PT Conclusion Comments - Page 6

Guancous · 02-20-2020, 09:19 AM

I don't know if it's possible at this late stage but it would be very helpful if ineligible tournaments were red like duplicate cards.

Signing up for three tournaments on your third team is suboptimal when you keep clicking on ineligible tourneys.

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 05:40 PM

Two-parter:

I noted in a comment someone talking about how OOTP leagues will kind of "crush" down hitting aspects to conform to an end-result formula, and having finally gotten a couple teams in Perfect for a while, I can tell the difference in the quality of the league by how hard it crushes certain hitters' attributes (partially obscured obviously by RNG gods).

Should I also assume that Gap hitting works the same way and in a league with lots of high rated Gap hitters teams will suffer a slight "tariff" on their XBH production skill?

Also - I wonder how much people appreciate this aspect of the game's simulation engine. Reflecting upon it, I can see where some eras would definitely be preferable to certain team construction approaches.

As such it seems like maybe Perfect Leagues shouldn't be so monochromatic. Maybe they should have different eras' "cumulative statistical totals" that they obey. It could provide a choice - or maybe you don't get one, and sometimes you're just ill-suited, which might force Whales to juggle approaches more, IDK, that's beyond my pay grade.

But it feels like a missed opportunity that more use isn't made of that in the game, which might even seed greater interest in it in tournaments. But I've seen it in tourneys for a while, and never took much notice because I didn't really appreciate how different eras worked.

HRBaker · 02-20-2020, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgans Magic

Two-parter:

I noted in a comment someone talking about how OOTP leagues will kind of "crush" down hitting aspects to conform to an end-result formula, and having finally gotten a couple teams in Perfect for a while, I can tell the difference in the quality of the league by how hard it crushes certain hitters' attributes (partially obscured obviously by RNG gods).

If your suggesting player cards are somehow reduced in capabilities once they reach Perfect, your barking up the wrong tree. Any difference you might see as teams move up the ladder is the result of facing stiffer competition. If there is anything that lies outside of that umbrella, it is the fact that the difference between the best and worst teams at Perfect Level is amplified by the reality that too many weaker teams make it there - thus the 100 GB stats seen far too many times.

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 06:48 PM

it's in every level, but you don't notice as much because the disparities in talent are so dramatic year to year in the pool of teams in your perfect. if you had a league full of power memes it's going to reduce your overall power regardless of the pitching.

the number of homers is based, in some way, on the total power hitting in the league (IDK, total power rating of all teams in the league regressed somehow?), not just the individual pitcher/batter aspect. i.e. if you played in a PT set in the 1910s it would push homers down significantly. if you set it in the steriod-era, obviously everyone gets a little boost.

The leagues depress homeruns so that everyone with 100 power doesn't hit 60 homers (i.e. power is not an absolute but relative. If I have 10 100 power guys I won't have 10 60 homer guys, I'm more likely to have 10 40 homer guys whereas if my singleton 100 was 20 better than the next highest power player in the league and it was steroidal era, perhaps he'd hit 80 homers). Or something to that effect, unless I really misunderstand that post to which I refer.

there's a governor of some sort in car terms...

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 06:52 PM

I think it's helpful when players don't have cards that have the exact same rating on a different team. it's quite confusing doing collections.

Most of the time they seem to get it right. Oliva has several cards, but none have the same rating. Then you get to Huston Street....

It's really a silly thing. Why do they have to have the same rating. Why WOULDN'T you make one a 91 & one a 92. This is the type of dumb stuff I'd really like to see polished up in PT21.

mcdog512 · 02-20-2020, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgans Magic

I think it's helpful when players don't have cards that have the exact same rating on a different team. it's quite confusing doing collections.

Most of the time they seem to get it right. Oliva has several cards, but none have the same rating. Then you get to Huston Street....

It's really a silly thing. Why do they have to have the same rating. Why WOULDN'T you make one a 91 & one a 92. This is the type of dumb stuff I'd really like to see polished up in PT21.

Perhaps because they are not arbitrarily assigned but calculated?

That would be a real solid reason. No, I do not know if they are or not. I always assumed so.

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 08:46 PM

Do you seriously think they're "calculated"?

I mean, I'm sure there's some calculations involved, but I know I've seen players with about the same stats higher rated than guys with similar stats. I don't have examples handy, but I'm willing to bet there are a couple that come to mind for people.

Indeed, the inconsistency in the rating system is something people have been grousing about for a long time, and a lot in the looking-toward-PT21 posts.

mcdog512 · 02-20-2020, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgans Magic

Do you seriously think they're "calculated"?

I mean, I'm sure there's some calculations involved, but I know I've seen players with about the same stats higher rated than guys with similar stats. I don't have examples handy, but I'm willing to bet there are a couple that come to mind for people.

Indeed, the inconsistency in the rating system is something people have been grousing about for a long time, and a lot in the looking-toward-PT21 posts.

Umm, you aren't super consistent in this post...
Do you seriously think they're "calculated"? I mean, I'm sure there's some calculations involved"

They either are or they aren't would be my thought but I have seen some great diamonds....could be calculated by tiers? Not sure.

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 10:24 PM

Listen, I didn't code this, so I OBVIOUSLY don't know how they came up with the ratings.

But I've played enough to see guys who are say, 79s, (esp Live) whose contact and eye and power are all less than someone rated lower. So If they're "calculated' which in the context of the message would explain why both Huston Streets are 92, then there should be no way if they are "calculated" for guys to have higher ratings than guys with the lower underlying stats in power, contact, eye/stuff, movement, control.

(all of this is sort of beside the point because they could've taken a different year of Huston Street presumably, so they didn't end up with two different cards of same player with the same rating)

HRBaker · 02-20-2020, 11:17 PM

I think what we're all missing is the fact that 500 ABs or 200 innings pitched is too small a number to show consistency either between cards or seasons. I'm personally convinced the ratings are calculated in some way and NOT "adjusted" based on league levels.

If they were, the whole damn game wouldn't make sense.

Morgans Magic · 02-20-2020, 11:54 PM

I fully agree that the small sample sizes make it very hard to infer, but as you've seen in tournaments, there is a way to play with different "rules" which I presume was also accompanied by dead ball era "end results"; I haven't played any of the era specific tourneys or when I did (I think I did a 2000s or 1970s) I didn't notice any difference, but I had always assumed, as I said, that if it's dead ball era 'rules' (pitchers endurance now allows them to throw longer easier?), I figured it's also massaging the results to create less homers and more triples REGARDLESS of what the power ratings are. But I certainly don't know.

02-20-2020, 09:19 AM	#101
Guancous Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 43	I don't know if it's possible at this late stage but it would be very helpful if ineligible tournaments were red like duplicate cards. Signing up for three tournaments on your third team is suboptimal when you keep clicking on ineligible tourneys. __________________

02-20-2020, 06:48 PM	#104
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	it's in every level, but you don't notice as much because the disparities in talent are so dramatic year to year in the pool of teams in your perfect. if you had a league full of power memes it's going to reduce your overall power regardless of the pitching. the number of homers is based, in some way, on the total power hitting in the league (IDK, total power rating of all teams in the league regressed somehow?), not just the individual pitcher/batter aspect. i.e. if you played in a PT set in the 1910s it would push homers down significantly. if you set it in the steriod-era, obviously everyone gets a little boost. The leagues depress homeruns so that everyone with 100 power doesn't hit 60 homers (i.e. power is not an absolute but relative. If I have 10 100 power guys I won't have 10 60 homer guys, I'm more likely to have 10 40 homer guys whereas if my singleton 100 was 20 better than the next highest power player in the league and it was steroidal era, perhaps he'd hit 80 homers). Or something to that effect, unless I really misunderstand that post to which I refer. there's a governor of some sort in car terms... Last edited by Morgans Magic; 02-20-2020 at 07:03 PM.

02-20-2020, 10:24 PM	#109
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	Listen, I didn't code this, so I OBVIOUSLY don't know how they came up with the ratings. But I've played enough to see guys who are say, 79s, (esp Live) whose contact and eye and power are all less than someone rated lower. So If they're "calculated' which in the context of the message would explain why both Huston Streets are 92, then there should be no way if they are "calculated" for guys to have higher ratings than guys with the lower underlying stats in power, contact, eye/stuff, movement, control. (all of this is sort of beside the point because they could've taken a different year of Huston Street presumably, so they didn't end up with two different cards of same player with the same rating) Last edited by Morgans Magic; 02-20-2020 at 10:39 PM.

02-20-2020, 11:17 PM	#110
HRBaker Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 2,088	I think what we're all missing is the fact that 500 ABs or 200 innings pitched is too small a number to show consistency either between cards or seasons. I'm personally convinced the ratings are calculated in some way and NOT "adjusted" based on league levels. If they were, the whole damn game wouldn't make sense. __________________

02-20-2020, 05:40 PM	#102
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	Two-parter: I noted in a comment someone talking about how OOTP leagues will kind of "crush" down hitting aspects to conform to an end-result formula, and having finally gotten a couple teams in Perfect for a while, I can tell the difference in the quality of the league by how hard it crushes certain hitters' attributes (partially obscured obviously by RNG gods). Should I also assume that Gap hitting works the same way and in a league with lots of high rated Gap hitters teams will suffer a slight "tariff" on their XBH production skill? Also - I wonder how much people appreciate this aspect of the game's simulation engine. Reflecting upon it, I can see where some eras would definitely be preferable to certain team construction approaches. As such it seems like maybe Perfect Leagues shouldn't be so monochromatic. Maybe they should have different eras' "cumulative statistical totals" that they obey. It could provide a choice - or maybe you don't get one, and sometimes you're just ill-suited, which might force Whales to juggle approaches more, IDK, that's beyond my pay grade. But it feels like a missed opportunity that more use isn't made of that in the game, which might even seed greater interest in it in tournaments. But I've seen it in tourneys for a while, and never took much notice because I didn't really appreciate how different eras worked.

02-20-2020, 06:52 PM	#105
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	I think it's helpful when players don't have cards that have the exact same rating on a different team. it's quite confusing doing collections. Most of the time they seem to get it right. Oliva has several cards, but none have the same rating. Then you get to Huston Street.... It's really a silly thing. Why do they have to have the same rating. Why WOULDN'T you make one a 91 & one a 92. This is the type of dumb stuff I'd really like to see polished up in PT21.

02-20-2020, 08:46 PM	#107
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	Do you seriously think they're "calculated"? I mean, I'm sure there's some calculations involved, but I know I've seen players with about the same stats higher rated than guys with similar stats. I don't have examples handy, but I'm willing to bet there are a couple that come to mind for people. Indeed, the inconsistency in the rating system is something people have been grousing about for a long time, and a lot in the looking-toward-PT21 posts.

02-20-2020, 11:54 PM	#111
Morgans Magic Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 66	I fully agree that the small sample sizes make it very hard to infer, but as you've seen in tournaments, there is a way to play with different "rules" which I presume was also accompanied by dead ball era "end results"; I haven't played any of the era specific tourneys or when I did (I think I did a 2000s or 1970s) I didn't notice any difference, but I had always assumed, as I said, that if it's dead ball era 'rules' (pitchers endurance now allows them to throw longer easier?), I figured it's also massaging the results to create less homers and more triples REGARDLESS of what the power ratings are. But I certainly don't know.