Realistic Sim Results?

[BeachBum]

A question for people who have done a lot of simming. Are the results reasonable??

The reason I ask is that I have seen some of things the AI does in lineups that are just completely ridiculous. I saw the AI start a 34 year old Ted Kluszewski at 2nd base and then bat him leadoff. Also seen the AI pinch hit for Hank Aaron.

I am thinking of a doing a fairly large, complex sim project but do not want to waste a whole bunch of time if the results are going to be completely ridiculous.

[RchW]

Yes. There are numerous threads in this sub-forum on how to set up for long term sims.

Be aware if you are looking for a "replay" type of result you may not get that close, but the game is far more than a "replay".

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by BeachBum

if the results are going to be completely ridiculous.

You might take to heart the possibility that all the people you see posting on this forum, not to mention all the people who are just lurking, or never find their way here, who apparently are spending way too much of their personal time playing this game ... probably think the results are not completely ridiculous (though that doesn't discourage them from complaining about one thing or another. )

So, have courage, and be optimistic ...

And, by the way, I've seen the likes of Hank Aaron get PHed for in real life gamelogs, usually because the score has gotten lopsided in one direction or the other and it's time to bring in the B-team.

[gglennwill]

Originally Posted by BeachBum

A question for people who have done a lot of simming. Are the results reasonable??

I know the results in OOTP get knocked a lot, and I have never done a careful study. But I got an appreciation for OOTP when I loaded the new Puresim game demo and replayed both games with the 1909 season a couple of times. The OOTP results seemed more realistic to me. In Puresim (which I like, by the way, especially with fictional), neither the Pirates nor Cubs, who both won over 100 games that year year, won their division; the Giants won both times although they won 92. The Phillies won it in the second run although they were under .500 that year. In fact, the Pirates never made the top 3 in either run. Detroit, who went to the series, didn't make the top 4 in one run. Christy Mathewson, who had a 1.12 ERA in real life, had a 3.5 ERA the first year, which seems too far off. In the OOTP runs, the Cubs won the division one year and the Pirates the next, and Mathewsons ERA was under 2 both times. As I say, I like Puresim, I know the sample size is small, etc, but I think Puresim has a ways to go to match the level of realism in OOTP, and Markus deserves a lot more credit than he gets for the realism factor. I'm sure Puresim will improve with time as Shawn Sullivan is a great developer. I would love to see a more "scientific" comparison, but frankly I'm too lazy

[spleen1015]

OOTP doesn't know who Hank Aaron is. It knows what ratings player #421 has and they should have been pinch hit for.

[PhillieFever]

Originally Posted by BeachBum

A question for people who have done a lot of simming. Are the results reasonable??

The reason I ask is that I have seen some of things the AI does in lineups that are just completely ridiculous. I saw the AI start a 34 year old Ted Kluszewski at 2nd base and then bat him leadoff. Also seen the AI pinch hit for Hank Aaron.

I am thinking of a doing a fairly large, complex sim project but do not want to waste a whole bunch of time if the results are going to be completely ridiculous.

Short answer,you will not be wasting your time.If you're looking to have players perform as close to their real life selves as possible,I recommend these settings which I've tinkered with to get just right over the last two years.Mind you,these aren't perfect,players will fluctuate from year to year,but on the whole I think you'll be happy.Here's the settings.

Recalc-3 years using real stats with the current year's stats doubled.
Retire according to history-on
Player development-off
For best results turn off the draft and have players import with the team's they broke in with.
Injuries-low
Fatigue-high
Trading-low

That's pretty much it.Everything else can pretty much be left at default.If you have any more questions feel free to ask.

[Childress]

One thing inhibiting realistic historical replays are the ball park factors, the ones in the OOTP database are (IIRC) generic and don't make allowances for L/R differences. This makes a huge difference for teams like the Yankees during their powerball years.

I understand theirs a download somewhere with the accurate numbers but they have to be entered manually, a not inconsiderable job.

[BaseballMan]

Originally Posted by Childress

One thing inhibiting realistic historical replays are the ball park factors, the ones in the OOTP database are (IIRC) generic and don't make allowances for L/R differences. This makes a huge difference for teams like the Yankees during their powerball years.

I understand theirs a download somewhere with the accurate numbers but they have to be entered manually, a not inconsiderable job.

I think someone made a file all the park.dat files on padres sites.
But doesnt the game change the park factors each year based on the ballpark era file. I wanted to keep the same factors each year so i removed the ballpark era file. Which reminds me that i better check and make sure it stays the same in my next year.

[BaseballMan]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

OOTP doesn't know who Hank Aaron is. It knows what ratings player #421 has and they should have been pinch hit for.

I agree to apoint but with a player like Hank Aaron shouldnt his ratings be good enough to not pinch hit for him unless recalc is off and its last year of his career.
Unless its Mickey Mantle or Wille Mays there shouldnt be many players who should have good enough ratings to pinch hit for Aaron.
But if it was once in a billion type thing i dont really see that as a problem.
The only 2 players i can think of that you never pinch hit for would be Glanville & Gload.

[Childress]

Originally Posted by BaseballMan

I think someone made a file all the park.dat files on padres sites.
But doesnt the game change the park factors each year based on the ballpark era file.

Yep, too be meaningful you'd average them over the life of the park, taking into consideration alterations.

Here is Yankee Stadium from 92-01, for example, showing the significant, though variable, advantage for L/HRS:

RunHRAvgL-AvgR-AvgL-HRR-HRH2B3B
1992 109 115 101 103 100 175 89 102 96 81
1993 86 104 94 99 89 109 102 89 73 62
1994 83 95 96 105 90 102 92 92 91 83
1995 103 105 106 110 101 126 94 105 106 87
1996 101 103 104 105 103 117 91 103 93 56
1997 92 98 99 93 103 87 111 96 92 142
1998 95 84 98 101 92 98 92 97 97 81
1999 81 84 91 87 94 86 92 88 96 82
2000 103 118 99 97 101 134 106 99 96 74
2001 101 125 99 105 94 136 115 97 99 48

Damned formatting...