way the game handles baserunning in general, and stealing in particular.
Anyone asking for corroborative stats or demanding a larger sample size, how about you do this instead: go and play out a season in one-pitch mode and see what happens. I will be shocked if you come back to this post (and others like it) satisfied by the in-game baserunning as it currently is.
The whole concept of human- vs AI-controlled stealing makes no sense whatsoever. Here are some reasons why:
- A fast player with high running ratings across the board controlled by a human facing a poor battery combo with regard to holding runners / throwing them out controlled by the AI will be stopped from attempting to steal at far beyond the rate it should be happening
- A slower player with worse running ratings controlled by the AI against a better battery combo will try to steal far more often than if the roles were reversed
- Trying to steal on a 0-0 count will result in the runner being picked off or a pitchout called at a higher rate than is to be expected. I have got the "art" down to having a hitter take the first pitch and if that pitch is a strike then I swing away from that point
- Trying to put on a hit and run with a player on first with anything better than average speed will at a far greater rate than should happen result in the batter - even those with good eye and / or contact ratings - swinging and missing (the pitch animation looking like a pitchout) and the runner being gunned down
- Trying to steal third meets with far less resistance than trying to steal second, even with a LHB at the plate.
I understand I open myself up to calls for quantification by using terms such as "at a far greater rate than you'd expect", but in this instance I mean in the framework of gameplay, not statistics. In other words, the whole process is clumsy.
As far as I'm concerned there should be the option to green light a player, which overrides the AI's ability to make the decision as to whether or not the runner goes. If the human manager wants to take his chances then they should be able to. The smart ones will quickly learn under which circumstances steals should be attempted, just as IRL, and the engine controlling the game should then make the judgement call using the ratings and situation as merit as to whether or not the steal is successful. That is, of course, assuming this sort of thing can be made to work.
I'm not saying it ruins the game the way it is. But it certainly reduces the enjoyment and the realism, especially with the bias so evident toward AI-controlled players and teams / against human controlled ones.
With regard to the other point raised in the OP. The reduced rate of attempted steals inflates the numbers of runners at first base for subsequent ABs. Inevitably, this has the flow-on effect of inflating the number of DPs. Although even I am surprised by the numbers you cite.
ALB raised a good point in another thread on the same topic, about how when in one-pitch mode the pitch count could have some effect. I do suspect this to be the case, and would love to hear what people who have experience playing in both one-pitch and pitch-by-pitch modes have to say on this. |
I play out probably 145+ games each season. I agree, Luckymann, that my team produces
many more successful stealing attempts when I have the AI simulate the game on my behalf compared to playing the games out myself. And it's not like the AI is making a ridiculous number of base stealing attempts each game that it simulates for me. If it did, I'd be seeing large numbers of "caught stealing" from my players too.
To sum up, none of my complaints are related to base stealing in simulated games. Any complaints I have are 100% related to when I play out all 9 innings myself. In fact, I think the AI does a great job of simulating "base stealing" when it has 100% control of my team and simulates behind closed doors.
Oh, btw, Luckymann... I went to your
https://atl-02.statsplus.net/footnote/ website. That looks awesome! I can't wait to visit when the league is in full swing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ablobj
I've honestly never even seen a batter make contact when I tell a runner to steal second. Whether the runner decides to steal or not, it always results in the batter taking the pitch.
|
Yes. That is by design. That way, there is the possibility of having straight steal attempts in addition to the Hit & Run and Run & Hit options.
What you're looking for is the "Run & Hit" play. That tells the runner to do a straight steal attempt of 2nd or 3rd base. Plus, the hitter can then decide if he wants to swing or not.
With a "Hit & Run" play, the base runner doesn't break toward 2nd or 3rd base like a stolen base attempt until the ball is about to come out of the pitcher's hand (the pitcher is fully committed to throwing a pitch). In this play, the batter is obligated to swing the bat at almost everything so the runner isn't dead meat due to his late break toward the next base.
Summary:
Press 4 or 5 - The batter will not swing
Press 9 - The batter will always swing
Press a - The batter has the choice to swing or not
Press 4, 5 or a - The base runner breaks for the next base immediately once the pitcher starts his delivery
Press 9 - The base runner has a slight delay before he breaks for the next base.