Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 25 Available - FHM 10 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 25 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Prior Versions of Our Games > Out of the Park Baseball 14 > OOTP 14 - General Discussions

OOTP 14 - General Discussions Discuss the new 2013 version of Out of the Park Baseball here!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-20-2013, 08:45 PM   #21
Lukas Berger
OOTP Developments
 
Lukas Berger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France
Posts: 19,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenoser View Post
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.
Exactly. So why remove them? Those who don't like/understand them can remove them for yourselves by turning them off. Give the rest of us the option to keep using them if we want.
Lukas Berger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 09:12 PM   #22
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
I don't want them removed...I want them to be uniform, and reflective of your scout's opinion (and performance), not some hybrid of actual ratings and performance.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 09:18 PM   #23
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla View Post
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.
He wasn't confused, he said it was re-done and consequently would not be an issue. This just isn't the case. Sorry.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 09:21 PM   #24
RchW
Hall Of Famer
 
RchW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The big smoke
Posts: 15,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by endgame View Post
No problem. I smile so little I don't recognize them anyway.
Hard to smile when your lips are stuck on a fence.
__________________
Cheers

RichW

#stopthestupid

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit
RchW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 09:57 PM   #25
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
He wasn't confused, he said it was re-done and consequently would not be an issue. This just isn't the case. Sorry.
Sorry....there was nothing for him to fix!

Did you check anything I said? Uh, no. Yet you keep on posting here that there is a terrible problem that must be fixed and that you have no idea why you are being ignored......THERE IS NOTHING TO FIX.

Please try to follow along......Ryan Ludwick gets 1.5 stars as a LF with 10(10), 11(13), 11/(11) on a 20 scale.

There are 57 LFers in the league that get 2 stars or more.

I retire all 57 of those players. I rerun scouting.

Ludwick is still 10(10), 11(13), 11(11), but is now 4.5 stars. Why? Because he is now a big stud fish in a shrunken pond.

So, what is it that is the problem with ANYTHING you have posted????
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 10:00 PM   #26
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
oooops...forgot the pics

Here they are
Attached Images
Image Image Image 
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 10:08 PM   #27
Fyrestorm3
Hall Of Famer
 
Fyrestorm3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tampa Bay, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,928
VG, not to be rude or anything, but I think you're completely missing what PSUColonel is upset about.

Sure, if you re-run scouting, the star ratings change. The issue here is that OCCASIONALLY (I stress occasionally), a player will have different Star Ratings on the different tabs of his profile. It might say the guy is 1.5 Overall on the main Profile tab, but if you switch it over to the Scouting Reports tab, suddenly he's a 3.0 Overall. No re-scouting has occurred, and in fact, if you do re-scout, it doesn't change a thing. The profile is giving one rating, while the scouting report is giving another, and both are occurring at the same moment in time. I've seen it myself, once or twice.

Now, it doesn't bother me as much as it bothers PSUColonel, but I do agree that the ratings should be uniform, and I don't understand why this happens.
Fyrestorm3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 10:20 PM   #28
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3 View Post
VG, not to be rude or anything, but I think you're completely missing what PSUColonel is upset about.

Sure, if you re-run scouting, the star ratings change. The issue here is that OCCASIONALLY (I stress occasionally), a player will have different Star Ratings on the different tabs of his profile. It might say the guy is 1.5 Overall on the main Profile tab, but if you switch it over to the Scouting Reports tab, suddenly he's a 3.0 Overall. No re-scouting has occurred, and in fact, if you do re-scout, it doesn't change a thing. The profile is giving one rating, while the scouting report is giving another, and both are occurring at the same moment in time. I've seen it myself, once or twice.

Now, it doesn't bother me as much as it bothers PSUColonel, but I do agree that the ratings should be uniform, and I don't understand why this happens.
Not taking it as rudeness, at all.

In the link I posted to the previous thread, I addressed this very issue there, months ago.

Last edited by VanillaGorilla; 07-21-2013 at 04:52 AM.
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 10:27 PM   #29
Fyrestorm3
Hall Of Famer
 
Fyrestorm3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tampa Bay, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla View Post
Not taking it as rudeness at, all.

In the link I posted to the previous thread, I addressed this very issue there, months ago.
My bad for not checking the link. I'll accept that explanation; I've never really found it to be an issue, I've just noticed it from time to time.
Fyrestorm3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 11:15 PM   #30
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Has scouted been totally re-coded as Markus said?
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2013, 11:19 PM   #31
endgame
Hall Of Famer
 
endgame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla View Post

There are 57 LFers in the league that get 2 stars or more.

I retire all 57 of those players. I rerun scouting.

Ludwick is still 10(10), 11(13), 11(11), but is now 4.5 stars. Why? Because he is now a big stud fish in a shrunken pond.

So, what is it that is the problem with ANYTHING you have posted????
Vanilla, your point's all good and well as goes how overall stars/ratings are reflected, but that's not the specific incident or example PSU is talking about and has been talking about for as long as I recall. I've even been an advocate of seeking better explanations as the representation (stars or numbers or whatever) do not match within either reasonable timeframes or even same day comparisons and it's been an issue off and on for some time, though few people insist on that kind of consistency he's desiring. I understand your 'shrunken pond' example, but it's misplaced in context of the specific examples he's offered over the, well, years. No one retired, no one imported a hundred players, the stars just don't align. He wants them to, and that's that. The problem, as he and some others perceive it, has been logged. It may not be your intention, but you border on demeaning someone for their perception because they're not seeing it in your context and so they must be ignorant or wrong. Let's be careful here. We're talking about representations of both ratings and perceptions of those ratings by the user. Markus may be the only one who understands the cold hard, coded, facts.

His concern has been logged. Again. I've added my own comments and links to appropriate threads. Nothing further will be gained until we get yet another response from Markus indicating just how the scout recoding affected any change in this area. Beyond that, discuss, but I suggest we do so with civility and respect for other points of view.
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett
_____________________________________________
endgame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 12:20 AM   #32
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by endgame View Post
Vanilla, your point's all good and well as goes how overall stars/ratings are reflected, but that's not the specific incident or example PSU is talking about and has been talking about for as long as I recall. I've even been an advocate of seeking better explanations as the representation (stars or numbers or whatever) do not match within either reasonable timeframes or even same day comparisons and it's been an issue off and on for some time, though few people insist on that kind of consistency he's desiring. I understand your 'shrunken pond' example, but it's misplaced in context of the specific examples he's offered over the, well, years. No one retired, no one imported a hundred players, the stars just don't align. He wants them to, and that's that. The problem, as he and some others perceive it, has been logged. It may not be your intention, but you border on demeaning someone for their perception because they're not seeing it in your context and so they must be ignorant or wrong. Let's be careful here. We're talking about representations of both ratings and perceptions of those ratings by the user. Markus may be the only one who understands the cold hard, coded, facts.

His concern has been logged. Again. I've added my own comments and links to appropriate threads. Nothing further will be gained until we get yet another response from Markus indicating just how the scout recoding affected any change in this area. Beyond that, discuss, but I suggest we do so with civility and respect for other points of view.
As I posted to Fyre, I indeed addressed this months ago in the linked thread. There was no response to that proposition, but new threads appear and old ones are bumped. I am not arguing that Markus is not the ultimate source for everything with the game. However, he, nor any single programmer dealing with such a complexity as OOTP can foresee how everything plays out. If that were not the case, there would be no beta team, bug report thread, or forum discussions, like this one.

I haven't gone back to look at ALL of the same day discrepancies pictured in all of the threads, but there is a commonality amongst them.

The players who are posted that gain stars (more than a half) are from the end of the season. This is when players become free agents and leave the pool of rostered players which elevates the star ratings of the remaining players as I illustrated with Ludwick.

The players posted who lose stars (more than a half) are coming at the start of the season as the Spring Training rosters are no more and the active rosters across the board go to 25. The 1/2 star AAA types are no longer bringing down the average and distribution of the talent and the remaining payers who were average in comparison to all players active for ST are now below average, which is the math of the star model.

Markus, Lukas, yourself, injurylog, or anyone else that has a more intimate understanding of the software is free to say "VG, you are full of banana barf, and here is why...."

I understand programming and design and order of operations in software. There are bugs that pop up in game play that are clear order of operation snafus (scoring play bugs come to mind).

I see the same day star discrepancy "bug" as not a bug at all, but a reflection of the order of operations being absolutely correct for the purpose of giving accurate relative strength of players to the user when it is the user's turn to interact with the game.

Last edited by VanillaGorilla; 07-21-2013 at 12:46 AM.
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 12:51 AM   #33
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Another example...In this case, the profile page should (to me) read 2.5 overall, 2.5 potential. (as my scout says the ratings are as of 3/30/13) Why does it instead read 1.5 overall and 3.5 potential? Should this profile page rating not change until the next report is filed by my scout?
Attached Images
Image Image 
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 01:44 AM   #34
endgame
Hall Of Famer
 
endgame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla View Post
As I posted to Fyre, I indeed addressed this months ago in the linked thread. There was no response to that proposition, but new threads appear and old ones are bumped. I am not arguing that Markus is not the ultimate source for everything with the game. However, he, nor any single programmer dealing with such a complexity as OOTP can foresee how everything plays out. If that were not the case, there would be no beta team, bug report thread, or forum discussions, like this one.

I haven't gone back to look at ALL of the same day discrepancies pictured in all of the threads, but there is a commonality amongst them.

The players who are posted that gain stars (more than a half) are from the end of the season. This is when players become free agents and leave the pool of rostered players which elevates the star ratings of the remaining players as I illustrated with Ludwick.

The players posted who lose stars (more than a half) are coming at the start of the season as the Spring Training rosters are no more and the active rosters across the board go to 25. The 1/2 star AAA types are no longer bringing down the average and distribution of the talent and the remaining payers who were average in comparison to all players active for ST are now below average, which is the math of the star model.

Markus, Lukas, yourself, injurylog, or anyone else that has a more intimate understanding of the software is free to say "VG, you are full of banana barf, and here is why...."

I understand programming and design and order of operations in software. There are bugs that pop up in game play that are clear order of operation snafus (scoring play bugs come to mind).

I see the same day star discrepancy "bug" as not a bug at all, but a reflection of the order of operations being absolutely correct for the purpose of giving accurate relative strength of players to the user when it is the user's turn to interact with the game.
And that, VG, is an excellent post, full of forethought with your ideas and concepts laid out with clarity minus the enthusiasm and bravado. Salutes! Even I, unskilled in your area of expertise, can follow the phasing and the order you infer is at work and may very well be the case. I will be sure to add these comments to my suggestion for review. Frankly, I'd anticipated argument of a more combative nature and you surprised me with dignifed and well-rounded delivery. Again, I appreciate that more than I can even express and I tend to express myself abundantly. Good thoughts. If I'd missed those in earlier presentations, perhaps said a different way, then I should have been paying more attention as it's a point of view with merit.

As to intimate knowledge of the game's processes, I'm afraid I don't quite measure up to the skill set of the others you mentioned. What I know best is very often what I don't know and, for what it's worth, have spent a fair amount of time over the years soliciting the powers that be for definition and exposition of what I've considered ambiguous or misunderstood. The irony in that is I probably qualify as both.

You, and many others possess a great deal more experience with baseball and logic, I'd admit. Much of my focus and efforts have traditionally been centered on perceptions of shortcomings, interpretations of how the game works in practice with users, and attempting to contribute to its integrity by always revisiting literally any area that offers the meager appearance of being broken in any way, actuality aside, perceptions matter. And so, as a result, we find ourselves in this discussion due, in part, to just such an appearance, however small the objecting audience.

Again, thanks for the gracious response. It's the kind of contribution that builds better community and furthers understanding.
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett
_____________________________________________
endgame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 02:01 AM   #35
Lukas Berger
OOTP Developments
 
Lukas Berger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France
Posts: 19,757
Great posts from both VanillaGorilla and endgame! You guys are getting me interested in this discussion in spite of my initial complete lack of caring at all!

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
I don't want them removed...I want them to be uniform, and reflective of your scout's opinion (and performance), not some hybrid of actual ratings and performance.
My comment wasn't directed at you. I understand where you're coming from. I don't personally care about the issue one way or another, other than to want the ratings to not disappear, but I do understand.

But there has been talk of removing the stat ratings at some points in this thread. Just wanted to add my voice as being against that idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
Has scouted been totally re-coded as Markus said?
Dunno. I've assumed so since Markus said it was. But since I don't have access to the coding...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel View Post
Another example...In this case, the profile page should (to me) read 2.5 overall, 2.5 potential. (as my scout says the ratings are as of 3/30/13) Why does it instead read 1.5 overall and 3.5 potential? Should this profile page rating not change until the next report is filed by my scout?
I'd think so.

Looking at the date, end of spring training, makes me think that VanillaGorilla's point is right on, that this is related to the shrinking of the roster pool when players are sent down.

Assuming I understand VG correctly and can correctly interpret the evidence as seen, the problem seems to be that the game doesn't recognize what rating to use when the pool changes substantially on the same day that a scout rating was generated. It seems like it takes a day to allow the game to actually recognize when that rating has changed if there are also major changes in the player pool on the same day.

So yeah, the profile should probably use the last scouted rating no matter what. Not sure what it would take to get that to actually happen. But that being said, this does look like a really minor glitch that only happens at a very few select times. So I don't quite get all the angst. Which isn't to say that there's no good reason for it or that this isn't important. I just personally don't get it, which doesn't actually matter, does it

Last edited by Lukas Berger; 07-21-2013 at 02:16 AM.
Lukas Berger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 04:17 AM   #36
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasberger View Post

Assuming I understand VG correctly and can correctly interpret the evidence as seen, the problem seems to be that the game doesn't recognize what rating to use when the pool changes substantially on the same day that a scout rating was generated. It seems like it takes a day to allow the game to actually recognize when that rating has changed if there are also major changes in the player pool on the same day.
This is not a problem. It is actually a great feature. The skill ratings can remain constant, but the value of a player can change dramatically.

Let's say I have a 1983 Jody Davis as my catcher and he carried a 2.5/2.5 star rating. Playing in the Majors are also Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Gary Carter, and Mike Piazza...all in their primes (I love random debut).

I am playing with an injury setting of high or very high, and in the matter of a week, Bench, Berra, Piazza, and Carter all suffer CEIs. Jody Davis is now the best catcher in the league, and is now 5 stars, even though his skill ratings have not changed at all. I, as a user, have this information conveyed to me through the star rating. His last scouting report still shows him as 2.5 stars at the time that report was submitted, but his current profile of 5 stars is correct for what his current value is relative to other catchers in the league.

If it so happens that Roy Campanella, Carlton Fisk, Pudge, and Bill Dickey were sitting in AAA behind Bench, Berra, Carter, and Piazza, Davis would still be 2.5 stars relative to the league when these four replace the guys that took the CEIs. I don't need to go through every team and see who is on everyone's roster everyday at every position to gauge how good I am at a position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasberger View Post
So yeah, the profile should probably use the last scouted rating no matter what. Not sure what it would take to get that to actually happen. But that being said, this does look like a really minor glitch that only happens at a very few select times. So I don't quite get all the angst. Which isn't to say that there's no good reason for it or that this isn't important. I just personally don't get it, which doesn't actually matter, does it
No, the profile should not use the last scouting report for star ratings from the time the report was submitted. The profile should reflect what the skill rankings are from the last scout report (and there has been no example given being of this ever not* being the case), yes. The star ratings, however, should be fluid and represent what those skill ratings are relative to the player/positional population today, and not six weeks ago. This is not a bug.

ADD: I went back and unretired all of the players from the game used in the Ludwick post and simmed a week. After a weeks worth of signings, Ludwick became a 2.0/2.0 star player. Not all of the retired players signed in that time. That explains why he is not a 1.5. With those players gone he is "an offensive force you can buid a line-up around". With those other players in the pool he is a "below average" hitter. His actual skill ratings never changed.

Last edited by VanillaGorilla; 07-21-2013 at 04:50 AM. Reason: edit*, ADD
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 04:40 AM   #37
VanillaGorilla
All Star Starter
 
VanillaGorilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,371
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by endgame View Post
And that, VG, is an excellent post, full of forethought with your ideas and concepts laid out with clarity minus the enthusiasm and bravado. Salutes! Even I, unskilled in your area of expertise, can follow the phasing and the order you infer is at work and may very well be the case. I will be sure to add these comments to my suggestion for review. Frankly, I'd anticipated argument of a more combative nature and you surprised me with dignifed and well-rounded delivery. Again, I appreciate that more than I can even express and I tend to express myself abundantly. Good thoughts. If I'd missed those in earlier presentations, perhaps said a different way, then I should have been paying more attention as it's a point of view with merit.

As to intimate knowledge of the game's processes, I'm afraid I don't quite measure up to the skill set of the others you mentioned. What I know best is very often what I don't know and, for what it's worth, have spent a fair amount of time over the years soliciting the powers that be for definition and exposition of what I've considered ambiguous or misunderstood. The irony in that is I probably qualify as both.

You, and many others possess a great deal more experience with baseball and logic, I'd admit. Much of my focus and efforts have traditionally been centered on perceptions of shortcomings, interpretations of how the game works in practice with users, and attempting to contribute to its integrity by always revisiting literally any area that offers the meager appearance of being broken in any way, actuality aside, perceptions matter. And so, as a result, we find ourselves in this discussion due, in part, to just such an appearance, however small the objecting audience.

Again, thanks for the gracious response. It's the kind of contribution that builds better community and furthers understanding.
Thank you for this post. It is much appreciated, as all the work done by you and everyone on the team is also appreciated.

Thank you for including my thoughts in your submission for official review. If the response is that I am completely full of banana barf on this, let me know. No need to break it to me gently, either.

Cheers.

Last edited by VanillaGorilla; 07-21-2013 at 11:56 PM.
VanillaGorilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 10:04 AM   #38
Lukas Berger
OOTP Developments
 
Lukas Berger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France
Posts: 19,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla View Post
This is not a problem. It is actually a great feature. The skill ratings can remain constant, but the value of a player can change dramatically.

Let's say I have a 1983 Jody Davis as my catcher and he carried a 2.5/2.5 star rating. Playing in the Majors are also Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Gary Carter, and Mike Piazza...all in their primes (I love random debut).

I am playing with an injury setting of high or very high, and in the matter of a week, Bench, Berra, Piazza, and Carter all suffer CEIs. Jody Davis is now the best catcher in the league, and is now 5 stars, even though his skill ratings have not changed at all. I, as a user, have this information conveyed to me through the star rating. His last scouting report still shows him as 2.5 stars at the time that report was submitted, but his current profile of 5 stars is correct for what his current value is relative to other catchers in the league.

If it so happens that Roy Campanella, Carlton Fisk, Pudge, and Bill Dickey were sitting in AAA behind Bench, Berra, Carter, and Piazza, Davis would still be 2.5 stars relative to the league when these four replace the guys that took the CEIs. I don't need to go through every team and see who is on everyone's roster everyday at every position to gauge how good I am at a position.



No, the profile should not use the last scouting report for star ratings from the time the report was submitted. The profile should reflect what the skill rankings are from the last scout report (and there has been no example given being of this ever not* being the case), yes. The star ratings, however, should be fluid and represent what those skill ratings are relative to the player/positional population today, and not six weeks ago. This is not a bug.

ADD: I went back and unretired all of the players from the game used in the Ludwick post and simmed a week. After a weeks worth of signings, Ludwick became a 2.0/2.0 star player. Not all of the retired players signed in that time. That explains why he is not a 1.5. With those players gone he is "an offensive force you can buid a line-up around". With those other players in the pool he is a "below average" hitter. His actual skill ratings never changed.
Right. I agree with and understand all that. But it does seem to be an issue that at a singular point in time OOTP will have two different overall star ratings for the same player. That's the complaint I'm seeing from PSUColonel and others. Am I wrong on that?

If not that that little hiccup should probably be fixed. Though maybe not if it takes any real time or effort to do so since I think there's some higher priorities of things to be fixed and improved.

I think it's a different issue from the overall value and usage of the start ratings, which is what you're describing (and describing very well at that). The two things are likely tied together, as it's changes to the player pool that causes OOTP to create the non matching ratings, but they're actually separate things. Or am I misunderstanding this issue?

Last edited by Lukas Berger; 07-21-2013 at 01:47 PM.
Lukas Berger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 10:59 AM   #39
hefalumps
All Star Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,355
VG,

You pointed out in my example the date of my screenshot (October 29th), and then assumed it was a day FAs or arbitration happened. If you look at the screen again, it says right up top it was the first day of the offseason.

And while your explanation of roster moves happening between the scouting report on the "Scouting Reports" tab and the "live" ratings on the "Profile" tab is certainly a feasible one, I don't think that's what I was seeing in my league. Sure, I only took the screenshot on one day, and maybe some players retired on October 29th that could have caused this discrepancy, but I was checking that player's ratings regularly throughout the year, and it was always the same thing - profile said 4 stars OVR and POT, scouting report said 1 star OVR and POT, even though the individual ratings on each report were identical.

I understand the math that we think is being used in star calculations, and that it's completely dependent on the other players in the league being compared to the individual player, but none of that explains why throughout the course of a season this player consistently shows four stars on his profile but one star on his scouting reports. So which is it? How exactly does this player compare to the rest of the league? I can only assume that the two tabs are somehow using different player pools for comparison, but I don't know how to determine why they're different and which player base each tab would be using. Maybe the 4-star profile tab is comparing him against minor leaguers for some reason, but even so, his recent scouting reports at the AAA level were still only 1 or 1.5 stars.

Maybe it's not a bug. Maybe it's a league corruption or some combination of settings causing weirdness, which is why not everyone sees it. I'd be happy to submit my league files to Markus but this was an old dynasty league I was playing in OOTP13 and have been playing since OOTP9, and I haven't imported into 14 yet. I also haven't seen the issue in my test 14 league (waiting for the last patch before I start my new dynasty), so I have nothing to submit.

But I still think there's something going on here worth looking into. When I import my OOTP13 dynasty into 14, if I'm still seeing a lot of this going on, I'll upload my league files to Markus and try opening a ticket to see if he can provide some kind of explanation.
hefalumps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2013, 11:05 AM   #40
hefalumps
All Star Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,355
I actually just had another thought... and I was hoping VG could lend his two cents.

If I recall (don't have my 13 league handy right now to check), at some point along the lines I noticed a number of players who were position players but still had ratings as a pitcher. I remember this because I would occasionally filter a screen by pitchers and see some position players scattered in there. I think Markus adjusted the filters so that they wouldn't show up anymore (or something like that), but there were still position players with pitcher ratings.

Does anyone think it's possible that perhaps the profile page's star ratings are taking these position player's pitching ratings into account, while the scouting report tab's star ratings are only comparing players with a strict MR role? It might explain why I traditionally saw this issue mostly with middle relievers and not other players.

Just a thought... next time I open my OOTP13 league I'll have to investigate this further.
hefalumps is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:45 AM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Out of the Park Developments