|
||||
|
|
OOTP 19 - Historical Simulations Discuss historical simulations and their results in this forum. |
|
Thread Tools |
07-22-2018, 12:20 PM | #41 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 297
|
I can see some people wanting to play the schedule as played, and some people wanting to play "as scheduled ". Im guessing more people will want to use as played, but who knows. "As scheduled" fans may want teams to play an equal number of games, even the ones that dropped out irl. Because some of the seasons didnt use a schedule, this would require some creative reconstruction to rebuild the schedules as best as possible.
I think we can all win on this issue. Building schedules may be one of the easiest things to resolve on this list. |
07-22-2018, 01:12 PM | #42 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Up There
Posts: 15,403
|
Quote:
The point is the difficulty in really recreating an open league model like the NA. I can see it being easier to start with the NL in 1876 and its closed league model. Last edited by Le Grande Orange; 07-22-2018 at 01:13 PM. |
|
07-22-2018, 01:20 PM | #43 | |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 297
|
Quote:
Last edited by guamyank; 07-22-2018 at 01:23 PM. |
|
07-22-2018, 06:33 PM | #44 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,266
|
Quote:
However i agree that using as scheduled schedules may be the best way to go for most people as it would still allow people to use as played schedules if they want. I would still have the option to start in 1871 and follow the actual historical expansion. They really need to do something about teams folding if you don't follow the game's expansion. Maybe allow you to move teams before starting the league and before expansion. The American League in 1871 just doesn't feel right. |
|
07-22-2018, 06:42 PM | #45 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 297
|
Ok Ive tried to incorporate all comments and suggestions so far in the first post. Ill clean it up some more later. Further suggestions and ideas are of course welcome. Thanks for everyones contributions!
|
07-22-2018, 06:52 PM | #46 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,266
|
I think we try to model the 19th century like the modern leagues.
Problem is that it may take away the chaos of the 19th century play which is the heart of 19th century play. Still the work that has been done by ootp and the beta teams is tremendous. I still remember the days you could have 19th century players but it was practically impossible to run a league from 1871 without major problems stopping it somewhere down the line. Now people can use the game's setup and start in 1871 and play. If they don't mind some slight changes from history they can at least get a league going. For those like me that try for a more accurate 19th century play the progress is just as good. I can start in 1871 and have accurate rosters every year without it taking a year to get to 1900. I started my recent league on June 30th and i am already up to 1882. The 19th century play still needs some work but i don't want to ignore the work that people have done to improve it. |
07-22-2018, 08:34 PM | #47 | |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 297
|
Quote:
Last edited by guamyank; 07-22-2018 at 08:39 PM. |
|
07-23-2018, 12:43 AM | #48 | ||
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Up There
Posts: 15,403
|
Quote:
Quote:
For example, in the 1882 NL season, Detroit played 86 games, even though the schedule was for 84 games. Why? Tie games. (Detroit's record was 42-41-3). In the 1886 AA season, both the Brooklyn and Cincinnati clubs played 141 games in a 140-game schedule (the former finishing 76-61-4 and the latter 65-73-3). The 1887 New York Giants played 129 games in a 126-game schedule due to tie games (68-55-6). In 1888 the AA Brooklyn club played 143 games in a 140-game schedule (its final record was 88-52-3). But all tie games don't appear in the as played schedule since they did not produce a win-loss result, and thus are treated as postponed games. (The rule was, and still is, to replay tie games in their entirety at a later date, schedule permitting), On this point we are in absolute agreement. |
||
07-23-2018, 03:29 PM | #49 | |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 297
|
Quote:
|
|
07-24-2018, 09:58 AM | #50 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Lonely Mountain
Posts: 2,509
|
__________________
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies." -- C.S. Lewis |
07-24-2018, 05:27 PM | #51 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Up There
Posts: 15,403
|
Retrosheet's final standings for each season shows the number of tie games played by each club. If you examine each club's individual schedule of results the tie games are listed. (This is true of Retrosheet's season game log files as well.)
|
07-27-2018, 05:55 AM | #52 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,266
|
Quote:
Not much but for the nick picky it may matter. I just look at retrosheets total games and make sure the as played schedule matches up. Just easier to me. Although i do use regular schedules after 1900 so either way is fine. |
|
07-29-2018, 04:03 PM | #53 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,266
|
Nice lecture on 19th century baseball. Most of it i knew already but was still
an interesting talk. I do agree with putting Chris Von der Ahe in the hall. https://youtu.be/rb-3VHVSk2M |
07-29-2018, 11:24 PM | #54 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Up There
Posts: 15,403
|
|
10-09-2018, 05:04 PM | #55 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 416
|
Quote:
|
|
10-09-2018, 10:35 PM | #56 |
OOTP Historical Czar
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bothell Wa
Posts: 7,254
|
The main reason for the 15 player limit was that 2-way players did not exist in OOTP as I recall. now they do as an option. but if gamers turn them off havoc could ensue. plus even now you can have less than 15 on non AI controlled teams. Oddly most gamers seem to set the roster size to 25 just because that is what they are used to.
__________________
It's madness, madness, I tell you! For the love of God, don't do it! |
10-10-2018, 05:41 PM | #57 | ||||||
Minors (Single A)
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 94
|
I've done a lot of 19th Century leagues over the years, trying to get it just the way I like it. I think I've got it now with OOTP19 - there is still a fair amount to do by hand, but I don't mind so much. I'm getting to like it.
But my thoughts on some of these... Quote:
And if you're going to be really particular (which I am when simming from 1871), then there's the issue of franchise histories starting way before they did in real life - of the original 1871 franchises, really only the Braves should have a continuous line to the modern day. Even if I delete teams so that only the teams that really played are represented, some team histories are going to stay in tact. For example, even when the NL goes down to 6 teams, one of them will eventually become the L.A. Dodgers. As a Giants fan, that is unacceptable to me. But I usually just add and subtract teams manually until I get to 1901 - then I let automatic expansion take it from there. Quote:
There's some hassle to that, but it's not prohibitive. (At least, I don't think so...And if it is prohibitive, I don't always include the UA.) Incidentally, this time around, I've tried adding the National Association as a separate league. Then for MLB, I put two dummy teams in each league and set the number of league games to 0. This skips the regular season for MLB, and then I play everything out in the NA. At the end of 1875, I'll move the appropriate teams from the NA to the NL, and then fold the NA. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I like the idea of real-life owners, too - but it's less important. And going along with this, I'd like the option to induct managers (and I suppose owners) into the HOF...but that's another thread. Quote:
Could we get a facegen pack without him - I know there's still a great deal of similarity in the fictional faces that would be created, but it wouldn't be the same guy over and over and over and over again. Sometimes this guy is half (or more) of a team. I try to delete him from my fg files wherever I see him, but it would be nice to someday get a fg set that doesn't include him at all. As for uniforms and logos - I'm fine with what we have. There's been a lot of great work done on these, and the on-line cap and jersey makers are very helpful in filling in whatever gaps may arise. |
||||||
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|