Inaugural draft AI in Historic leagues

[Spritze]

You are correct. I am an old man whose ass is not smart.

I quit the OOTP volunteer beta team a few months ago.

So I'll just peace out.

[mitchkenn]

Originally Posted by Spritze

You are correct. I am an old man whose ass is not smart.

I quit the OOTP volunteer beta team a few months ago.

So I'll just peace out.

6000+ posts, instrumental in getting the minors and Negro Leagues into the game and functioning, not mention your own database that can be used as an alternative to the one supplied with the game, and suddenly you're a know-nothing? i don't get it.
At any rate, there are those who appreciate your past work and understand your (at times ) off the beaten path humor. and .... as for peace ....

"Peace. It does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble or hard work. It means to be in the midst of those things and still be calm in your heart.
- Unknown -"

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by mitchkenn

6000+ posts, instrumental in getting the minors and Negro Leagues into the game and functioning, not mention your own database that can be used as an alternative to the one supplied with the game, and suddenly you're a know-nothing? i don't get it.
At any rate, there are those who appreciate your past work and understand your (at times ) off the beaten path humor. and .... as for peace ....

"Peace. It does not mean to be in a place where there is no noise, trouble or hard work. It means to be in the midst of those things and still be calm in your heart.
- Unknown -"

I appreciate Spritze's hard work very much and have used it often, and told him often how much I appreciate it. He is not a know-nothing. He's one of the backbones of OOTP. Without him, I'm not sure where OOTP is, but it would definitely not have reached the levels that it has.

That being said, if I see something that's not functioning well (like the subject of this thread), I reserve the right to point it out and argue that it should be fixed. It may be that in this case, this is what the powers that be want, and if that's the case I may have to take matters into my own hands with talent distribution via the draft. Ideally, checking the "use pre-defined draft value for AI" would work better than this, but if it doesn't I'll run the draft my way.

Spritze, I'm sorry if my frustration with this got the better of me, and I typed some things that offended you. That was not my intent. My intent was to draw attention to something that was functioning reasonably well overall in previous versions, and is now not functioning reasonably well IMHO. I understand that Babe Ruth being drafted 3rd overall in his draft year of 1913 (1914 debut) was a problem that needed addressing. What I don't understand is why other players' draft values needed to be adjusted when they were functioning pretty well in previous versions. I apologize for my tone, but not for raising the issue.

[Reed]

Well since his comment was directed at me let me just say I too appreciate his work as evidence by the fact that my current main game is a neutralized league and I am enjoying it. Thanks.

Do I think his comment to me was meant to be humorous…no. But that is ok and no big deal.

Part of the fun of OOTP for me is coming to the forum and reading others experiences, trying to help others, and participating in discussing how others set up their leagues, what they think are good points or wondering if something should or can be tweaked to make this great game even better. I probably spend as much time on this forum as I do on the game (which is way to much time) which is proof that I am narrow minded or whatever. Peace.

[JaBurns]

We all benefit from these forums, the wealth of knowledge and experience along with willingness to help others with any problem with their world or with OOTP.

We also benefit from those who have been with the game a long time. Txranger, pstrickert, Markus,mitchkenn, actionjackson, David Watts, Spritze et al have made my experience very gratifying; I think we should all remember that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Let’s be grateful for what we have and help each other, if we can, make this game better tomorrow than it is today.

I know I have missed many names and for that I apologize.

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by JaBurns

We all benefit from these forums, the wealth of knowledge and experience along with willingness to help others with any problem with their world or with OOTP.

We also benefit from those who have been with the game a long time. Txranger, pstrickert, Markus,mitchkenn, actionjackson, David Watts, Spritze et al have made my experience very gratifying; I think we should all remember that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Let’s be grateful for what we have and help each other, if we can, make this game better tomorrow than it is today.

I know I have missed many names and for that I apologize.

Hear, hear!

[JaBurns]

TigerFan you are one name, of many, I should have included, my profound apologies, sorry.

[Tiger Fan]

Originally Posted by JaBurns

TigerFan you are one name, of many, I should have included, my profound apologies, sorry.

No worries and thanks for including me. I know with all the great contributors to this place over the years I have learned far more than I have contributed myself. It is great to see that so many of us share our individual ways of playing and are eager to help each other so we can all play OOTP the way each of us enjoys most.

[actionjackson]

I'm experimenting with doing my own Draft AI and distributing the players based on that. I chose this after Reed reported that pitcher Gus Dorner was taken ahead of Joe Tinker and Johnny Evers in a 1901 straight historical amateur draft. That (to me) is bizarre. That's with the "Use pre-defined draft value for AI" box checked. With it unchecked I saw Babe Ruth go 8th overall in a historical random debut. Let me repeat that: Babe Ruth went 8th. As far as I'm concerned, you're damned if you do check the box, and damned if you don't. It's a helluva lot of work (especially the inaugural draft!), but I think in the end it'll be worth it. Now, I don't manage a team when I do this, so I don't have to worry about if my system totally screws my team over, so keep that in mind. I'll probably be posting my first five rounds of the inaugural draft when I finally get around to it and start up my new historical random debut thread. It'll be a while though. File it under "Coming Attractions".

[Scoman]

I guess it must not be possible to revert back to the old Draft values that were CORRECT and just hard code it to make sure Ruth goes #1. Problem solved.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by actionjackson

I'm experimenting with doing my own Draft AI and distributing the players based on that. I chose this after Reed reported that pitcher Gus Dorner was taken ahead of Joe Tinker and Johnny Evers in a 1901 straight historical amateur draft. That (to me) is bizarre. That's with the "Use pre-defined draft value for AI" box checked. With it unchecked I saw Babe Ruth go 8th overall in a historical random debut. Let me repeat that: Babe Ruth went 8th. As far as I'm concerned, you're damned if you do check the box, and damned if you don't. It's a helluva lot of work (especially the inaugural draft!), but I think in the end it'll be worth it. Now, I don't manage a team when I do this, so I don't have to worry about if my system totally screws my team over, so keep that in mind. I'll probably be posting my first five rounds of the inaugural draft when I finally get around to it and start up my new historical random debut thread. It'll be a while though. File it under "Coming Attractions".

Couple of things, the AI does not pick the best player in the inaugural draft at #1 all the time, there is some randomness involved, otherwise all drafts would be the same which is something I don't want.

Regarding general draft AI in historicals, there are several issues here and it depends quite a lot by the way you set up your league (recalc on or off, use draft values etc) so I'd need to know which settings exactly do not deliver expected results, otherwise I'd be fishing in the dark.

[Scoman]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Couple of things, the AI does not pick the best player in the inaugural draft at #1 all the time, there is some randomness involved, otherwise all drafts would be the same which is something I don't want.

Regarding general draft AI in historicals, there are several issues here and it depends quite a lot by the way you set up your league (recalc on or off, use draft values etc) so I'd need to know which settings exactly do not deliver expected results, otherwise I'd be fishing in the dark.

"the AI does not pick the best player in the inaugural draft at #1 all the time, there is some randomness involved, otherwise all drafts would be the same which is something I don't want."

This is when you leave use pre-defined Draft value for AI un-checked, and what we would expect.


But when the user has use pre-defined Draft value for AI option checked ....as the manual reads.....

(Only available in historical leagues) The historical database supports a predefined draft value that is used by the AI in the first-year player draft or inaugural draft in order to create more realistic (i.e. "true to history") draft selections.


Something has changed in the rankings of players for inaugural drafts and the amateur drafts.

[Scoman]

Anyone remember what version this was correct in? maybe that will help them to realize what is broken.

[Scoman]

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...=286671&page=6

Could post 106 be the problem?...why were the values changed? Because of Ruth? is this true? He is the ultimate anomaly and should be treated as such...not change a whole ranking system that was for the most part correct.

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Couple of things, the AI does not pick the best player in the inaugural draft at #1 all the time, there is some randomness involved, otherwise all drafts would be the same which is something I don't want.

Regarding general draft AI in historicals, there are several issues here and it depends quite a lot by the way you set up your league (recalc on or off, use draft values etc) so I'd need to know which settings exactly do not deliver expected results, otherwise I'd be fishing in the dark.

The Gus Dorner/Joe Tinker/Johnny Evers example was from a 1901 amateur draft in a straight historical that Reed was playing with the "Use pre-defined draft value for AI" box checked. In no universe is Gus Dorner in the same league as Joe Tinker and Johnny Evers. No way, no how, no where. He probably should've been close to the last player picked in the draft, but he was in the top ten, and Tinker and Evers were not. Something was changed radically about the pre-defined draft values between OOTP18 and OOTP19, and that is why Scoman started this thread and why others have jumped on board.

With that box unchecked anything can happen in a historical league. Babe Ruth can even go 8th overall in a random debut draft. This is actually more plausible than the Dorner/Tinker/Evers example because things will be much more randomized when that box is left unchecked. Babe Ruth is arguably the best player to ever lace up a pair of cleats (relative to those players that he competed against), but once that box is unchecked, anything can, and does happen. That's why I said (currently) the historical is damned if he does check the box, and damned if he doesn't.

I'm actually enjoying putting together my own draft values. The process is much different for a random debut inaugural draft than a random debut amateur draft because of the players coming in at all different stages of their careers, whereas in the amateur draft, everybody is at the beginning of their respective careers. I'll throw my support behind those that don't want to do what I'm doing though because I believe the "Use pre-defined draft value for AI" function can work much better than it currently does, and did work much better than it currently does in OOTP18 and other previous versions. Somewhere between OOTP18 and OOTP19, the draft values were overhauled, so that's where any search should begin IMHO.

Here's what I'm talking about from this thread in the Bug Reports forum:

"Here's what I get from moseying through the OOTP19 MLB Master.csv file.

1. George Mullin, 2331 Draft Value
2. Addie Joss, 1587 D.V.
3. Bob Ewing, 1501 D.V.
4. Bob Rhoads, 1156 D.V.
5. Charlie E Smith, 1017 D.V.
6. Otto Hess, 993 D.V.
7. Carl Lundgren, 984 D.V.
8. Andy Coakley, 835 D.V.
9. Fred Glade, 690 D.V.
10. Gus Dorner, 633 D.V.
11. Johnny Evers, 598 D.V.
12. Chappie McFarland, 562 D.V.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

??. Joe Tinker, 353 D.V.

Here's what I get with the same 13 players in OOTP18 Master.csv file.

1. George Mullin, 1958 D.V.
2. Joe Tinker, 1806 D.V.
3. Johnny Evers, 1784 D.V.
4. Bob Ewing, 1130 D.V.
5. Addie Joss, 1102 D.V.
6. Bob Rhoads, 819 D.V.
7. Otto Hess, 808 D.V.
8. Charlie E Smith, 726 D.V.
9. Carl Lundgren, 660 D.V.
10. Andy Coakley, 548 D.V.
11. Fred Glade, 516 D.V.
12. Gus Dorner, 474 D.V.
13. Chappie McFarland, 404 D.V.

Hmmm...Something must've happened between OOTP18 and OOTP19 to change these draft values so drastically. The best person to ask about that is the database master himself, Spritze in the Historical Database Issues thread.

In OOTP18 1902 debuts, there's also Harry Bemis (704 D.V.), Ernie Courtney (558 D.V.), Red Dooin (1290 D.V.), Patsy Dougherty (1233 D.V.), Tom Jones (1058 D.V.), Ed Phelps (633 D.V.), Lew Ritter (462 D.V.), Doc Smoot (680 D.V.), and Heinie Wagner (983 D.V.). What I'm saying is something changed drastically between OOTP18 and OOTP19. Whether this was intentional or a bug is what we need to find out."

[Spritze]

Well, not to create a moving target but last weekend I added career TZ/DER fielding values to the draft values of all players. This basically doubles Tinkers value for instance. Previously defense counted for 0 value. Until OOTP19 this data did not exist in the game database so it was not used. Now it does so it is.

You will see the results in the next update or two I'd imagine.

[Reed]

Thank you Spritze for all the attention to detail. I know all these databases etc. have to be a headache. It sounds like the pre draft value thing is going to be better than I hoped for once the fielding gets incorporated.

[Spritze]

Originally Posted by actionjackson

. What I'm saying is something changed drastically between OOTP18 and OOTP19. Whether this was intentional or a bug is what we need to find out."

Unfortunately I have a familial neurological disease that causes tremors in my fingers and hands. Since the formulas have not changed much since OOTP15 I must have accidently multi-clicked (due to this disease) on the batter append query and not noticed it.

I apologize for causing you such distress.

[actionjackson]

Thank you Spritze for all you do. I can't say that enough. That being said if I see something that looks off, I'm gonna report it with the hope that we can make this game even better. It's the only way I know how to contribute as I have a fraction of a fraction (read: zero) of your obvious skills with databases. I'm sorry if it comes off as distress/whining/complaining to you. It's not intended that way at all. It's done with the best of intentions.

What I meant by that comment that you highlighted was that maybe Markus wanted a change to the draft value system because Babe Ruth was going third in the 1913 draft class, so everybody else's draft value had to change along with Ruth's, or maybe it was a bug. Being on the outside, I have no idea which of the two it is so I was just thinking out loud. I'm sorry if I offended you, and I'll try to word things better next time I'm raising something to do with historicals. Peace.

[Spritze]

As things stand this value only works correctly with rookie draft classes in non RDL leagues. There is a write up in the historical bug reports you might review.

Anything else with the word draft in it will (currently) return weird results with this option ON.