Completely demoralised - Page 2

Déjà Bru · 08-08-2009, 10:10 AM

I'm lending my support to the "non-issue" folks. We had this discussion at length a year ago, and at first I was one of the conspiracy theorists. As the discussion wore on, and my league got older (and I started to win a few championships), I changed my mind. Here are some quotes from above that I agree with (also oldtimer's, but his was too long to quote):

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmknpk2

Don't give up hope. I've had stretches where it seemed impossible to win the world series, losing playoff after playoff. But then I've also had times when it seems like we just waltzed in there and took it all. The game is not rigged, just the breaks. Anything can happen in a seven game series.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

Oddly, Ive been in 3 post seasons and won them all..for the first time in 7 iterations of this game. It all comes down to luck and pitching.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afino

Sample size!

But yeah, I have to "hold back" just so I don't win every year. In 5 years of my current dynasty, I have three first-place finishes and two world titles.

LordTC · 08-10-2009, 06:52 PM

In 1901 I assembled the following team and lost the world series 4-2.

C Donahue (avg just under 300, OBP around 360 SLG over 375 )
1B Anderson (.330 AVG .360 OBP .476 SLG)
2B Lajoie (.426 AVG .463 OBP .643 SLG) Future HoFer
SS Wagner (.353 AVG .417 OBP .494 SLG) Future HoFer
3B Collins (.332 .375 OBP .495 SLG) Future HoFer
LF Donlin (.340 AVG .409 OBP .475 SLG)
CF Heidrick (.339 AVG .366 OBP .470 SLG)
RF Flick (.333 AVG .399 OBP .500 SLG) Future HoFer

Most of these players are among the best in the league on defense too.

Pitching:

SP1 Young (Future HoFer, best pitcher in year)
SP2 Mathewson (Future HoFer, solid year)
SP3 Hahn (Career fell apart but 1901 was a good year)
SP4 Wadell (Future HoFer, good splits, great K's)
CL Chesbro (Future HoFer)

MR's basically irrelevant because of the 1901 settings.

In the regular season I had four 30 win pitchers, and 15 shutouts. But then in the post season a huge collapse.

I found that kind of hard to believe.

jg2977 · 08-11-2009, 04:02 PM

I have a league where there are 20 teams, and #1 through #16 make the playoffs. I have best-of-nine series, and the team with the better record gets every single game at home. Sometimes a #16 with 70 wins beats a #1 with 105 wins. It doesn't happen often, but enough to make you realize that sometimes it comes down to who gets the better breaks, and not who's the better team.

Jamee999 · 08-11-2009, 04:28 PM

Game 7 of the 1996 Series. I manage the Mariners

ehencley · 08-12-2009, 01:30 PM

Atlanta Braves

Neags23 · 08-12-2009, 04:29 PM

You think you're demoralized? Try being a/an:

Buffalo Bill (4 straight losing super bowls)
Atlanta Brave (14 straight playoff appearances, 1 championship)
Chicago Cub (12 playoff appearances (since 1908), 0 championships)
Houston Astro (9 playoff appearances, 0 championships)
Cleveland Indian (7 playoff appearances (since 1954), 0 championships)
San Diego Padre (5 playoff appearances, 0 championships)
Seattle Mariner (4 playoff appearances, 0 championships)
Texas Ranger (3 playoff appearances, 0 championships)

I could go on.

The point is, it happens.

You might say, but my guys are really good in the regular season and we still don't win! You don't think the players on the above teams were also really good? How do you think they made it to the playoffs? They had dominant players, too.

The reason your 25 game winner sucks in the playoffs is probably because 20 of his wins were against non-playoff teams.

The reason your .330 hitter went 1 for 18 in the playoffs is because he probably hit .380 against non-playoff teams and .450 against pitchers who belong in the mop up role on .400 winning % teams.

It's tough to win in the playoffs because for one, the sheer odds are against you. Even if tossing a coin decided the winner, a team in the MLB has a 1 in 8 shot of winning the championship. And for two, you're playing the elite teams in the league. You don't get to beat up on the little guys in the playoffs.

It's hard because it's supposed to be.

ehencley · 08-12-2009, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neags23

You might say, but my guys are really good in the regular season and we still don't win! You don't think the players on the above teams were also really good? How do you think they made it to the playoffs? They had dominant players, too.

The reason your 25 game winner sucks in the playoffs is probably because 20 of his wins were against non-playoff teams.

The reason your .330 hitter went 1 for 18 in the playoffs is because he probably hit .380 against non-playoff teams and .450 against pitchers who belong in the mop up role on .400 winning % teams.

It's tough to win in the playoffs because for one, the sheer odds are against you. Even if tossing a coin decided the winner, a team in the MLB has a 1 in 8 shot of winning the championship. And for two, you're playing the elite teams in the league. You don't get to beat up on the little guys in the playoffs.

It's hard because it's supposed to be.

Amen

Articula · 08-12-2009, 05:24 PM

One thing I've noticed upon reading the boards is once people get to the top it seems really easy to maintain your status at the top. Do users find it to easy to stay at the top?

Rondell Tate · 08-13-2009, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neags23

The reason your 25 game winner sucks in the playoffs is probably because 20 of his wins were against non-playoff teams.

Thanks for the condescending attitude.
If you check the OP, you'll see one of my leagues I had Bob Gibson starting four years (1967-70). My team made the WS every year, and every year Gibson got blown out every game he started except one (as did my No. 2 for two of those years, Fergie Jenkins).

Gibson's real-life ERA in 3 World Series? 1.89 ... 9 starts, 8 CG, 2 shutouts, 7-2 record. Possibly the single greatest post-season pitcher ever.

Gibson's OOTP ERA in 4 World Series? 9.23 ... 9 starts, 0 CG, 1-7 record.

If it's not cheating, it's doing a lousy job reflecting reality.

Yeah, it's supposed to be hard. It's supposed to be hard getting to the playoffs too, but it's not (I have to handicap my teams to not win 110 games a year, like play in a tiny market. Despite that, most teams I play, most years I win about 95 games and make the playoffs).

It is ridiculously hard to win them unless you stack your team. Don't take my word for it, go look at the Desperation in Denver thread ... his experience, season after season (18 playoffs, 13 in a row, often w/ the best team in baseball, zero WS titles), is what I see in most of the leagues I start in OOTP. It's gotten real old ...

jasonn29tn14 · 08-13-2009, 08:44 AM

I just won the WS in the second year of my fictional league. Had a very talented team go 77-85 the year before due to an incredible number of injuries. My team is the odds on favorite to repeat this year. But if they don't I won't be blaming the game. It's just hard to win it all - a reflection of reality in MLB.

Green & Gold Heart · 08-13-2009, 08:51 AM

My last OOTP 9 league I was the Milwaukee Brewers. My goal was to get a championship for Ryan Braun. Kept him on the team his whole career (til about the early 2020's or something). We had a stretch of 15 years in a row making the playoffs, but didn't win the WS for the first 13 years! Lots of close calls too. Then Braun retired, and we won back-to-back titles. Them's the breaks.

Articula · 08-13-2009, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rondell Tate

Thanks for the condescending attitude.
If you check the OP, you'll see one of my leagues I had Bob Gibson starting four years (1967-70). My team made the WS every year, and every year Gibson got blown out every game he started except one (as did my No. 2 for two of those years, Fergie Jenkins).

Gibson's real-life ERA in 3 World Series? 1.89 ... 9 starts, 8 CG, 2 shutouts, 7-2 record. Possibly the single greatest post-season pitcher ever.

Gibson's OOTP ERA in 4 World Series? 9.23 ... 9 starts, 0 CG, 1-7 record.

If it's not cheating, it's doing a lousy job reflecting reality.

Yeah, it's supposed to be hard. It's supposed to be hard getting to the playoffs too, but it's not (I have to handicap my teams to not win 110 games a year, like play in a tiny market. Despite that, most teams I play, most years I win about 95 games and make the playoffs).

It is ridiculously hard to win them unless you stack your team. Don't take my word for it, go look at the Desperation in Denver thread ... his experience, season after season (18 playoffs, 13 in a row, often w/ the best team in baseball, zero WS titles), is what I see in most of the leagues I start in OOTP. It's gotten real old ...

This looks to be my single biggest hurdle to me personally buying the game. Its to easy to maintain a great record once you get there. There has to be some cyclical nature to this game. No team, no matter what is good forever.

Sure you can quote the Yankees, Red Sox, or even the 90's Braves. But except for a few occasions these teams weren't winning 115 games a season and having guys put up insane 350 BA, 50 HR, 150 RBI seasons.

Questdog · 08-13-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Articula

This looks to be my single biggest hurdle to me personally buying the game. Its to easy to maintain a great record once you get there. There has to be some cyclical nature to this game. No team, no matter what is good forever.

Sure you can quote the Yankees, Red Sox, or even the 90's Braves. But except for a few occasions these teams weren't winning 115 games a season and having guys put up insane 350 BA, 50 HR, 150 RBI seasons.

The game will be that way if you do not abuse your power as God.......

The computer is dumb as a rock, so you have to be magnanimous and not take advantage of his small brain. If you are capable of this self-control, then OOTP will provide you with the most realistic baseball management experience you have ever experienced.......

And it's not like there is another buying option that will provide you with a more cerebral opponent......

Malleus Dei · 08-13-2009, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rondell Tate

I swear there's a separate difficulty level that switches on in the World Series

Here, read this:

http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/playoff2002.htm

eborix · 08-13-2009, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

Here, read this:

http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/playoff2002.htm

Good article. I wish everyone would read it

Lucas718 · 08-13-2009, 05:33 PM

I used to be one of those who believed the game was rigged so that it was almost impossible to win in the playoffs. My teams would dominate in the regular season and were usually bounced in the first round of the playoffs by an inferior team. And then it happened...

Finally, my team pulled off the same thing that had happened to them so many times. We won 86 games, barely making the playoffs as a wildcard team, went on a roll and finally managed to win it all. I'm talking about playing out all my games since OOTP3 and not one single championship... until now.

Of course the next season we won 111 games again and got bounced in the first round of the playoffs, but at least I can say I finally got a championship under my belt. It was a long time coming.

Rondell Tate · 08-13-2009, 05:47 PM

MD:

Yeah, I get that. I also know that the game keeps trying to lead off a slow-footed catcher with below-average OBP. I'm hoping that one of these years, the AI is really, really sharp so you have to knock your brains out to beat it over a long season. It's not there yet.

I also know that every major computer game franchise from Civ to EA Sports codes cheats/shortcuts/breaks for the machine into the programming because computers still aren't as good as people at responding to the complicated, big-picture situation that games simulate ... so people who study the game are better than the AI.

Having seen such shortcuts in dozens of games over the years, and having played OOTP for far longer than my sig would indicate (I changed computers and forgot my login that dated back to OOTP 4 or 5, so I started over), I'm convinced that there's a switch in the software that says, in essence, "Hey, it's the playoffs, so time to change the odds in the computer's favor."

For the posters who keep treating those of us with suspicions as morons, yes, we get that sometimes the better team loses (I'm a Reds fan from way back, and there's no way we should have swept the A's in '87. None.).
But that doesn't prove the computer isn't "cheating" any more than the fact that the computer wins an inordinate number of upsets proves the computer is "cheating."

But experiences like reading Desperation in Denver and watching things like Bob Gibson fall apart series after series strongly suggests to me there's a problem, and it's motivating me to quit on the solo game.

I'm sorry for stating an honest opinion besides "I love this game," which is also true, but there you have it. I love the game enough to want to play it, a lot, but I feel cheated when I see the playoffs stacked against me.

Matt Arnold · 08-13-2009, 06:10 PM

If the playoffs are stacked against me, I say bring it on. I mean, if the playoffs were as easy as the regular season, I'm sure some people would win like 10 straight WS. Heck, the best teams often lose in the playoffs (too ovreconfident heading in).

And sure, it sucks that a real-life playoff ace like Gibson would suck in the playoffs (maybe they need to have some either hidden or not "clutch" ratings, so he won't fall apart). And sure, I hated it in my game my top starter, who I just signed to 10M a year for like 6 more years, suddenly decided this year to have an ERA of about 9 in the 2 games he pitched in the playoffs, despite having an ERA of about 1.50 the year before.

And who knows? Maybe there are some hidden modifiers in that make something harder. Maybe my human team without too many old overpaid guys won't do as well when push comes to shove than some other with those veterans. My kids might kill in the regular season, but fail in the clutch. Or maybe it's luck. All I know is I'll keep playing until I win it all, then try to repeat, then keep playing until I get bored with the team, and take the next best challenge - switch to another team, and try to beat the dynasty that I created.

ehencley · 08-13-2009, 06:39 PM

I believe that the "alleged" late season fall off in Human teams is due to rest issues. I truly believe that if you start a guy 155-162 games a year, they start to lose effectiveness in OOTP.

thamolas · 08-13-2009, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Left-handed Badger

To quote Burgess Meredith's bookworm character in that Twilight Zone episode (when he broke his glasses) "that's not fair, that's not fair at all"

That was a GREAT episode!

I have stopped playing OOTP until the next patch. And if the game still doesn't work, I will demand a refund. Dominions 3 has given me no problems and I'll keep playing that until then. Two guys made Dom 3 and guess what - it works AND it's a better game.

I guess I've been demoralized, too. Lol.

08-10-2009, 06:52 PM	#22
LordTC Major Leagues Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 476	No Matter how dominant In 1901 I assembled the following team and lost the world series 4-2. C Donahue (avg just under 300, OBP around 360 SLG over 375 ) 1B Anderson (.330 AVG .360 OBP .476 SLG) 2B Lajoie (.426 AVG .463 OBP .643 SLG) Future HoFer SS Wagner (.353 AVG .417 OBP .494 SLG) Future HoFer 3B Collins (.332 .375 OBP .495 SLG) Future HoFer LF Donlin (.340 AVG .409 OBP .475 SLG) CF Heidrick (.339 AVG .366 OBP .470 SLG) RF Flick (.333 AVG .399 OBP .500 SLG) Future HoFer Most of these players are among the best in the league on defense too. Pitching: SP1 Young (Future HoFer, best pitcher in year) SP2 Mathewson (Future HoFer, solid year) SP3 Hahn (Career fell apart but 1901 was a good year) SP4 Wadell (Future HoFer, good splits, great K's) CL Chesbro (Future HoFer) MR's basically irrelevant because of the 1901 settings. In the regular season I had four 30 win pitchers, and 15 shutouts. But then in the post season a huge collapse. I found that kind of hard to believe.

08-12-2009, 04:29 PM	#26
Neags23 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,577	You think you're demoralized? Try being a/an: Buffalo Bill (4 straight losing super bowls) Atlanta Brave (14 straight playoff appearances, 1 championship) Chicago Cub (12 playoff appearances (since 1908), 0 championships) Houston Astro (9 playoff appearances, 0 championships) Cleveland Indian (7 playoff appearances (since 1954), 0 championships) San Diego Padre (5 playoff appearances, 0 championships) Seattle Mariner (4 playoff appearances, 0 championships) Texas Ranger (3 playoff appearances, 0 championships) I could go on. The point is, it happens. You might say, but my guys are really good in the regular season and we still don't win! You don't think the players on the above teams were also really good? How do you think they made it to the playoffs? They had dominant players, too. The reason your 25 game winner sucks in the playoffs is probably because 20 of his wins were against non-playoff teams. The reason your .330 hitter went 1 for 18 in the playoffs is because he probably hit .380 against non-playoff teams and .450 against pitchers who belong in the mop up role on .400 winning % teams. It's tough to win in the playoffs because for one, the sheer odds are against you. Even if tossing a coin decided the winner, a team in the MLB has a 1 in 8 shot of winning the championship. And for two, you're playing the elite teams in the league. You don't get to beat up on the little guys in the playoffs. It's hard because it's supposed to be. __________________ GM Havana Sugar Kings, World Baseball League - 2000, 2003, 2005 WBL Champions Former GM Washburn Sea Wolves Dog Days Baseball - 1981 & 1986 Kennel Cup Champions

08-13-2009, 05:33 PM	#36
Lucas718 Major Leagues Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 399	I used to be one of those who believed the game was rigged so that it was almost impossible to win in the playoffs. My teams would dominate in the regular season and were usually bounced in the first round of the playoffs by an inferior team. And then it happened... Finally, my team pulled off the same thing that had happened to them so many times. We won 86 games, barely making the playoffs as a wildcard team, went on a roll and finally managed to win it all. I'm talking about playing out all my games since OOTP3 and not one single championship... until now. Of course the next season we won 111 games again and got bounced in the first round of the playoffs, but at least I can say I finally got a championship under my belt. It was a long time coming. Last edited by Lucas718; 08-13-2009 at 05:36 PM.

08-13-2009, 05:47 PM	#37
Rondell Tate Minors (Double A) Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 169	MD: Yeah, I get that. I also know that the game keeps trying to lead off a slow-footed catcher with below-average OBP. I'm hoping that one of these years, the AI is really, really sharp so you have to knock your brains out to beat it over a long season. It's not there yet. I also know that every major computer game franchise from Civ to EA Sports codes cheats/shortcuts/breaks for the machine into the programming because computers still aren't as good as people at responding to the complicated, big-picture situation that games simulate ... so people who study the game are better than the AI. Having seen such shortcuts in dozens of games over the years, and having played OOTP for far longer than my sig would indicate (I changed computers and forgot my login that dated back to OOTP 4 or 5, so I started over), I'm convinced that there's a switch in the software that says, in essence, "Hey, it's the playoffs, so time to change the odds in the computer's favor." For the posters who keep treating those of us with suspicions as morons, yes, we get that sometimes the better team loses (I'm a Reds fan from way back, and there's no way we should have swept the A's in '87. None.). But that doesn't prove the computer isn't "cheating" any more than the fact that the computer wins an inordinate number of upsets proves the computer is "cheating." But experiences like reading Desperation in Denver and watching things like Bob Gibson fall apart series after series strongly suggests to me there's a problem, and it's motivating me to quit on the solo game. I'm sorry for stating an honest opinion besides "I love this game," which is also true, but there you have it. I love the game enough to want to play it, a lot, but I feel cheated when I see the playoffs stacked against me. __________________

08-11-2009, 04:02 PM	#23
jg2977 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 23,741	I have a league where there are 20 teams, and #1 through #16 make the playoffs. I have best-of-nine series, and the team with the better record gets every single game at home. Sometimes a #16 with 70 wins beats a #1 with 105 wins. It doesn't happen often, but enough to make you realize that sometimes it comes down to who gets the better breaks, and not who's the better team.

08-11-2009, 04:28 PM	#24
Jamee999 All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 771	Game 7 of the 1996 Series. I manage the Mariners

08-12-2009, 01:30 PM	#25
ehencley Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 71	Atlanta Braves

08-12-2009, 05:24 PM	#28
Articula Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 39	One thing I've noticed upon reading the boards is once people get to the top it seems really easy to maintain your status at the top. Do users find it to easy to stay at the top?

08-13-2009, 08:44 AM	#30
jasonn29tn14 Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 320	I just won the WS in the second year of my fictional league. Had a very talented team go 77-85 the year before due to an incredible number of injuries. My team is the odds on favorite to repeat this year. But if they don't I won't be blaming the game. It's just hard to win it all - a reflection of reality in MLB.

08-13-2009, 08:51 AM	#31
Green & Gold Heart Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 5,242	My last OOTP 9 league I was the Milwaukee Brewers. My goal was to get a championship for Ryan Braun. Kept him on the team his whole career (til about the early 2020's or something). We had a stretch of 15 years in a row making the playoffs, but didn't win the WS for the first 13 years! Lots of close calls too. Then Braun retired, and we won back-to-back titles. Them's the breaks.

08-13-2009, 06:10 PM	#38
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 15,712	If the playoffs are stacked against me, I say bring it on. I mean, if the playoffs were as easy as the regular season, I'm sure some people would win like 10 straight WS. Heck, the best teams often lose in the playoffs (too ovreconfident heading in). And sure, it sucks that a real-life playoff ace like Gibson would suck in the playoffs (maybe they need to have some either hidden or not "clutch" ratings, so he won't fall apart). And sure, I hated it in my game my top starter, who I just signed to 10M a year for like 6 more years, suddenly decided this year to have an ERA of about 9 in the 2 games he pitched in the playoffs, despite having an ERA of about 1.50 the year before. And who knows? Maybe there are some hidden modifiers in that make something harder. Maybe my human team without too many old overpaid guys won't do as well when push comes to shove than some other with those veterans. My kids might kill in the regular season, but fail in the clutch. Or maybe it's luck. All I know is I'll keep playing until I win it all, then try to repeat, then keep playing until I get bored with the team, and take the next best challenge - switch to another team, and try to beat the dynasty that I created.

08-13-2009, 06:39 PM	#39
ehencley Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 71	I believe that the "alleged" late season fall off in Human teams is due to rest issues. I truly believe that if you start a guy 155-162 games a year, they start to lose effectiveness in OOTP.