Minor Changes for OOTP 24

[jimmysthebestcop]

...

[DJ_Jak_32]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Hot air? You came to thread to reply to me. You brought thread off topic. Cry me a river

Then do the stream and show everyone how good you are at exploiting the game. Face it....you won't because it will prove you are full of hot air and expose you for nothing more than a troll that has nothing of substance to add other than to complain about the same 3 things over and over but phrase them differently so it looks like you have more to say, but as I and others have said, you just repeat the same drivel over and over again and then that thread gets locked....coincidence? I think not.

[jimmysthebestcop]

...

[DJ_Jak_32]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

The thread will got locked cause you brought it off topic cause you are a troll.

I'm not a streamer. Again you game lessons I charge 35 bux an hour I'll send you my cash app

I've been nothing but cordial with you, never once called you a name...but as usual you slip in the subtle insults thinking you are sly.

And just admit it, you don't want to do a live stream because it will show everyone that you are all talk and no substance.

Can the mods please lock this thread now or move it to the suggestions forum.

[David Watts]

Wow, looks like I went to bed too early last night. What did I miss?

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by DJ_Jak_32

You change your story like the weather.....you said you have not played single player since XX. Please do everyone a favor and just stop posting in the forums....you clearly have nothing constructive to add because all your posts are the same thing over and over.

My experience with him is he is a repeater, as you note, and when confronted with data a goal post mover.

Here's a little sample of what he does...

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

nothing on any wishlist ever comes true its pretty sad

edit..

all in seriousness. the financial model needs a complete overhaul it is pretty awful and it effects every part of the GM gameplay experience and i am going to throw 40 man managements into the finance model.

rule 5 is a joke because of the finance model and 40 man. its not that the AI protects the wrong players it happens IRL it is that there are studs and just solid MLB players on the rule 5 every year but almost 0 AI teams will draft them cause their own 40 man is full. you can draft 10 rule 5 players every year and immediately trade them for prospects as every AI team then wants them but passed on them in rule 5.

same thing goes for waiver claims. Teams waive studs and mlb ready players the entire year. The human can literally claim all these players all year long and trade them. As soon as you trade the players waived every team wants them. Cause something in trade logic must indicate to the AI that they have to do a 40 man move but they wont do it for a free waiver claim they rather trade a minor league prospect. it makes no sense.

free agency. the AI has no shot at competing with a human in free agency. the human can get the player almost always 100% in a contract favoring the team and even then trade them right afterwards sticking the AI with a horrible backend option deal. so the AI either takes the options or lets the player go after 1 year. but the human gains prospect in the trades.

the owner controls budget option is a joke. either needs to be just for the humans or there actually needs to be variety in how owners act. not 99% of owners just restricting the budget. if every owner acts the same just have options for different % budget available in options. i dont see the point in an option when every owner just does the same thing.

the finance model also effects which players the AI tries to dump at trade deadline. playoffs teams dont sell bad contracts of quality players they need for playoffs. period. end of story. in ootp it happens. you can fleece the AI just trading for expiring contracts and then trading those players back to playoff teams for prospects. Even the same team that just traded the player. [snipped swear]

It isnt really the trade ai logic its the finance model. the AI just cant manage finances which effects all parts of the game from he gm experience.

then we get to fan interest and ticket prices. this is easily manipulated where a human can tank the season finish last but have 100% interest and max ticket prices. so the following year huge increase to budget. this has to do with player popularity and how fan interest gets a huge bump even if you then trade that player. plus you can alter ticket prices all year. should have to set ticket prices for regular season and playoffs and that is it. then locked.

and it is not about the human not doing these things. it is about these exploits shouldn't exist in the game every year. they all have been here since at least ootp18. all the fanboys on forum are just like well dont play that way.

the point is if it exists in the game then the games logic is not correct. so why is it overlooked each year?

i really think it is just cause ootp is for the team manager and not the General manager. i dont think the gm side of the game will ever improve significantly and there will always a be ton of exploits or bad finance model that makes the game just too easy for a human gm,

Originally Posted by Sweed

I would agree the on field is much better than the GM. Thankfully I am more of an on field manager than a GM.

What I see on my waiver wire as far as the "best MLB player" are relievers and, honestly they aren't really any better than what I have. Bats on waiver wire? Bench and roll players. Like a lot of what you mention it could be better.

For the rule 5 I don't see what you do. My latest rule 5 had 19 players drafted by AI teams while real MLB had 16 selections. Yes, at the MLB level but that is all OOTP has so, it's apples to apples. The best player was a 45/55 on the 20/80 scale. The rest were 40-45's, a bit below average, or lower. The 45/55 is the only one producing above normal expectations hitting .305. He is having some luck when compared to ratings and is projected to get 105 PA (tells you what you need to know) from his current stats. Hardly a star. You'll note in the screen that teams will skip a pick early and then take one later. Yeah. looks a bit silly but I assume comes down to the teams decide "in the moment" with each round being a new dice roll.

Edit: Now, as I look over my rule 5, I see the Mets are the only team that skipped in the first round and selected in the second. A lot of teams used to do this, maybe they tweaked it for v23?

It could be improved, sure, but in my game at least it's not the disaster you see in yours. This is not an outlier year in my game, it's on par with what I normally get.
2040 rule 5: 19 players selected
2039 : 13
2038: 27
2037: 22
2036 : 21
2035 : 18
2034 : 18
2033 : 22

etc. etc.

Figured I'd post my data so users reading know it's not happening to everyone.

It's also interesting to click through the 2033 rule 5 players (picked that year to see how players did over many seasons). Amazing how mundane their careers were. No batter had 100 career homers. .230ish to .260 ish averages. I didn't dig deep, click on a batter and look at career batting page, years of MLB service, etc. Quite easy to see over careers these guys were getting 40 or so starts per year and production you would expect of that type of player.

Fair enough on closing human advantage loopholes though I couldn't care less either way. It's not so much I sit there and think "I shouldn't do this, it's not fair" as when I play I think "what waste of time" for the return. I'd have more fun watching dust dry than using my time to manipulate ticket prices Other's mileage may vary. If I pull off a "good trade" I enjoy that. When I'm trying to move someone that is MLB ready as a marginal starter because he's stuck at AAA I hate it. Looking over the low level minor leaguers I'll get in return is, to me, not fun. But I'm sure many have trading as their favorite thing to do, and that's ok too.

Sure we can go down the "it doesn't have to be either or" but if it does? I'd take better financials over closing loopholes six days a week and twice on Sunday. One I can control, the other I can't. Just my 2 cents.

Note how I start out by agreeing that the GM isn't as good as the on field and then respond to his claims about rule 5 and FA. Evidently those goal posts weren't installed in cement as they were very easy to move.

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Rule isnt about who is taken and who isnt taken. or about who is protected and who isnt protected.

it is about you can select rule 5 players and immediately trade for prospects who arent rule 5.

so the AI team has to have them on the 40 man the entire season. the players wont make it out of preseason but they just gave up a prospect for the rule 5.

why cant the AI see that it is a rule 5 player so you might not want to trade anyone for them.

same thing for waivers. i am not saying their are studs there. but there are players on waivers the AI will trade prospects for if the human shops them. so if they are willing to give up prospects for a waiver why not claim the player?

ive literally claimed the same player multiple times in the same season and traded him for prospects every time. to me that is a symptom of a larger problem behind the scenes.

all loopholes, holes, bugs, exploits are symptoms of larger problems behind the scenes. this is true in all games. if that many exploits exist then the program has faulty logic. bottom line.

it is up to the devs to find this fault and fix it. whether all of this comes from the finance model or some other module in the game. something is certainly not correct.

Originally Posted by Sweed

You said in your post the AI won't take them because their 40 man is full. I showed, in my league, that is not true. You also said teams waive studs in your post. It's what you said and, what I responded to. If you want to amend your post feel free.

As I said I couldn't care less if they do or don't fix those holes. You say you do all of that stuff so either you find it fun or can't control yourself. You could claim it's "just testing" to prove the holes are there. Fair enough but once it's tested and proven then there is no reason to do it, is there?

Financial additions, again as already noted, would be time better spent IMHO.

In any case I responded because I don't see these studs you speak of nor a lack of AI teams selecting players in the rule 5. I supported that with data.
Whether you want to post any of these studs from your data is up to you. Whether you want to amend your post is up to you. I'm just responding to what I read.

I give him an opportunity to supply data and note that I already have. His response is my data is invalid.

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Sweed you have a game you sim a day at time that you imported from ootp 4. Like any of your data is valid.

Try starting a fresh game MLB opening day and watch the hair ball ai. I don't need data. I explained the bugs, holes, exploits, ticket pricing.

Not my job to get data but it is the devs job to not have a hole riddled program

After this post the thread was locked and I couldn't respond. I think I'll take the time to do it now...

I guess I didn't realize my game was using the AI from OOTP4? Boy do I feel foolish for buying each new version to get that updated AI Do you read what you write? You do realize v23 doesn't know my players were imported right? They, like all players, are a bag or ratings running through code to create output. My pool of players are subject to the same code as any other's pool of players. This is a really ignorant statement on your part.

But I'm asking for you data. Why would the validity of my data matter? Show me how the AI doesn't select players in rule 5 and how there are star players on both the waiver wire and rule 5 in your game. I'm waiting.

How about the "task manager" loop hole?

How about the stupid way you trade rule 5 picks and want the developer to "save you".

Only response I've ever received, in the past, was to move the goal posts and, if that fails? Ignore and don't respond. I'm not expecting anything different today.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Wow, looks like I went to bed too early last night. What did I miss?

I love it when a post is edited down to an ellipsis after it's already been quoted.

[Pelican]

As the OP, it’s discouraging how easily these threads get hijacked into the latest iteration of a bitter dispute over unrelated beefs. Not that I mind efforts to wrestle hyperbolic comments to ground with real data. I myself was guilty of not posting some examples of what I meant. At least with screenshots and reports on testing, we can speak in objective terms about what we have experienced. The rest is just noise.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Brad K

I love it when a post is edited down to an ellipsis after it's already been quoted.

I think Jimmy picked up another infraction though, so I wonder if there was something that wasn't quoted.

[DJ_Jak_32]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I think Jimmy picked up another infraction though, so I wonder if there was something that wasn't quoted.

I think he already had '1's" across the board, but I could be wrong. He didn't say anything that I did not quote, but he still likes to attack you and be sly about it. When I called him on his streaming thing again, he edited all his posts and went to bed.

Oh well...it's Sunday, almost time for football!

[DJ_Jak_32]

Originally Posted by Pelican

As the OP, it’s discouraging how easily these threads get hijacked into the latest iteration of a bitter dispute over unrelated beefs. Not that I mind efforts to wrestle hyperbolic comments to ground with real data. I myself was guilty of not posting some examples of what I meant. At least with screenshots and reports on testing, we can speak in objective terms about what we have experienced. The rest is just noise.

I apologize for contributing to the hijacking, you really did make some good requests and I wish more people would post things that are constructive and not a personal battle with the Devs or company. I have read some of you posts in the past and you usually do provide examples and data to back up what you are saying and also can have a civil discussion.

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by Bobfather

1A. Catcher visits to the mound. To help warm up relievers.

This. And it saves a manager visit.

[Shoeless' Socks]

In fairness, FWIW I did agree with him that Rule 5 does need work. There are too many teams that just signed a ML player that have full 40 man rosters that need to create a 40 man spot while having a 20 OVR player on their 40 man that the AI should release, and those ML players end up in the R5 Draft Pool way too often.

Since I play in Commissioner Mode, I will often manually 'fix' that but if you don't do it there will be inequities.

Rule 5 does IMO need work.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

IME outfielders only run through walls with user-created stadia, which is probably an issue with the user created stadia moreso than the 3D animations. But wait, you wouldn't know this because you haven't played the game in like 4 years. It's probably lasers.

I use game-created default stadiums for my league... the outfielders run through the right-field fences... it was worse in the early 3D versions, but has gotten better in OOTP22 and OOTP23.

I don't see it as much as I used to.

Appears that the OOTP animators have improved the 3D animation with each new version.

[silvam14]

Originally Posted by Sweed

But it does matter. In this case you seriously are expecting the developer to provide support for user created mods? For material they don't have a license to distribute? Really? This is coming from you, a "real gamer"?

In creating all of the parks that I did, I took painstaking measures to ensure each had a field grid which matched up just inside the actual fences. (Admitedly, I missed one with Jarry Park when I re-did it) Anyway, I am still seeing issues of players running through the corner fences to retrieve balls. I kind of gave up documenting at this point, as I am not much for capturing video on my PC, but I will try to document going forward.

The point is, the issue doesn't seem like it is with the user created 3D model, but rather the field grid, which is a part of the game and I would expect the Devs to support any issues with it. When it comes down to it, the field grid is what should drive where the players and ball moves on the field, the 3D model is just eye candy.

Matt has reached out to me about it which is good. Again, I just have to be better with documenting the instances I see.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by silvam14

In creating all of the parks that I did, I took painstaking measures to ensure each had a field grid which matched up just inside the actual fences. (Admitedly, I missed one with Jarry Park when I re-did it) Anyway, I am still seeing issues of players running through the corner fences to retrieve balls. I kind of gave up documenting at this point, as I am not much for capturing video on my PC, but I will try to document going forward.

The point is, the issue doesn't seem like it is with the user created 3D model, but rather the field grid, which is a part of the game and I would expect the Devs to support any issues with it. When it comes down to it, the field grid is what should drive where the players and ball moves on the field, the 3D model is just eye candy.

Matt has reached out to me about it which is good. Again, I just have to be better with documenting the instances I see.

My response wasn't intended as any kind of slight against any modders. My historical game is something I dabble in so I have not played tons of games but would add I have not seen a player go through a wall in any of your parks. At the time of my post I wasn't even thinking about my experience and your parks. Rather the fact that there are a few park creators out there and they must be the one(s) causing issue.

What I was doing was responding to a user's assertion that it doesn't matter why something happens

Doesn't matter what causes it only that it still happens.

(A post he deleted after my response that only survives because I quoted it)
I took that, and still do, that even if something is caused by a mod it doesn't matter. It's the developer's responsibility to "fix" it no matter what. Except it does when it's real ballparks, uniforms, face gens, etc. etc. and it's licensed material. At least that is my understanding.

I read your thread every year and enjoy all of your work. I also see that you respond to issues in your thread and offer support where you can. I do not doubt that you are meticulous in getting your settings right and, as I said, in my limited play I have not seen any "wall issues".

I'm not saying the developer shouldn't offer support for code that allows one to mod the game. If the cause is the field grid the modder has to use, all instructions are followed, and there is a bug? Then yes, that is a part of game the developer should support. Nothing there is covered by licensing.

I did see your earlier response to Matt and am glad to hear Matt reached out to you about this issue. Not surprising as he and Markus have shown time and time again their willingness to look into user issues.

I hope that clarifies my point and that I wasn't disparaging anybody that mods the game.

[Pelican]

No worries here. Thanks for getting this back on track and posting real solutions. I am constantly in awe of what the stadium modders (looking at you, Silvam) accomplish. By comparison, my clumsy effort to move the Baker Bowl fences out was a disaster waiting to happen. I picked 1938 because that was the year the Phillies moved to Shibe Park in midseason. You can see the impact IRL on the hitting of some players (looking at you, Chuck Klein!). In my 1938 sim, it affects the lefty pull hitters for the whole season. Of course, it gives the RHP a fair chance.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by silvam14

In creating all of the parks that I did, I took painstaking measures to ensure each had a field grid which matched up just inside the actual fences. (Admitedly, I missed one with Jarry Park when I re-did it) Anyway, I am still seeing issues of players running through the corner fences to retrieve balls. I kind of gave up documenting at this point, as I am not much for capturing video on my PC, but I will try to document going forward.

The point is, the issue doesn't seem like it is with the user created 3D model, but rather the field grid, which is a part of the game and I would expect the Devs to support any issues with it. When it comes down to it, the field grid is what should drive where the players and ball moves on the field, the 3D model is just eye candy.

Matt has reached out to me about it which is good. Again, I just have to be better with documenting the instances I see.

Have you re-released Jarry Parc? I love them stadia even with the occasional quirk.

Regarding the 3D stuff, I’m not sure you necessarily need to screencap everything but you need to make it replicable. The way you do that is, when you see the players going through the stands or what have you, you replay the play by play (which I think is also done with the F9 key) and that in turn will put a bunch of text onto your clipboard. Copy and paste that into a post on the 3D issues forum along with a description of what’s happening, the park you’re using, and so on. That should hopefully allow a dev or QA person to sit down, run through all those actions using the stadium you noted, and hopefully see exactly where the issue lies.

[silvam14]

Originally Posted by Sweed

My response wasn't intended as any kind of slight against any modders. My historical game is something I dabble in so I have not played tons of games but would add I have not seen a player go through a wall in any of your parks. At the time of my post I wasn't even thinking about my experience and your parks. Rather the fact that there are a few park creators out there and they must be the one(s) causing issue.

What I was doing was responding to a user's assertion that it doesn't matter why something happens (A post he deleted after my response that only survives because I quoted it)
I took that, and still do, that even if something is caused by a mod it doesn't matter. It's the developer's responsibility to "fix" it no matter what. Except it does when it's real ballparks, uniforms, face gens, etc. etc. and it's licensed material. At least that is my understanding.

I read your thread every year and enjoy all of your work. I also see that you respond to issues in your thread and offer support where you can. I do not doubt that you are meticulous in getting your settings right and, as I said, in my limited play I have not seen any "wall issues".

I'm not saying the developer shouldn't offer support for code that allows one to mod the game. If the cause is the field grid the modder has to use, all instructions are followed, and there is a bug? Then yes, that is a part of game the developer should support. Nothing there is covered by licensing.

I did see your earlier response to Matt and am glad to hear Matt reached out to you about this issue. Not surprising as he and Markus have shown time and time again their willingness to look into user issues.

I hope that clarifies my point and that I wasn't disparaging anybody that mods the game.

absolutely Sweed, I know what you were getting at. I just don't want to let the developers off the hook for something that has been happening for pretty much every version since 3D came out as "a modded stadium issue" when I don't think that particular one is. (I'm pretty sure I've seen it happen a few times in the out of the box parks too) Point I wastrying to make was that I think there is something else going on in the 3D engine that causes that to happen.

No biggie and I'm glad you like the parks!

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by silvam14

absolutely Sweed, I know what you were getting at. I just don't want to let the developers off the hook for something that has been happening for pretty much every version since 3D came out as "a modded stadium issue" when I don't think that particular one is. (I'm pretty sure I've seen it happen a few times in the out of the box parks too) Point I wastrying to make was that I think there is something else going on in the 3D engine that causes that to happen.

No biggie and I'm glad you like the parks!

I am happy to hear you didn't take my comments in a negative way.