Good Modifiers For You

[sprague]

I have been trying for a while to find the right modifiers to use so that oldtime years can play as if they were modern.
You may have noticed that when you went into setup- strategy, when you picked a new year, say 1993 as i did for my 1901 league, a box would come up to show that a calculation was being made. And a new set of modifiers appeared.
But then when the season started, it did this again, and a whole new set of modified numbers came up. When I played with this set as is, things were usually too low. when I played with the first set. Too high.
so yes. you can guess. I averaged the two out, and found that in 1901 the numbers turned out well

The two biggest areas that never worked for me was hitter home runs- they were always way down to what one may expect
for a modern era, and pitcher strikeouts, they were either way too low or super high- guys with 500 strikeouts. But after some
modifications here is what i am testing out


So as an example.
hits were .980 hte second time they come up .983. So the average between the two is .982. But I found in tests this needs a bump, so i take that number, add it to 1.000 then divide by 2 again. The result was .991
All other figuers is to divide by 2

For 1901 Spritzie high school DB Here is what came out

Hits- .991
2b- 1.100
3b-.800
hr- 12.000
w-.980
hpb-.925
k- 2.700

(actually i forgot to record the first number for 2b, 3b, w, hbp- but remembered this was close from other tests i had done. hr, hits, k are correct)

other fixes
strategy
make 5 man rotations
stamina- normal
closers- vo
relief-o

(the game will wind up making starters 2.000 stamina)

i forgot in this game to up the stolen base figures by .050 for sb% and sb attempts, hence the leader oinly wound up with 54- a usual total is arourd 70 for a leader

the last thing is to fix errors. I take the final number, and divide it by 2. max 1.000. So catchers, pitch 1b wound up with 1.000, while 3b was 1.400 and cf was 2.500

these were all much more realistic figures and you can see in the post below just how good the first year came out

[sprague]

Here is the final season screen
As you can see nap Lajoie lead with a .408 average and the other 3 on screen were in the 360-370
Each league had a 40 hr guy, and second place finisher in the 30's

Rube Waddell led the majors with a realistic 248 K's
Al Orth took advantage of some expansion (all be it given a few free agents) teams that were a bit weaker
and won a realistic 23 games. The save leaders were in the high 30's

Again the SB were a bit low, but that was my error in not bumping up the sb numbers on starting the season

I am gonig to play a few more years to see if this sort of thing continues, this might wind up being a ton of fun
to see

[sprague]

The main 1901 award winners as facegens- got to give the guys who worked on that great package a pat on the back

[sprague]

Oh forgot to mention that for the dead ball era (to 1919) I have chosen to use the modifiers for 1993- to not jump homeruns to the steroid era, or to have Ks rise to high as they are today. In the Ruth-WW2 era I will chose a different year between 93-2011 that best reflects the best rise from there to today

The main group 1940's-1990's I would likely use 2005 as it is a good mix in all areas but not overwhelmingly high in any category

[Spritze]

You can automate the process if you wish. Go to the database folder and edit the files that begin with the word era*. You can copy the 2005 data to each year if you wish. Change era_fielding if you want to use modern gloves to decrease errors, the others are self-explanatory.

[sprague]

Originally Posted by Spritze

You can automate the process if you wish. Go to the database folder and edit the files that begin with the word era*. You can copy the 2005 data to each year if you wish. Change era_fielding if you want to use modern gloves to decrease errors, the others are self-explanatory.

hey spritzie
i tried that previously, and it seemed like the stats during the season stayed exactly the same as if no change were made, as though the player's ratings determined the end values outright
but i will give this another shot with 1900-1910 and see what happens when all of these values in the files are changed

ps- the high school database is just terrific. From editing a few db's myself i know how much work went into this. Another round of thanks for creating this for all of us

[Spritze]

Well, that is how it used to work anyway. Maybe the arrival of the mysterious ODB file has changed that.

[sprague]

ok i gave the suggestion a try, changing the modifiers in the text files
but that really didnt work too well
results below

[sprague]

So here was my results for 1902 doing things with my format, of averaging out the two values. in this case home runs turned out a bit low

[sprague]

by 1904 and 05 i was using the new modified files as if I was using the 2005 season, and as you can see the numbers exploded (not in the first uploaded pic, will explain why below- but in the other two babe ruth would be embarressed to have been in the league)

The first pic to see is the bottom one, which should be for the 1903 season (but screen capped in january hence the 1904 on top- they came up a bit in wrong order. but that was with the revised totals, and 3 players hit 60 home runs
the second pic is from 1904 and in this year I moved all the modifiers back to 1.000 on the setup screen (as even though they were 1.000 in the file, they still change each year even though the main totals (ag, h, hr ect stay the same). Here they dropped back to what you would expect for 1904
The middle pic is for 1905 when i went back to what the computer suggested and here we see a player with 134 home runs.

So that suggestion, which seems like it should work, does not really- at least in the dead ball era which is very tough to modify due to the low hr numbers, and the fact the game distributes hr to pitchers in a somewhat odd way- certain pitchers that year will give up 150 home runs

Hence i feel my original idea was better, as it seemed to slow the hr rise so the leader was around 27-40 (reasonable but not crazy) and the strikeout pitchers were still +200 but not around 400. It only took me about 2 min at the start of each year to make the calculations and change the numbers. So I will give that a test playing out a full 110 years and see what happens. As my 1902 expereince shows, not every year will work out perfectly. But thta can be noted, so particular years that seem too far off can be modifed on future play.

This has been a very useful test