OOTP 11 Replays Better than Diamond Mind?

[PhillieFever]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

First, no one ever agrees with me or if they do they keep quiet so they aren't brutally ganged up on as I am.

I realize the settings mean a lot and I will check yours out in the A.M. when I get up. Perhaps I can work with you to get things sorted. The problem I have is that so many people have posted so many settings I have never been able to figure out which are best. Since you play single seasons I would like to see what you do. I don't get on-line very often anymore, not sure why, guess I'm bored with the net right now, but when I do I'll let you know of any problems I am having with it, if any.

I'd be more than happy to work with you in order for you to enjoy the game more.If you have any questions about the settings I've provided or anything else related to historicals feel free to fire away. I did neglect to mention One thing as far as settings go.When you initally start the league, disable l/r splits and then at the adjust/weaken area for batters and pitchers use 300/250 for batters and 50/30 for pitches

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

However, if the game is not good at single season replays why do they promos for the game keep on talking about "better single season results"? Read the promo for OOTP 11, particularly this part..

This is why I start in on you whenever you bring this up.

Your opinion is that a replay consists on stats that are real close to what they were. My opinion is that seasons are going to be completely different each time you run them.

Check out Albert Pujols over his career. Do you think his talent changes every year or do you think there are some variables that influence his stat line? Check out Ichiro who has been one of the most conistent players in baseball. His stats always change quite a bit from year to year. He hit .372 one year followed by .303 you'd be having a fit about OOTP having the league leader drop 70 points off his average despite the fact that his talent probably stayed the same IRL.

OOTP gives the guys the ratings close to what they should be and they let the game do the rest. The only way to get accurate replay stats are to use an engine that is f'ed up.

Strat-o-matic is good at replay stats. Do you know what their stat builder consists of? 50 percent hitting/50 percent pitching. Defense is hardly even a factor. They have a horseshoe for clutch hitting(basically they give a horseshoe for players that had more RBI's) and ball park configurations are hardly used either. It is a dummed down version of what baseball is so it can give the accurate stats some people crave. Strat-O-Matic consists of 1 maybe 2 dice rolls while OOTP probably consists of upwards to 9-10 dice rolls.

Truth be told I'm not even sure what you are looking for. You say you dont mind that the stats are a little bit off(which is the nature of baseball) but on the other hand if they are too far off you hate that as well. Basically I think you want a stat machine with an error rate of +/- 5 percent.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Your opinion is that a replay consists on stats that are real close to what they were. My opinion is that seasons are going to be completely different each time you run them.

I know seasons will be different but not to the point someone like Camilo Pascual in 1969 is an all-star.

Even if the exact same real life players on the exact same teams were to step out on the field for a 2nd game on the exact same day the results would not be the same as the first.

I don't think some people here really understand what me and a few others have been saying about this or they are reading what I've been sayiong and just ignoring it.

There is a point when "different" results gets absurd, like the '69 Expos winning the world series while the Cards and Mets finish at the bottom of the division, and yes I know the Mets are a hard team to duplicate in a game so that doesn't have to be mentioned again. The Expos were consistantly in the top 3 teams in that division.

With all the adjusting and sims I did the Phillies of '69 never finished worse than 3rd and they were about as bad as the Expos and Padres that year.

The Dodgers and Astros dominated the West in most of the sims while the Braves were a steady 4th or 5th but I wasn't overly concerned about that division since it was pretty believable that any of the teams except SD could win that division.

In the A.L. the White Sox were the winners in half the sims. The Twins never did better than 3rd. The A's took the division the 2nd most times which is believable.

In the AL East it was either Baltimore or NY that won the division with Baltimore winning all but 3 times in 20 sims.

One of the problems is that the AI doesn't trade the players that were actually traded nor does the game limit playing time to players who played 50% - 75% of the season so they end off playing a lot more than they really did and this can skew things quite a bit.

Anyway all this discussion being thrown at me about this is pointless. I have discussed this 1000 times in the past and it is just my opinion based on how I play the game. Everyone has different expectations and some don't have any. Some can separate themselves from reality completely and some of us can't.

I am not as picky about "exact" numbers as some think and I'm sorry if what I have been saying has not been understood but I don't know of any other way to explain it. So just forget I said anything.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

I am not as picky about "exact" numbers as some think and I'm sorry if what I have been saying has not been understood but I don't know of any other way to explain it. So just forget I said anything.

I was always under the impression you were more upset about player performance.

Yes the team situation is a bit crazy. The fielding import function isnt very strong and I believe that is a big focus of OOTP 11.

[pstrickert]

In 2004, Ichiro hit .372 (262 H, 704 AB). Put differently, he averaged about 44 hits (and 117 ABs) each month. If in OOTP (or another text sim), Ichiro averages about 47 hits per month, his BA will be .398. If he averages about 41 hits per month, his BA will be .347. There is, in fact, a good possibility that -- by random chance -- Ichiro will hit .398 or .347. In other words, it doesn't take much variance to produce a BA 25 points higher or lower than IRL. If a text sim does not produce this kind of variance with hitters, it probably is fudging the numbers.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

The fielding import function isnt very strong and I believe that is a big focus of OOTP 11.

I'm anxious to see what people say about 11 and the fielding changes once they get the game.

For the first time I am waiting until after the release and after the patches before deciding on whether or not to buy. I want to see what is said on the boards.

[Jah]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

First, no one ever agrees with me or if they do they keep quiet so they aren't brutally ganged up on as I am.

I realize the settings mean a lot and I will check yours out in the A.M. when I get up. Perhaps I can work with you to get things sorted. The problem I have is that so many people have posted so many settings I have never been able to figure out which are best. Since you play single seasons I would like to see what you do. I don't get on-line very often anymore, not sure why, guess I'm bored with the net right now, but when I do I'll let you know of any problems I am having with it, if any.

Styx - First of all, I remember this same discussion several months ago, and I wholeheartedly agreed with you then...and do now! I'm not going to get into all the reasons again, either, but I understand where you're coming from. I read Markus' comment about DMB, plus the "single-season" line in promoting the next version...but I've long since moved on to Action for my historical replays, and it more than meets my needs. Maybe OOTP will get there in the next version, or is there now, or whatever...but it doesn't work well for the way I want to play...and it's always been a hassle trying different settings, etc. With my limited free time, I just don't have the time to fool with it all anymore. At least with Action, you're pretty much ready to go right out of the box.

Seems like the counter-argument always used to be "the game isn't meant for single-season replays"...yet now some are saying it is good...and others have redefined the definition of single-season replays and what they consider "appropriate" historical results!

Anyhow, I still use OOTP for fictional, but my other game is the way to go for historical...for me at least. And that's the bottom line in my book!

See ya!

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by Jah

Styx - First of all, I remember this same discussion several months ago, and I wholeheartedly agreed with you then...and do now! I'm not going to get into all the reasons again, either, but I understand where you're coming from. I read Markus' comment about DMB, plus the "single-season" line in promoting the next version...but I've long since moved on to Action for my historical replays, and it more than meets my needs. Maybe OOTP will get there in the next version, or is there now, or whatever...but it doesn't work well for the way I want to play...and it's always been a hassle trying different settings, etc. With my limited free time, I just don't have the time to fool with it all anymore. At least with Action, you're pretty much ready to go right out of the box.

Seems like the counter-argument always used to be "the game isn't meant for single-season replays"...yet now some are saying it is good...and others have redefined the definition of single-season replays and what they consider "appropriate" historical results!

Anyhow, I still use OOTP for fictional, but my other game is the way to go for historical...for me at least. And that's the bottom line in my book!

See ya!

Well thanks for the response. Most of the time I feel like I'm imagining things since all the responses I get are from those who disagree. I feel like I'm a salmon and everyone else is the river.

Nice to hear from someone else who has similar issues.

[Siv]

Styx I agree with you totally on how you play. I actually play the exact same way and play out every game. I purchased Action PC after a discussion with you in a previous thread and am totally happy with the results. I love replaying the 1983 season with the names and stadiums and feel of that year. I; like you don't know why I love that season, but whatever it is; it is my enjoyment I am looking for. The Phillies and Orioles in the series, Ripken playing like he did and my favorite player of all time Jose' Cruz.

I still love OOTP and use it for fictional replays and a different immersive experience then the historical replay of Action PC. I will test OOTP 11 for single season historical accuracy and totally concur with Styx that I don't need exact numbers. I want it to be close and when it is close I am happy. I want individual player numbers to be close and that is the most important thing for me.

Anyway we need to enjoy this game for what it is and don't stereotype people and suggest your way is the only way to enjoy this game.

Keep your eyes open and always lookup when you hear "Heads Up"!

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by Siv

Styx I agree with you totally on how you play. I actually play the exact same way and play out every game. I purchased Action PC after a discussion with you in a previous thread and am totally happy with the results. I love replaying the 1983 season with the names and stadiums and feel of that year. I; like you don't know why I love that season, but whatever it is; it is my enjoyment I am looking for. The Phillies and Orioles in the series, Ripken playing like he did and my favorite player of all time Jose' Cruz.

I still love OOTP and use it for fictional replays and a different immersive experience then the historical replay of Action PC. I will test OOTP 11 for single season historical accuracy and totally concur with Styx that I don't need exact numbers. I want it to be close and when it is close I am happy. I want individual player numbers to be close and that is the most important thing for me.

Anyway we need to enjoy this game for what it is and don't stereotype people and suggest your way is the only way to enjoy this game.

Keep your eyes open and always lookup when you hear "Heads Up"!

Well, that's 3 salmon now. You're so right in the comment you made that I put into bold.

[ootpFox07]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

Well, that's 3 salmon now. You're so right in the comment you made that I put into bold.

I'm in the purely fictional sim bucket. I'm with endgame in the fact that I like going back and replaying single years to see if OOTP results are the same as real life based on the player ratings and all the little things thrown in. That said, I certainly don't see any benefit in putting down anyone else's way they enjoy the game. Everyone should play it how they like. If anything, I see it as a way to keep challenging the game to be better. If a statement is made that OOTP is better than another in a certain regard, it has to be able to be backed up and stand up to challenge by those most interested in that feature if it doesn't meet expectations.

It's great in my eyes that OOTP is flexible enough that it can bring together such different type of players under one game (and one forum).

[BaseballMan]

I understand wanting stats to be close. Yet we all know it would be almost impossible to get every single player close. When i do a career replay i dont expect every player to be close. Most yes but all no. In a career league with recalc on ive seen Bob Gibson have a 1.68 era in 1968 and Sandy Koufax go 25-7 with a 1.74 era in 1965 and in the same league Willie Mays hits 447 hr while Barry Bonds hits 850. Should i be upset that Willie didnt hit 600+ hr? I guess if i played with injuries off and no trades. But wheres the fun in that? I know that 9 times out of 10 Willie will most likely hit 600 hr. I know the game has given him that ability but theres always that slight chance that in this sim something may cause him not to do it.

Some want the stats to be close. Thats not want i look. I want the player to have the ability to perform has he did in real life. Most will but a few may not.
I dont want to look at the leader board and just see the only difference is that the top 5 switched places. But at the same time I dont expect a player who hit 50 hr in one season to fall to 13 or a 13 to hit 50 unless there was a major injury and virtual steroids were involved.

I cant say how accurate those other games are because single season replays no longer interest me. But maybe somebody that has all games could tests each season and see how close each game comes to the stats for each player in the major statistical category's. Of course that might take some time and effort.

[jbergey22]

I'd like to know who in this thread was putting down the way someone played since that is the hot topic?

I think the basis of the conversation is that certain people want something that OOTP wont be able to recreate since its a baseball sim not a stat sim.

If you want a stat sim you can easily take 2 dice and a 20 sided die and recreate season stats. It doesnt take a genius to program that. I believe there was a free one I found awhile ago but I cant remember the name.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by BaseballMan

I cant say how accurate those other games are because single season replays no longer interest me. But maybe somebody that has all games could tests each season and see how close each game comes to the stats for each player in the major statistical category's. Of course that might take some time and effort.

They are very accurate. Them games are just dice rolls. If you roll the dice 600 times the odds are it will come very close to what odds would say it would come out as.

[Killing Time]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

Well, that's 3 salmon now.

Four salmon.

[robc]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

They are very accurate. Them games are just dice rolls. If you roll the dice 600 times the odds are it will come very close to what odds would say it would come out as.

That's not entirely true. If a batter hit .333 in 600 AB (200 hits), and you used random numbers to simulate 600 AB, they are only 68% likely to be in the range of 188 hits to 212 hits (.313 to .353). They are 95% likely to be between 177 to 223 hits (.295 to .372).

There is a large variance in the outcome just due to using random numbers. OOTP uses random numbers or rolling dice too to generate the results.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by robc

That's not entirely true. If a batter hit .333 in 600 AB (200 hits), and you used random numbers to simulate 600 AB, they are only 68% likely to be in the range of 188 hits to 212 hits (.313 to .353). They are 95% likely to be between 177 to 223 hits (.295 to .372).

There is a large variance in the outcome just due to using random numbers. OOTP uses random numbers or rolling dice too to generate the results.

As far as your first paragraph we may have a different definition of what "very close" is. That was some quick figuring though and I wish I knew how to figure out standard deviation. I believe this is what people have a hard time grasping. Even flipping a coin 600 times will have a range of error. I am guessing you could give me that in a matter of seconds also

Your second point is basically what I have been saying. I used an example earlier about how Stratomatic is 1 or 2 dice rolls while OOTP is probably upwards of 9-10 dice rolls.

[robc]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

As far as your first paragraph we may have a different definition of what "very close" is. That was some quick figuring though and I wish I knew how to figure out standard deviation. I believe this is what people have a hard time grasping. Even flipping a coin 600 times will have a range of error. I am guessing you could give me that in a matter of seconds also

Your second point is basically what I have been saying. I used an example earlier about how Stratomatic is 1 or 2 dice rolls while OOTP is probably upwards of 9-10 dice rolls.

Yes, I guess 'very close' is pretty subjective . Here is a quick example of how to compute standard deviation for the above numbers.

square root ( (number of attempts) x (probability of event) x (1 - probability of event))
1. number of attempts (at bats) = 600
2. probability of event (a hit) = hits / AB = 200 / 600 = .333
3. (number of attempts) x (probability of event) x (1 - probability of event)
= (600) x (.333) x (1 - .333)
= 133
4. square root = 11.5 = 12 (rounded up)

5. So, there is a standard deviation of 12 hits from the average. This puts the range of hits for 1 standard deviation at 200 - 12 and 200 + 12
= 188 to 212
6. Compute batting averages for these number of hits =
188 / 600 = .313
212 / 600 = .353
7. So, 68% of the time the number of hits should be within 1 standard deviation (between .313 and .353).
95% of the time the number of hits should be within 2 standard deviations (176 and 224 hits) for averages of .293 to .373.

This could be used for all sorts of stats if you compute the rate of occurance in real life. I hope this helps or that somebody finds it interesting. I had forgotten how to do it until I looked it up based on a post on the OOTP boards.

[jbergey22]

Awesome, much appreciated robc.

[68pirate]

I guess I'm one of the salmon, too. I understand standard deviation. I'm not gonna complain if a .280 hitter hits .260, as long as he is rated to hit .280. When I played card and dice games I had deviation, but accepted it because I could look at the player card and know the result numbers were acceptable, even if my dice rolls were not.
The thing I find difficult to grasp with OOTP is this. When I import a player, I can look at his real-life stats. I would then expect to see those stats translate into appropriate ratings. However, this is not always the case, especially with pitchers. For example:
1982 Rod Scurry
(real life/ootp expected results in the editor)
OAVG .212/.250 ERA 1.74/4.15

1980 Eddie Solomon
OAVG .251/.281 ERA 2.69/4.54

I realize that ERA can be a misleading stat but included it here anyways because of the significant gap. I would think that the OAVG numbers should be closer however. These are one-year import numbers without usage reductions so therefore the "expected results" should mirror the real-life stat line, in my opinion. Even if I manually input the real life stats in the editor I still get ratings which won't replicate the real-life stats. I don't get it. At least with a hitter, changing the stats in the editor does produce the correct ratings to replicate that. Hopefully the improvements in OOTP11 will address this.