All the "this doesn't work" and "that doesn't work" threads

[fredbeene]

it would be easier to test if there was more detailed output. which leads to deeper analysis.
it would be easier to test if HTML reporting would be replaced

[David Watts]

Just fast simmed 1921, League I had only played a few games in, Ruth only had 1 home run, I deleted Ruth and simmed the rest of the season. There were 937 home runs hit in real life 1921. In a Ruthless OOTPland there were 892 home runs. The real Yankees hit 134 home runs. OOTP Yankees hit 63.

[sprague]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Just fast simmed 1921, League I had only played a few games in, Ruth only had 1 home run, I deleted Ruth and simmed the rest of the season. There were 937 home runs hit in real life 1921. In a Ruthless OOTPland there were 892 home runs. The real Yankees hit 134 home runs. OOTP Yankees hit 63.

The problem here is that you likely ran the modifiers while ruth was still in the game. Thus the hr modifier expected him hence the results.
Try starting 1921 again and delete ruth before you run the modifiers.
You might see a wild hr champion for the year

[Garlon]

It is not a problem. It is working as designed. Rain King did the test one way and got results that were expected with multiple copies of Ruth all performing like Ruth should. The David Watts also did a different test with Ruth not okaying and also got results that were expected. The game allows you to have it either way and yes you could even remove Ruth before calculating the modifiers and his HR will basically get spread across 16 teams, which is like 3 or 4 more HR per team, they are not all going to go to just one player in the league though.

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by turtle4499

How does one become a beta tester? I have literally never seen anything on this before.

They make a post, you apply. You do things in mods and stand out, then Lukas might personally invite you in a DM. But they do make posts around every December if they need more testers.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by sprague

The problem here is that you likely ran the modifiers while ruth was still in the game. Thus the hr modifier expected him hence the results.
Try starting 1921 again and delete ruth before you run the modifiers.
You might see a wild hr champion for the year

Ah, never thought of that.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by The Game

How many testers do you have currently? Sign me up for 26. I will not buy 25 til all the bugs and kinks are worked out. I have bought 6 versions since 12 either in presale or release day. The rest I have waited, usually until the ASG sale. the last 3 versions have been buggy until then.

Originally Posted by The Game

How many testers do you have currently? Sign me up for 26. I will not buy 25 til all the bugs and kinks are worked out. I have bought 6 versions since 12 either in presale or release day. The rest I have waited, usually until the ASG sale. the last 3 versions have been buggy until then.

Similar, but regrettably less economic, experience here. I bought v25, have not played it because I can’t bring myself to invest time in such a fundamentally compromised experience. The problems that are still being reported by a disconcerting number of users are hardly peripheral to the product OOTP sells (or, the product they market). Player development? Displayed, if not actual, ratings? Immersion-killing inscrutable and infinity loop transactions? These are pretty critical problems for a game of its purported kind.

Which leads back to the play tester discussion. How did so many of this issues. (Granted, some have become more apparent due to unintended knock-on effects from patches. At the same time, however, patches have addressed some problems present at initial release; the net effect at a minimum means the original release’s flaws are not overstated by discussing the current version.). Was a systematic and efficiently-distributed methodology of testing followed, with individual testers serving particular duties as part of an organic team effort? Or were problems identified and communicated by testers to an insufficiently responsive developer group? If the latter, perhaps the testers should have showed the same persistence as many currently exhibit on this forum in their Little Dutch Boy routines, challenging seemingly every posted unfavorable experience like plugging each new hole in the dam (seriously, check the game credits for play testers and see how many of those names show up on this forum exclusively to minimize or deny the expressed criticisms of users). The sense of ownership, illusion of proximity to the sanctum sanctorum, the quixotic desire for a sense of personal intimacy with the developers: whatever the means, to some observers it seems the largest achievement of the play testing is a type of regulatory capture by the company.

That is not claimed to be a proven and definitive statement of fact, but neither is it idle speculation; it is rather one user’s alienating yet honest sentiments. Setting aside the subjective, what IS objectively certain is that the product itself, both in initial and current iterations, is indefensibly substandard.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Matt says it's moving that way. But we have a group here claiming it works just fine as is.

Originally Posted by Sweed

At the end of the day the game engine and outcomes are based on LT, LTM, and ratings. This is by design and works quite well. Matt has said they are trying to rely less on LTM's and I think that is as close as you are ever going to get to what you want, unless they rewrite a large chunk of the game. I don't see it, but I'm not a coder for OOTP Dev.

No he has said they are toning down the affect. He has never said they are being removed. But then we went over this before in another thread. The toning down is the "as close as you're going to get" part of the bolded line above.

It is working fine as is, that doesn't mean it's perfect in all situations. That statement goes for almost anything in the game, ie none of it is perfect. It's why there are patches and improvements from version to version. Kind of like all of the work done on historical this year tying in with the new ratings scale. Kind of makes me think it is the start of what Matt is telling you the plan is.

Originally Posted by Brad K

Matt says it's moving that way. But we have a group here claiming it works just fine as is.

Originally Posted by Brad K

Read it again. I didn't say Matt was lying to me. I said I was TOLD Matt was lying to me. I believe what he posted. I do not believe what you posted.

So in the end you have a developer saying this is being worked on. You believe the developer, but you continue on in your posts as if nothing is being done? Most users would simply say "thank you Matt, I can't wait to see what progress is made for v26" and move on.

There are a lot of users making requests, but never got any reply from a developer, that would be very happy with that outcome. If you believe Matt why isn't that good enough?

[Scoman]

Originally Posted by Garlon

This is Mariano Rivera from a recent 1871-2023 game with OOTP25. This is not a replay league with real lineups and transactions. Players could end up on any team.


Mariano Rivera

Real vs OOTP


ERA: 2.21 vs 2.19

Games: 1115 vs 1104

WHIP: 1.00 vs 0.97

HR per 9 innings: 0.497 vs 0.559

BB per 9 innings: 2.005 vs 2.017

K per 9 innings: 8.224 vs 8.276

K:BB ratio: 4.101 vs 4.102

HBP per 500 BF: 4.507 vs 4.018

Balks: 3 vs 2

FIP: 2.76 vs 2.89

Opponent BABIP: .265 vs .255

Opponent BA: .211 vs .204

Opponent OPS: .555 vs .564

Save %: 89.07% vs 90.78%

Can you show a list of your all time career HR leaders?

From my extensive testing and I mean hundreds of hrs, I have found that while all Pitchers long term stats look good,and hitters career percentages look good, I have found a real problem with career HR totals for individual players to be on the low side.

Especially pre 1950,guys like Ruth,Ott, Gehrig,Foxx,all under perform on HR totals no matter what the setting.


So could you please post your alltime HR leaders ,Id really be curious to how they are. Thanks.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by sprague

The problem here is that you likely ran the modifiers while ruth was still in the game. Thus the hr modifier expected him hence the results.
Try starting 1921 again and delete ruth before you run the modifiers.
You might see a wild hr champion for the year

Since he removed Ruth it's his fault he did it at the wrong time.

However if the game removed Ruth via injury and the same time he did, the results would be the same as David got. So in that case, blame the game, right? Or is it still David's fault?

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Since he removed Ruth it's his fault he did it at the wrong time.

However if the game removed Ruth via injury and the same time he did, the results would be the same as David got. So in that case, blame the game, right? Or is it still David's fault?

If David doesn't want it to recalculate modifiers at that point he can just disable Autocalc. That is a very viable option for David depending on the results he is looking for.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Rain King

If David doesn't want it to recalculate modifiers at that point he can just disable Autocalc. That is a very viable option for David depending on the results he is looking for.

Thank you for answering the questions.

All problems are caused the user.

Got it.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Thank you for answering the questions.

All problems are caused the user.

Got it.

You have a real love for twisting words.

There are solutions for every scenario that I have seen you present. What is the need for there to be some kind of blame?

[Garlon]

Here are the top HR career from that saved game. Player Fatigue was set to High and injuries were off. OOTP is pretty good at optimizing who plays so during those earlier eras you will sometimes see guys like Foxx hit fewer than expected while at the same time a guy like Greenberg getting more than expected due to usage.

In real mlb history the 100th best single season for HR is 47 HR, while in this OOTP game the 100th best season was 46 HR.

[Mariner and Giants Fan]

Originally Posted by David Watts

How can you say that? I am committed to running the Tigers in 2035 and when I do so, I want things to be perfect. I don't want to be coming on here and saying the the OOTP play by play uses the word "the" too much, or there are too many singles hit right before a rain delays on Wednesdays.

You have those problems too

[turtle4499]

Originally Posted by twins_34

They make a post, you apply. You do things in mods and stand out, then Lukas might personally invite you in a DM. But they do make posts around every December if they need more testers.

So the answer is you cannot and this post is....?

[Scoman]

Originally Posted by Garlon

Here are the top HR career from that saved game. Player Fatigue was set to High and injuries were off. OOTP is pretty good at optimizing who plays so during those earlier eras you will sometimes see guys like Foxx hit fewer than expected while at the same time a guy like Greenberg getting more than expected due to usage.

In real mlb history the 100th best single season for HR is 47 HR, while in this OOTP game the 100th best season was 46 HR.

Is this with neutral ballpark factors?

[Garlon]

This is real stats with a neutral park factors file and 5yr recalc double weighted, retire according to history, batters 1100/550, pitchers 162/100, and player development disabled.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Rain King

You have a real love for twisting words.

There are solutions for every scenario that I have seen you present. What is the need for there to be some kind of blame?

Where's the twist? The same problem occurs when the game rather than David removes Ruth. What's the solution to that?

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Where's the twist? The same problem occurs when the game rather than David removes Ruth. What's the solution to that?

1. The removal of one player from the league is going to make very marginal differences in any season aside from 3 or 4 involving Babe Ruth so at best you are nitpicking an extreme case.

2. The game works just fine without using Autocalc (especially in the current version) so "David" should probably utilize that option if their main purpose is to avoid that very specific scenario (or for many other scenarios that result in way different talent in a given season than existed in real life).