Historical database issues go here!

[szathkey]

Originally Posted by szathkey

about 60%-80% of the 1871 players (and other 1870s players as you progress) have been mislabeled as switch hitters by the DB on import.

This issue persists even after the new DB that was pre-released.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by szathkey

This issue persists even after the new DB that was pre-released.

I'm actually working on fixing some of those now. The others will follow before long.

EDIT: Actually, as I work through this I'm seeing the majority of these guys are simply guys whose hitting hand is unknown. So they're not really mislabeled, we have to assign them something after all.

Regardless, I've worked through quite a few of these today (also fixed up some wrong heights and weights).

[szathkey]

Thanks so much! Looking forward to the patch!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DMRich]

24.3.52 May 5 ???

--OOTP 23 will starts

--Perfect Team..OOTP 24 (with patch ? )

left aphasia

[DMRich]

Dave

7 errors...0 error !!!!!!!!

:-) :-)

Left Aphasia

[szathkey]

This is still an issue in 1871...not sure if the changes you worked on were part of the patch

[LansdowneSt]

The following two players are intertwined. Found it when making a Jim Callahan (1902 Giants) facegen but the game has John Callahan as a 1902 Giant instead. John played in 1898.

Here are the two players and their IDs:

John Callahan, 1898, callah004joh, callaji01
Jim Callahan, 1902, callah004jam, callaji02

[Braden]

OOTP 1932 Negro League roster not correct. The Detroit Seamheads roster does not match OOTP roster. Not even close. Since the Attach Files function is not working, I uploaded the Seamheads Detroit Wolves & OOTP version to the following so you can see the difference.

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/h2hy0nqpd625u/Misc

I just looked at the free agents for the 1932 Negro League and see players for the Wolves that should be on the team. I will see if I can fill all the teams with the correct players from the FA list. Should they not have been assigned in the DB?

[AESP_pres]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

One or two of the teams with the same issues in 1884 are fixed (the stats are linked to other teams that are actually in the db though, since it's not possible to link to the teams not included in the db for now).

It's the way it has always been, as long as the stats are there I can do the structure myself manually for every seasons like I have always done.

[Keef]

I have had the same issue with multiple players being suddenly two-way players who weren't. I started playing in 1952, but the problem didn't show up until 1958.
After I got done with the December 1958 amateur draft, there were 117 players listed in my active roster (including the 25 actual active players) who were not anywhere else. I tried to demote them to a minor league, but I wasn't allowed because the game kept insisting that they had to be listed in the secondary roster. I altered their contracts to minor league and that didn't work either. This is the second time I tried this historical game at 1952 and this problem arose in 1959. I was in commissioner mode. I've played many seasons in commissioner mode in earlier ootp baseball games and never ran across this problem. I did check the other teams and there was no influx of low minor league players in the active roster. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[LansdowneSt]

Originally Posted by Keef

I have had the same issue with multiple players being suddenly two-way players who weren't. I started playing in 1952, but the problem didn't show up until 1958.
After I got done with the December 1958 amateur draft, there were 117 players listed in my active roster (including the 25 actual active players) who were not anywhere else. I tried to demote them to a minor league, but I wasn't allowed because the game kept insisting that they had to be listed in the secondary roster. I altered their contracts to minor league and that didn't work either. This is the second time I tried this historical game at 1952 and this problem arose in 1959. I was in commissioner mode. I've played many seasons in commissioner mode in earlier ootp baseball games and never ran across this problem. I did check the other teams and there was no influx of low minor league players in the active roster. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Are historical transactions/line-ups being used? The reasons for a given player becoming two-way (when they shouldn't) may vary. Are there any names you can grab so there's a sampling of particular ones to check? Also, what are the historic game settings (made for Single-Season replay or Career play) and, most importantly, is it recalc-ing the player to real life stats every year or is the development engine being used instead?

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Braden

OOTP 1932 Negro League roster not correct. The Detroit Seamheads roster does not match OOTP roster. Not even close. Since the Attach Files function is not working, I uploaded the Seamheads Detroit Wolves & OOTP version to the following so you can see the difference.

https://www.mediafire.com/folder/h2hy0nqpd625u/Misc

I just looked at the free agents for the 1932 Negro League and see players for the Wolves that should be on the team. I will see if I can fill all the teams with the correct players from the FA list. Should they not have been assigned in the DB?

Updating and correcting the Negro Leagues is a long-term project. Not something we've done now. This should be all the same as in OOTP 23 and other previous versions.

The historical db changes we've made are in part to allow us to finally update the Negro Leagues (among other historical areas that need to be updated). But this is more something that once we have the db looking stable for this year, that then we'll start to work on. So very likely, not something you can expect to see before OOTP 25.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by szathkey

This is still an issue in 1871...not sure if the changes you worked on were part of the patch

Of the players from 1871 to 1900 (ish) that imported as switch hitters, there are probably 1800 or so of these. I've adjusted around 400-500 for this patch, focusing on the better players first.

So just in 1871, you'll still see a good proportion of the guys that were previously switch hitters not having changed. Though probably 20-25% will be 'fixed'.

Of the other 1300-1400, some are actually switch hitters, and many are guys we have no accurate info on their handedness at all.

I will keep going and adjust most of these to one hand or the other over time.

But given that we do not actually have any data on 90% of these, it's not necessarily my highest priority. Anything we assign them as is going to be random, given that we have no data on most of them.

[Braden]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

Updating and correcting the Negro Leagues is a long-term project. Not something we've done now. This is the same as in OOTP 23 and other previous versions.

The historical db changes we've made are in part to allow us to finally update the Negro Leagues (among other historical areas that need to be updated). But this is more something that once we have the db looking stable for this year, that then we'll start to work on. So, very likely, not something you can expect to see before OOTP 25.

Probably would get done sooner if it was for PT!

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Braden

Probably would get done sooner if it was for PT!

Yeah, sorry but that's that's just not true

The historical db merger project has taken a solid six months of my time and effort so far.

PT doesn't affect it in the least.

[Lukas Berger]

If anything, given that we want to keep expanding the Negro Leagues cards in in PT, PT creates more of an urgency to get the Negro League historical updates done, not less.

Working with additions to the historical db is just very complex and it takes a huge amount of time and effort.

The db merger will significantly decrease that time and effort involved though, and allow us to update the Negro Leagues and other historical leagues much more efficiently in the future.

[szathkey]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

Of the players from 1871 to 1900 (ish) that imported as switch hitters, there are probably 1800 or so of these. I've adjusted around 400-500 for this patch, focusing on the better players first.

So just in 1871, you'll still see a good proportion of the guys that were previously switch hitters not having changed. Though probably 20-25% will be 'fixed'.

Of the other 1300-1400, some are actually switch hitters, and many are guys we have no accurate info on their handedness at all.

I will keep going and adjust most of these to one hand or the other over time.

But given that we do not actually have any data on 90% of these, it's not necessarily my highest priority. Anything we assign them as is going to be random, given that we have no data on most of them.

Thanks Lukas.

It took about 5 minutes to switch batting hand to match throwing hand for all the players in my 1871 start. (I start with about 350 players…anyone that would have been at least 18 like I used to be able to do with Spritze DB).

That said, I will be happy when you get through this project, but I’ve finally moved forward with my historical start

Thanks again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by szathkey

Thanks Lukas.

It took about 5 minutes to switch batting hand to match throwing hand for all the players in my 1871 start. (I start with about 350 players…anyone that would have been at least 18 like I used to be able to do with Spritze DB).

Yeah, I could just mass edit things this way in around the same amount of time as well, but that would mean not catching the height/weight discrepancies and the cases where the throwing hands are off as well, and I've run into a few of those.

So to me, better to take a bit of extra time and catch those things up at the same time.

Though maybe the best compromise solution would be to make the batting hand=throwing hand adjustments now, then circle back around to the height/weight and throwing adjustments.

Not sure if there's a downside to doing things that way. I will think it over and if it seems reasonable, will make those adjustments at some point in the week.

[szathkey]

Thanks again Lukas...wasn't questioning YOUR process. You go ahead and take your time to make things RIGHT.

I just did what was quick and reasonable in the absence of total accuracy.

Appreciate you

[brady3577]

Several managers are missing their historical records and stats.