Scouting Discrepancy on different screens

[kidd_05_u2]

PSU, what you are saying is false, unless I'm not understanding you correctly.

Grab any bad player, edit his ratings to the max, advance a day, and see if his overall has changed. It won't have changed.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by kidd_05_u2

PSU, what you are saying is false, unless I'm not understanding you correctly.

Grab any bad player, edit his ratings to the max, advance a day, and see if his overall has changed. It won't have changed.

How else can you explain the change in overall ratings when you change a players' position on the fly? Also, why are there so many discrepancies such as the one illustrated by the OP in this very thread?

I could be wrong, but there is definitely (and always has been) some very funny stuff going on where overall & overall potential ratings are concerned.... with the profile page vs the scouting page.

This is my theory I guess...but if I am wrong, then please, please after all of these years....will someone explain the wonkiness in all of this?

[md40022]

Just using a player's overall stars rating to keep this simple, I've seen TONS of discrepency where the home page of a player profile shows a certain number of stars and the scouting tab that you click on from that very same player profile shows a completely different number of stars.

Let's say the player profile page gives the play 5 stars overall, and the most recent scouting report under the scouting tab gives the guy 3.5 stars. I've seen that type of thing so often that I couldn't even put a number on it. And if the scouting report is 2 months old, the assumption that I've always made is the player has gotten better since that scouting report. And to back that theory up I have done a manual "request scouting report" in some of those scenarios just to see where the improvements came, and sure enough it comes back as now the guy is a 5 star guy....... So PSU's theory is the same theory I've been operating under for years.

If this is not normal than there is a serious glitch here for years and I'd consider that unbelievable given the thoroughness in which some people on this forum know the game..... such an obvious "glitch" would have been caught

[md40022]

Now that I'm really kicking this around in my head, I'm starting to wonder if these ratings discrepancies are strictly when a guy is scouted as a SS and I've moved his position to 2B since then or something along those lines..... Because I do primarily see this with prospects as I'm combing through the farm system to see whose been progressing vs. whose been declining....and prospects tend to get their position changed a bit.

Hmmm.

Going to keep an eye on this moving forward.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by md40022

Just using a player's overall stars rating to keep this simple, I've seen TONS of discrepency where the home page of a player profile shows a certain number of stars and the scouting tab that you click on from that very same player profile shows a completely different number of stars.

Let's say the player profile page gives the play 5 stars overall, and the most recent scouting report under the scouting tab gives the guy 3.5 stars. I've seen that type of thing so often that I couldn't even put a number on it. And if the scouting report is 2 months old, the assumption that I've always made is the player has gotten better since that scouting report. And to back that theory up I have done a manual "request scouting report" in some of those scenarios just to see where the improvements came, and sure enough it comes back as now the guy is a 5 star guy....... So PSU's theory is the same theory I've been operating under for years.

If this is not normal than there is a serious glitch here for years and I'd consider that unbelievable given the thoroughness in which some people on this forum know the game..... such an obvious "glitch" would have been caught

Sometimes it can be related to position. Say the player in question is listed as a SP but was last scouted as a RP. The scouting area will have the player listed as a RP along with the date and the ratings from that particular scouting report. (whenever that may have been). So in a case like this it's a LITTLE more understandable, although I still don't like it because I feel you should need to scout the player as a SP in order to update the report....rather than it automatically updating on the player profile page.

In other cases, (such as the one mentioned by the OP) it's just complete wonkiness where the positions are in fact the same, but the overall and overall potentials are different. This is likely because again, the scouting area is a snapshot in time, and somehow the player profile has been updated to real-time.

It's my feeling the reason it works this way is to keep the AI competitive. This is something I can understand and fully get behind. What I think should be done however to compensate (maybe...any other suggestions are welcome) I to maybe make the player profile ratings identical to the scouting ones (again they are a snapshot in time) even if under the hood, the AI is operating on a different level, where it knows what the ratings are or approximately are. This way the human would have the need to re-scout even if the AI doesn't. It would be nice if it all worked in a dynamic manner (where the AI had to actually scout players also...I know they do on some level because each team has a scout...but I think that may be the only filter/hurdle for the AI) and had to send scouts on assignments also...but I really don't think that's happening.

Part of the issue also then becomes the search/filter system. The game is setup to search for overall & potential overall ratings based on the profile score...not the scouted one. So basically it seems the profile page ratings are really what drives the engine and not so much the scouted ones. What I am asking to do is just create a bit more fog of war for the human player. I know you can just turn them off all together, but I am trying to find a way to keep them while not giving away too much information to the human user. I hope what I am trying to convey here makes sense.

Anyway....I could be completely wrong in how all of this works, but it seems to make some sense to me just based on years and years of observation.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by Carbrenash

Here are the two tabs. The game date is 6/14/1965

Your screen shot where it says "current role" says Strictly Bullpen. And his got excellent potential there


Your 2nd screen shot where he has very little potential shows him as SP.



If he's currently being used as an RP (strictly bullpen) he has far more potential in that role than he does in the SP role that he was scouted as.....


Now that I am really focusing on the scenarios that I've seen similar issues, I think there is a chance it is always when there is a position change from the last time a scouting report was issued..... My guess is your guy in question, given his "strictly bullpen" current role, is probably set as an RP - hence the bigger potential.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by md40022

Now that I'm really kicking this around in my head, I'm starting to wonder if these ratings discrepancies are strictly when a guy is scouted as a SS and I've moved his position to 2B since then or something along those lines..... Because I do primarily see this with prospects as I'm combing through the farm system to see whose been progressing vs. whose been declining....and prospects tend to get their position changed a bit.

Hmmm.

Going to keep an eye on this moving forward.

YES, This is what I am trying to explain. The discrepencies are very often related to position. I still don't feel the human should be getting automatic updates on the overall & potential overall ratings just because they switch a player to another position...but you do...and that is FACT.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Sometimes it can be related to position. Say the player in question is listed as a SP but was last scouted as a RP. The scouting area will have the player listed as a RP along with the date and the ratings from that particular scouting report. (whenever that may have been). So in a case like this it's a LITTLE more understandable, although I still don't like it because I feel you should need to scout the player as a SP in order to update the report....rather than it automatically updating on the player profile page.

In other cases, (such as the one mentioned by the OP) it's just complete wonkiness where the positions are in fact the same, but the overall and overall potentials are different. This is likely because again, the scouting area is a snapshot in time, and somehow the player profile has been updated to real-time.

It's my feeling the reason it works this way is to keep the AI competitive. This is something I can understand and fully get behind. What I think should be done however to compensate (maybe...any other suggestions are welcome) I to maybe make the player profile ratings identical to the scouting ones (again they are a snapshot in time) even if under the hood, the AI is operating on a different level, where it knows what the ratings are or approximately are. This way the human would have the need to re-scout even if the AI doesn't. It would be nice if it all worked in a dynamic manner (where the AI had to actually scout players also...I know they do on some level because each team has a scout...but I think that may be the only filter/hurdle for the AI) and had to send scouts on assignments also...but I really don't think that's happening.

Part of the issue also then becomes the search/filter system. The game is setup to search for overall & potential overall ratings based on the profile score...not the scouted one. So basically it seems the profile page ratings are really what drives the engine and not so much the scouted ones. What I am asking to do is just create a bit more fog of war for the human player. I know you can just turn them off all together, but I am trying to find a way to keep them while not giving away too much information to the human user. I hope what I am trying to convey here makes sense.

Anyway....I could be completely wrong in how all of this works, but it seems to make some sense to me just based on years and years of observation.

I just revisited the OPs screen shots that he provided a few responses down from the OP. The scouting reports are clearly as an SP, we see that. But given that his current role says "strictly bullpen" that has me pretty certain that he's currently set as an RP at the moment that the screen shot was taken.

I get your point though. Just telling a starting pitcher hey, we are moving you to the bullpen should not magically yield a brand new scouting report instantly. IRL that would be an experimental thing that would take a while to give results. Maybe you could have a good feel for the move just based on a guy having nasty stuff, but you still wouldn't get a magically updated scouting report the very moment you said, "we're moving you to relief."

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by md40022

I just revisited the OPs screen shots that he provided a few responses down from the OP. The scouting reports are clearly as an SP, we see that. But given that his current role says "strictly bullpen" that has me pretty certain that he's currently set as an RP at the moment that the screen shot was taken.

This is not necessarily true...the fact it says "strictly bullpen" means the AI feels this player is really only suited for a bullpen role....what position he ACTUALLY is playing is a different story.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by md40022

I get your point though. Just telling a starting pitcher hey, we are moving you to the bullpen should not magically yield a brand new scouting report instantly. IRL that would be an experimental thing that would take a while to give results. Maybe you could have a good feel for the move just based on a guy having nasty stuff, but you still wouldn't get a magically updated scouting report the very moment you said, "we're moving you to relief."

Right...or any other position for that matter.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is not necessarily true...the fact it says "strictly bullpen" means the AI feels this player is really only suited for a bullpen role....what position he ACTUALLY is is a different story.

And to your point, the current stuff, movement, control, etc. ratings are the exact same on the scouting report as they are on the player profile page.

Normally when you move a SP to RP his "stuff" related ratings instantly jump up. The fact that the OP's stuff related ratings are identical on the profile page and the scouting page would support the idea that he's still listed as a SP..... so something does feel off there.

When you called it wonkie a few posts earlier - that's probably the best way to describe it I guess haha

[MathBandit]

I mean, Overall and Potential ratings are hardly worth the pixels they're written on anyways, so I think it's fine to show what a player would be at another position.

None of us need a scouting report to know that if you moved Aaron Judge to SS, he wouldn't be nearly as valuable as he is in RF.

[kidd_05_u2]

Fan: Hey chief scout for the Rangers, how would Jacob deGrom rate as a reliever?

Scout: I have no clue! I would need to watch him pitch out of the bullpen first!

Yeah that makes sense.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by kidd_05_u2

Fan: Hey chief scout for the Rangers, how would Jacob deGrom rate as a reliever?

Scout: I have no clue! I would need to watch him pitch out of the bullpen first!

Yeah that makes sense.

Agreed. If anything I think in the modern game, OOTP is a bit too restrictive on position fluidity. Looking just at the Jays (the team I'm most familiar with) for an example, in a default 2023 game with scouting at 100%:

* Biggio is only partially trained at 1B, LF, RF
* Espinal is only partially trained at SS, has no LF/RF ability at all
* Kiermaier would be a 35-rated LF or RF (not particularly meaningful but also wildly inaccurate lol)
* Whit Merrifield is only partially trained at LF
* Springer is only partially trained at RF
* Varsho is only partially trained at LF

That's 6 guys on just one team who are significantly hampered in their ability to play positions, with no 2023 Spring Training to get them up to speed (and two of them are hampered in their *primary* 2023 position).

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by kidd_05_u2

Fan: Hey chief scout for the Rangers, how would Jacob deGrom rate as a reliever?

Scout: I have no clue! I would need to watch him pitch out of the bullpen first!

Yeah that makes sense.

Well, it does and it doesn't. The scouting grades are not usually wildly different, so yes, you might have a difference of 5 or 10 points usually on the 20-80 scale. 10 points is actually significant...5 not as much. But there needs to be a strategic element to scouting, and so if it takes a scout a few days longer to let you know, so be it.

Scouting is so dumbed down as it is. I mean, we really should have separate scouts for Major Leagues, Minor Leagues, International Leagues (although less now I guess) and Amateurs. We already have these as 4 desperate categories, so why not have some more scouts for immersion and strategy purposes? Why not be able to assign scouts to different geographical areas? I'm just brainstorming aloud.

For some reason scouting in OOTP has always gotten the "short shrift" compared to say a game like FM.

[kidd_05_u2]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Well, it does and it doesn't. The scouting grades are not usually wildly different, so yes, you might have a difference of 5 or 10 points usually on the 20-80 scale. 10 points is actually significant...5 not as much. But there needs to be a strategic element to scouting, and so if it takes a scout a few days longer to let you know, so be it.

Scouting is so dumbed down as it is. I mean, we really should have separate scouts for Major Leagues, Minor Leagues, International Leagues (although less now I guess) and Amateurs. We already have these as 4 desperate categories, so why not have some more scouts for immersion and strategy purposes? Why not be able to assign scouts to different geographical areas? I'm just brainstorming aloud.

For some reason scouting in OOTP has always gotten the "short shrift" compared to say a game like FM.

We talked about this before. Scouting in FM is the most unrealistic and gamey garbage it could possibly be.
A scout in FM literally can't ever be wrong when he scouts a player, and he gives you hyper-precise information on a lot of stuff that isn't even observable.

A scout in FM watches a defender play 15 minutes of a match and he suddenly can tell you, without the possibility of being wrong and very precisely on a 1-20 scale, how good the player is at kicking a corner (he never watched the player kick a corner), how aggresive he is, whether he is good at teamwork, whether he will be composed when presented with a 1v1 versus a keeper, etc...

[kidd_05_u2]

Honestly, thinking scouting in FM is better than scouting in OOTP is beyond ridiculous in my opinion, especially for someone who supposedly values realism.

OOTP has a great and customizable scouting system. What matters the most is if the scouting system reproduces the way a GM/managar gains information, and the degree of uncertainty around that information. OOTP is amazing at this, FM could not be any worse.

Do you really think having to be sending scouts to different regions would help with immersion? It is really marginal stuff.

[snepp]

Scouting in v8 had multiple scouts you had to constantly assign to tasks, it was a miserable waste of time.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by kidd_05_u2

We talked about this before. Scouting in FM is the most unrealistic and gamey garbage it could possibly be.
A scout in FM literally can't ever be wrong when he scouts a player, and he gives you hyper-precise information on a lot of stuff that isn't even observable.

A scout in FM watches a defender play 15 minutes of a match and he suddenly can tell you, without the possibility of being wrong and very precisely on a 1-20 scale, how good the player is at kicking a corner (he never watched the player kick a corner), how aggresive he is, whether he is good at teamwork, whether he will be composed when presented with a 1v1 versus a keeper, etc...

It's more about how you assign the scouts and so forth. In FM the scouts are only right about the ratings once they have them narrowed down to a single number on the 1-20 scale. They have to scout players' multiple times to do this. There is a fog of war though in that the scout will tell you a players attribute in any one category might be in the range of say 8-12 or so forth.

So scouting does take place over time, and you can't really know much about players without scouting them. In OOTP we have OSA...which is something that should be utilized for sure..but the scouting just needs to be a bit more in depth. I am not saying it should be exactly like FM, I am just saying it needs to be a bit more in depth. As it is, it is a bit simplistic and hollow. Same with development....development in OOTP is a bit too tied to luck. I am not saying luck shouldn't be a factor, but right now it just feels like it's the biggest factor.

I would love to see a big upgrade to scouting & development as well as finances. I am obviously one of the people who want a "Manager" experience out OOTP...not just a simulation experience. Those of you who argue against these things see to be less interested in the manager experience and more about the straight simulation.

[kidd_05_u2]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

So scouting does take place over time, and you can't really know much about players without scouting them. In OOTP we have OSA...which is something that should be utilized for sure..but the scouting just needs to be a bit more in depth. I am not saying it should be exactly like FM, I am just saying it needs to be a bit more in depth. As it is, it is a bit simplistic and hollow. Same with development....development in OOTP is a bit too tied to luck. I am not saying luck shouldn't be a factor, but right now it just feels like it's the biggest factor.

I would love to see a big upgrade to scouting & development as well as finances. I am obviously one of the people who want a "Manager" experience out OOTP...not just a simulation experience. Those of you who argue against these things see to be less interested in the manager experience and more about the straight simulation.

The scouting and player development systems could have more depth obviously, but I much rather have the OOTP style where you have realistic outcomes (volatile and unpredictable player development that on the aggregate makes sense) than the FM style where you get a lot of gamey stuff to do, but neither the processes nor the outcomes are realistic (you can develop almost every player to their full potential if you play on a big team, and that potential is fixed btw).

The reality is that player development in baseball is predominantly tied to factors outside of an organization's control, so what you say is too much luck is actually luck+other stuff that as a GM you should have no control over.