Interaction Of Settings With Auto-Calc

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Yes.

That is the entire purpose of Auto Calc.

What that doesn't mean is that "auto calc overrides ratings", nor does it mean "to have ratings affect the league output, it is necessary to use pre-calc". Your applying it to an extreme case does not invalidate it.

Auto Calc uses the ratings that currently exist in your league, runs simulations against your League Totals and adjust Modifiers to get the overall output of those League Totals. That's it. It isn't some big conspiracy. The ratings obviously have to "matter" for that to occur.

I know that you are purposefully misinterpreting all of this because you don't like it. I really wish you would give it a rest and stop trolling or that the mods would ban you for constantly misrepresenting this stuff.

You prefer not to use Auto Calc. Great, don't use Auto Calc.

Auto Calc has it uses for those that want certain results....and does exactly what it is intended to do.

You previously suggested I would change the subject rather than address your points. Here you say I'm purposely misrepresenting (AKA lying), trolling, and that you wish I would be banned.

I'm not interested in responding to someone who tries to degrade the poster rather than address the subject.

[Brad K]

Some people have stated I don't like auto-calc. Not true at all.

It has it's place, as was stated, for people who want specific results. I agree.

I'm trying to help people understand what it does. My ultimate goal is for OOTP to have no default setting and explain what the settings do. Perhaps something like the what is below.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

I'm trying to help people understand what it does.

No, you aren't. If you were, you would actually explain what it does and stop misrepresenting what it does.

My ultimate goal is for OOTP to have no default setting and explain what the settings do. Perhaps something like the what is below.

For one, why? Why do you need to dictate how the settings in the game are layed out?

Second, there are ways to go about discussing potential changes that don't involve trolling, hijacking, and generally being a detriment to the forums.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Rain King

No, you aren't. If you were, you would actually explain what it does and stop misrepresenting what it does.



For one, why? Why do you need to dictate how the settings in the game are layed out?

Second, there are ways to go about discussing potential changes that don't involve trolling, hijacking, and generally being a detriment to the forums.

Please read post 41 again. Thanks!!!

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Please read post 41 again. Thanks!!!

The part where you talk about not responding? Because you must not have been talking about me...considering you responded.

When you post misinformation, I'm going to set it straight. Maybe that is trolling the troll, but here we are.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Rain King

The part where you talk about not responding? Because you must not have been talking about me...considering you responded.

When you post misinformation, I'm going to set it straight. Maybe that is trolling the troll, but here we are.

Well, no insults in this one (I'm considering that you implying you are trolling equaled things out) so I'll respond.

Provide the proof that you're right. Anecdata and he said he said doesn't get it.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Well, no insults in this one (I'm considering that you implying you are trolling equaled things out) so I'll respond.

Provide the proof that you're right. Anecdata and he said he said doesn't get it.

Prove what?

The claims you are making don't make any sense.

How can ratings possibly not matter? All players have ratings. I can't remove the ratings from the game engine. That would crash the game.

I could do something like create a league, run autocalc, then change a bunch of ratings to show...what? There is nothing that can be shown to a troll to stop them from trolling. They just move the goalposts and continue trolling.

[robc]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Everyone agrees that auto-calc controls the game output. No dispute there. That idea and the idea ratings matter are mutually exclusive.

Then there's the statement made many times on the board by many people: There are only so many home runs to go around. That means auto-calc, not ratings, control output.

I have stated my views and provided proof. Those who say I am wrong have provided no proof.

If you are talking about total league numbers then yes it is the league environment (season used) that controls output and that gets massaged by auto calc . The ratings control how those totals get divided up between players. Changing the ratings donÂ’t affect league totals. If you agree those statements are true then you and I are in agreement with how it works.

[twins_34]

Brad, Rainking and Garlon are the people you should be listening too since they are the ones that help with a lot of the info and data that recalc uses. I think they know how it works way better than you think you do and when I come to ask about recalc, these are the first people I talk to because they know their crap when it comes to recalc. You are posting misinformation about recalc and honestly, listen to the people that have been doing this a long time. Stop with the false information.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by robc

If you are talking about total league numbers then yes it is the league environment (season used) that controls output and that gets massaged by auto calc . The ratings control how those totals get divided up between players. Changing the ratings donÂ’t affect league totals. If you agree those statements are true then you and I are in agreement with how it works.

I agree. That's not what my detractors are saying. They're in the area I described as mutually exclusive.

Adding that when three year recalc is used it has zero affect on the league totals. But since player's ratings compared to each other change, that increases the possibility of outliers. Three year has does not make league output better and damages the accuracy of player output. I documented the effect in post 30.

Given the net negative effect of three year and five year with auto-calc, the option should be grayed out and not available when auto-calc is selected.

[Rain King]

...and there we get to the crux.

Brad believes there is one all holy way of playing historical...and he is mad that the defaults may not be the ones he prefers.

Even though if you took 100 historical simulators on these boards and asked them what they are trying to accomplish with their saves you might get 90+ different answers, Brad says some of them should not have the options they want.

Brad, your "net negative" might be exactly what someone else wants. Stop trying to decide for everyone else how they should play the game.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by twins_34

Brad, Rainking and Garlon are the people you should be listening too since they are the ones that help with a lot of the info and data that recalc uses. I think they know how it works way better than you think you do and when I come to ask about recalc, these are the first people I talk to because they know their crap when it comes to recalc. You are posting misinformation about recalc and honestly, listen to the people that have been doing this a long time. Stop with the false information.

I've proved my points with data. Nobody has offered any evidence I'm wrong.

[Scoman]

Originally Posted by Brad K

I've proved my points with data. Nobody has offered any evidence I'm wrong.

Has anybody from the OOTP historical team offered any evidence that you are right?

[robc]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Adding that when three year recalc is used it has zero affect on the league totals. But since player's ratings compared to each other change, that increases the possibility of outliers.

I agree that when 3 year recalc is used it doesn't affect league totals. It shouldn't because that is controlled by the season being used to control league totals and the autocalc modifiers.

Originally Posted by Brad K

Three year has does not make league output better and damages the accuracy of player output. I documented the effect in post 30. Given the net negative effect of three year and five year with auto-calc, the option should be grayed out and not available when auto-calc is selected.

All 3 year recalc does is use additional seasons to determine each player's ratings. One of the benefits is if the player doesn't have a lot of PA or IP for the current season, it is augmented by the stats for the other two seasons. What is the current year of your league, 1977? So for the 3 year recalc it is using 1976, 77, 78?

Originally Posted by Brad K

Despite these different ratings the league will produce historic output. However auto-calc affects the league as a whole. It doesn't target individual players. All 3 year ratings will get a bump because on average they're lower than what is needed for historic output in 1977.

Note some players ratings are higher on 3 year even though 1977 was a stronger offensive year for the league. The auto-calc boost is applied to these players too who are thus likely to over perform in 1977.

Auto-calc on three year makes the league produce historic output while increasing the chance of outlier performances by individual players.

The league should produce historic output because the individual player ratings don't affect that (nor should they).

Some players would have higher ratings on 3 year recalc if they performed better compared to league average in 1976 and/or 1978 compared to 1977. The fact that 1977 was a stronger offensive year for the league has no relevance for their ratings, only how they compare to league average.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Auto-calc on three year makes the league produce historic output while increasing the chance of outlier performances by individual players." Autocalc just affects league totals produced by OOTP. 3 year recalc just uses multiple years to compute the player's ratings compared to league average. It's true that using a 3 year recalc will make the player's ratings vary from the 1 year recalc and therefor they won't perform comparatively the same, but that is the whole point of choosing 3-year recalc - to base the player ratings over a wider period.

[jcard]

If there is any trolling here, it must be a group conspiracy to talk past each other and give us all an OOTP production of “Who’s on First?”.

Auto-Calc and Ratings

With AC:

1. Ratings DO matter in the sense of absolute ratings between the players. For Example: Regardless of AC, a player with an X absolute Power rating will hit more HRs than another player in the league who has a <X absolute rating.

2. Ratings DON’T matter in that the expected statistical output from a given absolute rating is determined by that value relative to that of other players in the league (as per above) AND the league total targets (via the Auto-Calc LTMs).

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Scoman

Has anybody from the OOTP historical team offered any evidence that you are right?

Why would they? I have already posted the evidence I am right.

I expect this will play out the same way the pre-calc issue did where, after some initial resistance, they saw the need to create a new pre-calc file.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by robc

It's true that using a 3 year recalc will make the player's ratings vary from the 1 year recalc and therefor they won't perform comparatively the same, but that is the whole point of choosing 3-year recalc - to base the player ratings over a wider period.

OK, so three year produces different comparative results for individual players than one year. And we know one year results are correct.

The historic fans think 3 year produces results closer to historic. I wonder how they'll take it when they see your post that they're wrong.

A bigger sample doesn't help when it adds data irrelevant to the situation.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by jcard

Auto-Calc and Ratings

With AC:

1. Ratings DO matter in the sense of absolute ratings between the players. For Example: Regardless of AC, a player with an X absolute Power rating will hit more HRs than another player in the league who has a <X absolute rating.

2. Ratings DONÂ’T matter in that the expected statistical output from a given absolute rating is determined by that value relative to that of other players in the league (as per above) AND the league total targets (via the Auto-Calc LTMs).

Good comments.

I view this as aggregate ratings can go up and down, auto-calc over rides that, and ratings then determine the difference between players.

[WhiskyTango]

Does it matter what the plethora of available options and combinations of options under the historical tab are set to for auto-calc to be always be the recommended option? I don't have a horse in this race so this is just something I wonder about. It would seem that auto-calc's sole job is to align total/aggregate outcomes with seasonal totals. The historical settings allow some control over how the aggregates are arrived at. Historical options are variable, auto-calc is the secret sauce that makes them all come together, more or less, so they taste like cake.

In my "historical" (using that term loosely) save I have 24 MLB teams in 1943. I have only one setting checkmarked under the historical tab. I want players to develop according to ratings because of the extra rosters. I don't know if this is the best way, but auto-calc seems to be the best means of getting results that look lets say non-jarring (since I don't know what realistic would be, and it sure isn't historical). I get stats I can live with realizing the stats could be completely unrealistic for that setup were it to have occurred IRL.

So, it seems the software and design is fairly robust to be able to pull that off? Or the designers have guessed well as to what will satisfy me? However, I also consider myself to be a very undemanding player. I also wonder how many options OOTP could afford to remove before the average player began missing them.

[robc]

Originally Posted by Brad K

OK, so three year produces different comparative results for individual players than one year. And we know one year results are correct.

The historic fans think 3 year produces results closer to historic. I wonder how they'll take it when they see your post that they're wrong.

A bigger sample doesn't help when it adds data irrelevant to the situation.

I'm pretty sure my statement is pretty non-controversial. It all depends upon what you want from the game. An OOTP customer who wants players to adhere as closely as possible to that season's performance uses 1 year recalc. A player who rather smooth out extreme season performances, or seasons with low data would prefer a 3 or 5 year recalc.

I haven't seen anyone claim using a 3 or 5 year recalc provides single season player results that more closely match a particular season. That is not why 3 or 5 year recalc exists.

At this point I think I'm out because you're either so convinced your experiment proves something it doesn't, you're so entrenched in your position you can't realize your understanding of certain OOTP features is incorrect, or you are purposefully just arguing to argue. I suppose there are more possibilities, but I'm convinced there is no chance of anything productive happening for continuing. This isn't a matter of denying the existence of some bug (which I'm sure OOTP has many), it's that you make statements that show you don't understand the point / intent of certain features.

Where I do agree with you is that OOTP should have more complete explanations of how things work so features are clear to players.