ETA for New Patch that Fixes L/R splits in fictional leagues

[22chill22]

Do we know when to expect a new patch that solves the problem with all fictional players being created with almost identical L/R splits? My fictional league, already statistically battered by the upgrade to 25 from 24, is unplayable without this essential fix.

[Matt Arnold]

It will be out soon. Hard to say whether it will be the end of this week or early next.

[22chill22]

Thanks for the quick reply, Matt. Very much looking forward to it!

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

It will be out soon. Hard to say whether it will be the end of this week or early next.

Will Random Debut be fixed as well?

[biggerme]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

It will be out soon. Hard to say whether it will be the end of this week or early next.

Will that change have also impact to PT Cards that are not released yet and also next LIVE update?

[JudgeGio]

And will this patch fix the inability to export schedules to an .lsdl file?

[Larryk007]

Thanks, I was just starting to edit my players, so I will wait.

What is this rating and how is it generated? Left hand side, "Resulting R/L Platoon Split 1.024"

[Reed]

Originally Posted by JudgeGio

And will this patch fix the inability to export schedules to an .lsdl file?

I think that was fixed last patch unless you are still having issues. At least I can export to an isdi file now.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

It will be out soon. Hard to say whether it will be the end of this week or early next.

Not sure if you will see this, and I know it's a big ask this late in the release cycle... but will there be anything to address players starting in unrated positions in the historical sims?

If not, I understand. I can just keep working around it.

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Will Random Debut be fixed as well?

what is wrong with Random Debut?

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by twins_34

what is wrong with Random Debut?

Modern day players are having their fielding ratings go completely in the tank around the age of 32 if they are out of recalc years. Not happening to every single one, but way too many.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Modern day players are having their fielding ratings go completely in the tank around the age of 32 if they are out of recalc years. Not happening to every single one, but way too many.

??? I thought splits were messed up too.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by 22chill22

Do we know when to expect a new patch that solves the problem with all fictional players being created with almost identical L/R splits? My fictional league, already statistically battered by the upgrade to 25 from 24, is unplayable without this essential fix.

It is telling that a flaw of this significance got past developers and beta testers in late-March, let alone that it persists 60% of the way through the current season. The markers of neglect / complacency / incompetency are so glaring at this point. We are talking about the sole product of this company; either the cumulative man-hours devoted to the game is woefully insufficient, or these are the wrong men for the job.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by jcard

It is telling that a flaw of this significance got past developers and beta testers in late-March, let alone that it persists 60% of the way through the current season. The markers of neglect / complacency / incompetency are so glaring at this point. We are talking about the sole product of this company; either the cumulative man-hours devoted to the game is woefully insufficient, or these are the wrong men for the job.

Where is the better game?

[jcard]

Originally Posted by uruguru

Where is the better game?

I understand that is sufficient endorsement for some. It is not for me. There is a point where the lack of quality and the overt apathy on an absolute (not relative to other options) scale outweigh my interest in the subject matter and product type. Perhaps that is at least in some degree a flaw in my approach to potential recreational outlets. I know and often regret that it makes enjoyment a more elusive quarry, but it is also true that I frequently find that being forced to refresh and broaden my search for alternatives results in finding sources of greater fulfillment.

[Pdubya64]

Originally Posted by jcard

I understand that is sufficient endorsement for some. It is not for me. There is a point where the lack of quality and the overt apathy on an absolute (not relative to other options) scale outweigh my interest in the subject matter and product type. Perhaps that is at least in some degree a flaw in my approach to potential recreational outlets. I know and often regret that it makes enjoyment a more elusive quarry, but it is also true that I frequently find that being forced to refresh and broaden my search for alternatives results in finding sources of greater fulfillment.

As Uruguru alludes to above, if you are no longer interested in the price-to-performance value of OOTP as a regular (non-PT) game, then how about you cease with coming on this board and banging your funeral drum seemingly at every chance you get?
It's getting mighty old and if you can't find at least a bit of time to provide constructive criticism then can you please just move on and leave the rest of us who still want to play to it?

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by jcard

I understand that is sufficient endorsement for some. It is not for me.

It is illogical to concede that OOTP is the best baseball sim on the market while at the same time saying that the devs are incompetent.

Simulations can be incredibly complex to pull off. There are points where you have to acknowledge, "ok that's enough detail" and make abstractions below that point.

And when you are simulating something (in this case, professional baseball) that has millions of knowledgeable and dedicated fans, there is no level of detail that is going to be enough.

And when your simulation is the best on the market, the most dedicated fans will constantly expect more detail, more realism, more more more because we all ****ing love baseball so much.

It's an impossible market to satisfy. And by 'impossible', I mean that literally.

Now if the OOTP devs were just sitting on their MLB license and never upgrading the game with new features, then it would be reasonable to be upset about new bugs popping up or never getting fixed.

But when they are adding new features within the tight deadlines of having to release every opening day, there are always going to be unintended bugs introduced that slip through the cracks. It's why people say "don't switch your big sims over to the new version until the bugs are worked out"

Think about everything that OOTP has to model in professional baseball. This is a thread about the L/R splits not being accurate for fictional players in fictional leagues. Yes, it absolutely sucks if that is how you play the game. But they are working on it.

[Bill Veeck]

Originally Posted by uruguru

And when your simulation is the best on the market, the most dedicated fans will constantly expect more detail, more realism, more more more because we all ****ing love baseball so much.

Now if the OOTP devs were just sitting on their MLB license and never upgrading the game with new features, then it would be reasonable to be upset about new bugs popping up or never getting fixed.

Think about everything that OOTP has to model in professional baseball. ... they are working on it.

I don't think you are overstating this. This is a very complex simulation where one change can affect multiple calculations

[hfield007]

Originally Posted by jcard

The markers of neglect / complacency / incompetency are so glaring at this point

keep us updated

[jcard]

Well, thanks for the feedback. I take it under advisement. I honestly disagree with many of these perspectives not in the general points raised (which I agree valid), but to the degree that they are employed in —legitimate factors for keeping expectations reasonable absolutely should be recognized, but can’t be a blanket defense against criticism per se.

As far as my never being constructive, I think that, again, a perhaps legitimate argument of excessive negativity is being applied without proper proportionality. For example, just after my initial post here I had posted something in the thread on the manual that was at least an attempt to contribute worthwhile perspectives.

I genuinely am surprised that my assessments are as apparently controversial and untenable to others as the tone and character of much of the response would seem to indicate is the case. In any case, it was not my intent to agitate or troll the community—it certainly brings me no joy to be a net antagonistic force on the experience of other users.