Star Ratings in OOTP 14

[hefalumps]

Hi Markus,

I know I've come across a number of threads where people see differences between what the player's profile has for star (overall/potential) ratings and what the player's scouting report has, even when the scouting report is issued on the same day that you're viewing the profile. I've tried tweaking some of the AI evaluation settings and "ratings based on all players not just positions", and I'm still seeing stuff like what's linked in the thread below.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ml#post3463631

Any thoughts? Hoping this is something that can either be explained or caught and fixed for OOTP14, because I run into it a lot in my league, especially with relievers.

Thanks!

[Jon Shafer]

Alas, this is still an issue in 14.

Strangely though, it appears to be less prevalent for relievers now. After our online league upgraded from 13 a young guy that was showing 2-star potential on his profile page but 4.5 stars on the Scouting Reports tab is now 4.5 in both (good news for me!).

The issue is definitely more common with younger/less established players. Studs and consistent guys in their prime very rarely have any inconsistencies.

Since this bug may not get fixed, does anyone at least have a clue as to which set of ratings tends to be more correct?

I only play in one league and don't do single player so the data I have is pretty limited, but it at least seems that the profile page looks more correct. When there is a difference, guys with higher batting or pitching ratings tend to have more "appropriate" star ratings on the profile page, while those on the Scouting Reports tab feel low (and vice versa).

What have you guys noticed?

- Jon

[PSUColonel]

I am wondering if this is still being examined?

[PSUColonel]

It seems to me this issue is being ignored for one reason or another. I've been talking about it until my face turned blue.

[DCG12]

Let me start by saying that I am in no way defending the game or saying that there isn't something wrong BUT maybe it's time people stopped paying so much attention to stars (or the numeric equivalent).

In hefalumps example the only thing not the same is the number of stars. The actual ratings are the same 15-9-10. So do the stars matter? Based on how good you interpret those numbers to be, you pitch him and see what happens. What are his stats etc.

I just don't get the fascination with stars. I do agree that if you have a system in place to compare players to players or positions to positions it should be uniform, but the level of angst when it doesn't appear to alter the game amazes me.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

It seems to me this issue is being ignored for one reason or another. I've been talking about it until my face turned blue.

The issue was answered, in a thread you started on this topic:

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ml#post3506378

To the OP's link to the thread which shows a 1 star vs 4 star discrepency, it can be explained by this:

The date is Oct 29. This is probably a date of arbitration hearings or Free Agency filings for that particular league, that year.

All the players who were not given Arbitration, or who filed for Free Agency, whatever the case may be, are no longer part of the population used to determine relative talent in the league.

Couple that with teams replacing those players from their minor league squads that are largely players with lower ratings than anyone that was on those team's rosters prior to the Arb/FA date, and you have a shift in league talent that is the basis for the star ratings.

Again, the skill ratings are not different from one report to the other, but the relative strength of those skill ratings in comparison to the composition of league talent has changed. This is what is reflected in the star ratings.

There is nothing wrong here.

[Sweed]

Frankly I think the star rating should just be removed. Its just not that big of a deal and is not worth the effort. Same with the text reports that have a hard time matching up.

We have the player's overall and potential in many numeric forms from the realistic 2-8 to the "too much information" (IMHO) 1-100 that do a good job of showing what a player is and could be. We have the player's abilities also broken down numerically for various skills. We also have the stats the players produce while playing games.

I get that we're all different and players of a game like this are probably on some level more "anal" than the average guy but I, for the life of me, can't see why anyone would spend so much time and energy on something like this that in the end makes no real difference?

Remove the stars. Go with your favorite numerical rating system. Want maximum FOW go with 2-8. And start enjoying your OOTP baseball world.

Yes with numeric ratings you can also get some strange looking results but they are much more rare than the star system. And as I already said we still have individual skill ratings and stats that can be our guide.

Whatever causes this must be lost in the complex code of OOTP and is not an easy find\fix. If it was it would already be done, no?

I'm not trying to belittle anyone here. I know I am more anal than some and less than others. What bothers me doesn't bother them and visa versa. I'm just suggesting that this issue goes almost entirely away if one turns off those "damned stars" that have never worked.

Pleas Markus remove those stars!

Just my 2 cents and FWIW I do hope you someday get this fixed to your satisfaction.

[endgame]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Please Markus remove those stars!

IIRC, we did that once, didn't we? And wasn't there a tremendous uproar? Maybe times are different now, and maybe I'm not remembering it correctly, but I think we've been there done that.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Frankly I think the star rating should just be removed. Its just not that big of a deal and is not worth the effort. Same with the text reports that have a hard time matching up.

We have the player's overall and potential in many numeric forms from the realistic 2-8 to the "too much information" (IMHO) 1-100 that do a good job of showing what a player is and could be. We have the player's abilities also broken down numerically for various skills. We also have the stats the players produce while playing games.

I get that we're all different and players of a game like this are probably on some level more "anal" than the average guy but I, for the life of me, can't see why anyone would spend so much time and energy on something like this that in the end makes no real difference?

Remove the stars. Go with your favorite numerical rating system. Want maximum FOW go with 2-8. And start enjoying your OOTP baseball world.

Yes with numeric ratings you can also get some strange looking results but they are much more rare than the star system. And as I already said we still have individual skill ratings and stats that can be our guide.

Whatever causes this must be lost in the complex code of OOTP and is not an easy find\fix. If it was it would already be done, no?

I'm not trying to belittle anyone here. I know I am more anal than some and less than others. What bothers me doesn't bother them and visa versa. I'm just suggesting that this issue goes almost entirely away if one turns off those "damned stars" that have never worked.

Pleas Markus remove those stars!

Just my 2 cents and FWIW I do hope you someday get this fixed to your satisfaction.

I like the Stars, a lot. I am glad they are there. Since the game's player output is based on each player's relative strength to the others, the Stars are a quick reference for the user to let him know how good his player is comparison to others at that listed position.

Since the game is NOT Strat, this information is invaluable. Player results for a 50/80 hitter will be substantially different if the league average for hitters is 30, 50, or 70. The Stars give the user an indication of how good the 50/80 contact/power is for the league without having to look at every other player in the league.

If someone doesn't like using the stars, then that person should turn them off.

However, removing them from the game because some people find them to be confusing would be a bad idea.

Mo options, mo better.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

I like the Stars, a lot. I am glad they are there. Since the game's player output is based on each player's relative strength to the others, the Stars are a quick reference for the user to let him know how good his player is comparison to others at that listed position.

Since the game is NOT Strat, this information is invaluable. Player results for a 50/80 hitter will be substantially different if the league average for hitters is 30, 50, or 70. The Stars give the user an indication of how good the 50/80 contact/power is for the league without having to look at every other player in the league.

If someone doesn't like using the stars, then that person should turn them off.

However, removing them from the game because some people find them to be confusing would be a bad idea.

Mo options, mo better.

Yeah, I guess that would be true if the stars worked? And the turn 'em off request is somewhat in jest knowing it's not going to happen. My real point was for the OP and supporters to turn the stars off and enjoy the game instead of letting it bother them.

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

Since the game is NOT Strat, this information is invaluable. Player results for a 50/80 hitter will be substantially different if the league average for hitters is 30, 50, or 70. The Stars give the user an indication of how good the 50/80 contact/power is for the league without having to look at every other player in the league.

Not sure I understand this line of thinking or why you are talking about 50/80 hitters. Aren't the stars based on current\potential overall? Isn't a 50\80 batter based "on each player's relative strength to the others" the same as a 3*\5*? What is different about comparing a 3*\5* player or a ~50/80 overall batter\pitcher?

If I want to compare contact, power, etc I have to use the numeric scale, don't I? I didn't think players were rated as 3* contact, 4* power, 2* eye but only 50 contact, 70 power, 15 eye. Now I never use stars so am I missing something?

edit: I would also add that the numeric ratings both skills and overall\potential also provide a "quick reference" by color coding for different levels of skill. Of course this is not handy if one is color blind but it is there and does work well, at least for me.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by endgame

IIRC, we did that once, didn't we? And wasn't there a tremendous uproar? Maybe times are different now, and maybe I'm not remembering it correctly, but I think we've been there done that.

Well, the option is in the game to disable them, so I believe both parties should be happy, those who want them and those who don't.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by endgame

IIRC, we did that once, didn't we? And wasn't there a tremendous uproar? Maybe times are different now, and maybe I'm not remembering it correctly, but I think we've been there done that.

Yeah, and thats why the smiley is there. Though rereading my post I should have had a smiley in the first sentence too.

[endgame]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Yeah, and thats why the smiley is there. Though rereading my post I should have had a smiley in the first sentence too.

No problem. I smile so little I don't recognize them anyway.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Not sure I understand this line of thinking or why you are talking about 50/80 hitters. Aren't the stars based on current\potential overall? Isn't a 50\80 batter based "on each player's relative strength to the others" the same as a 3*\5*? What is different about comparing a 3*\5* player or a ~50/80 overall batter\pitcher?

If I want to compare contact, power, etc I have to use the numeric scale, don't I? I didn't think players were rated as 3* contact, 4* power, 2* eye but only 50 contact, 70 power, 15 eye. Now I never use stars so am I missing something?

The stars aren't for individual traits. They are an overall indication. I was abbreviating my illustration, is all.

IF the stars only represented hitting (they don't, but let's just say) and you had the 50/80 50/80 guy in a league with 200 other 50/80 50/80 guys and you imported one hundred 80/80 80/80 guys into that league, the 50/80 guys would still be 50/80 guys, but they would go from being 2-3 star players to 1-1.5 star players and their output would go from average to below average once the 80/80 players were imported, though the actual ratings of the 50/80 guys would not change.

This is how I understand the game's workings. This is why I find the Stars to be valuable.

The ratings are the commodity. The stars are the value of that commodity in the particular playing environment.

A gallon of gas in Manhattan is the same gallon of gas in Mecca. Yet, that gallon has a different value in the NYC environment than it does in the environment of Saudi Arabia. That value would be represented by the stars.

If I am wrong about any of this, fine. It won't be the first time. As I said, this is my understanding of the game's operation. I am open for correction on any point.

ADD:

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

The stars aren't for individual traits. They are an overall indication. I was abbreviating my illustration, is all.

IF the stars only represented hitting (they don't, but let's just say) and you had the 50/80 50/80 guy in a league with 200 other 50/80 50/80 guys and you imported one hundred 80/80 80/80 guys into that league, the 50/80 guys would still be 50/80 guys, but they would go from being 2-3 star players to 1-1.5 star players and their output would go from average to below average once the 80/80 players were imported, though the actual ratings of the 50/80 guys would not change.

This is how I understand the game's workings. This is why I find the Stars to be valuable.

The ratings are the commodity. The stars are the value of that commodity in the particular playing environment.

A gallon of gas in Manhattan is the same gallon of gas in Mecca. Yet, that gallon has a different value in the NYC environment than it does in the environment of Saudi Arabia. That value would be represented by the stars.

If I am wrong about any of this, fine. It won't be the first time. As I said, this is my understanding of the game's operation. I am open for correction on any point.

ADD:

Yeah, the game is quite complex and I know I could be wrong on many of the assumptions I make about OOTP.

My understanding was the stars were simply a conversion of a player's O/P (overall\potential) as compared to the either the rest of the league or position depending on your settings. So, yeah you may be right that importing a hundred 80\80 guys would\could skew the stars.

I never thought of it that way though because to me a "stable" league that is working as it should (I know just my opinion) will have players come and go and the overall talent shouldn't change a whole lot. So a 50\80 guy will always be ~3* and a 75\80 will be a 5*.

Either way I'm really not against having them at all. "As is" I personally don't think they are worth using in one's game. I would love it if they worked in a consistent manner for those that like them. I still would not use them in my game, personal preference

[PSUColonel]

All I can say is this:

post #35

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...take-note.html

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

All I can say is this:

post #35

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...take-note.html

Note that post 34 was placed by Markus 11 minutes prior to post 35. He wants to know more about your settings. I do not think you uploaded a file and he examined it and made the post in 11 minutes.

Recalling and reading through that thread, Markus was confused by your complaint (as I read it, not assigning any actual confusion to Herr Markus).

The stars are NOT broken. They are working as described in the manual. There is no need to fix something that is functioning as designed. The only thing that needs fixing is the understanding of what the design of that function is, as opposed to what an individual user thinks the function should be.

From the manual:

Basis for OVR Ratings and POT Ratings
By default, OVR ratings are based exclusively on underlying actual ratings only. These are compared to the average actual ratings for all players at that position or role within the league. POT ratings are based exclusively on your player's underlying potential ratings, compared to the average underlying potential ratings for all other players at that position or role within the league.


Read THIS as meaning that the stars change when the league population changes, though the ratings will themselves remain constant.

You have posted NO instances of a player's RATINGS having changed from one screen shot to the next on the same day, only the star ratings.

What remains as the problem, here?

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Jon Shafer

The issue is definitely more common with younger/less established players. Studs and consistent guys in their prime very rarely have any inconsistencies.

This observation illustrates the star mechanism at work. It is simply math.

If you have established studs at 5 stars, they are not going to go down in ratings when other 5 star players leave the pool (temporarily, in the case of becoming Free Agents) and they are replaced by 1/2 star talent in the pool. This does not affect their displayed star value because they are already represented at maximum relative value.

Lower rated players are seen getting a boost when this happens. They also see a decline in their relative value when the better players are signed and the 1/2 star guys are returned to the farm.

That is why it seems that the studs are more stable, in terms of this discussion point.

As noted, the ratings are not changing, just the relative value of the ratings in the league construct. The stud player's skill ratings are not more stable than the average and replacement player's skill ratings. Only the star ratings are, because if you start with 5 stars, the only thing that will bring that rating down (other than an actual talent change) is importing a bunch of max talents into the league.

[PSUColonel]

I would like the option to rid of the profile stars while retaining those in the scouting report. What I also hate is that the AI doesn't use the scouting directors overall rating...and that you cannot search by that parameter. When you search based on star rating...you are not searching your scout's raring, but rather the one found on the profile page. What is this rating? Why is it sometimes so much different from my scouts? Is it in fact based on actual ratings rather than my scout's opinion? If so, doesn't this give away the fact your scout is wrong? I just think there has to be a better way to do this. As far as I'm concerned Marjus said he was recoding the scouting system and this would never be an issue again....that didnt happen.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

When you search based on star rating...you are not searching your scout's raring, but rather the one found on the profile page. What is this rating? Why is it sometimes so much different from my scouts? Is it in fact based on actual ratings rather than my scout's opinion?

This has been answered here, and elsewhere (as linked).