|
||||
|
|
OOTP 14 - Historical Simulations Discuss historical simulations and their results in this forum. |
|
Thread Tools |
04-16-2013, 06:20 PM | #1 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 183
|
Is the history accurate on OOTP14 ?
I was thinking of starting from the begining, so I looked at the teams created for the 1871 season...
I went online and noticed that there were 9 teams in 1871. These teams match Philadelphia Athletics Chicago White Stockings Boston Red Stockings Cleveland Forest City (In OOTP14 listed as Citys) OOTP14 - 1871 Baltimore Canaries St. Louis Brown Stockings Brooklyn Atlantics Cincinnati Reds Real History - 1871 Washington Olympics Troy Haymakers New York Mutuals Ft. Wayne Kekiongas Rockford Forest City Did I set something wrong that the teams arent accurate ? |
04-16-2013, 06:55 PM | #2 |
All Star Reserve
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 803
|
I believe OOTP does not get teams and expansion correct until 1901. I think it is correct past from 1901 on.
|
04-16-2013, 07:02 PM | #3 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,625
|
We really need a sticky in this forum to warn all users that you absolutely CANNOT use OOTP to simulate the full history of MLB dating back to 1871.
The only way you can conduct a historically accurate simulation is to start in 1901. Any starting year before that season will not give you the correct rules of the game, let alone correct clubs, rosters, lineups, statistical output, and transactions. The sport was too fluid during those first three decades, and there were many franchises that folded, moved, changed leagues, etc. That's just one aspect of the early years that can't be modeled. There are many others. |
04-16-2013, 08:09 PM | #4 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 183
|
thanks for the info...
|
04-16-2013, 08:29 PM | #5 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,166
|
That's a bit harsh -- "absolutely CANNOT use." I've done it many times. It certainly is possible. Is it possible without manual work? No, certainly not. But it is possible, and those of us who enjoy it also enjoy discussing our attempts with others who enjoy it. So a sticky dissuading someone from such an attempt would not be of much overall benefit.
__________________
FABL -- Chicago Chiefs |
04-16-2013, 08:30 PM | #6 | |
OOTP Developments
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France
Posts: 19,906
|
Quote:
You can get close to it, if you're really, really patient and willing to make major changes to your league by hand. Adding and removing all the different clubs each year, moving the players around, changing some of the rules and modifiers. It's a major project to do so, one that's too daunting for most people to even attempt. Even if you do so, there will be a lot that's not perfect. But it is possible and it's actually pretty fun, if you're an ocd, slightly insane, early baseball fan with too much time on their hands. Last edited by Lukas Berger; 04-16-2013 at 08:31 PM. |
|
04-16-2013, 11:37 PM | #7 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,625
|
Corrected:
Quote:
When you can't even get balls, strikes, strikeouts, and walks to be awarded and counted as they were in real life, it's a non-starter. Right away, your statistical output is going to be skewed. And that's only the beginning of the issues, even if you spend many hours painstakingly editing and modifying the game in an effort to simulate baseball from 1871 onward. Yes, you technically simulate a vague approximation of the professional baseball world beginning in 1871 and moving forward, but you can't accurately simulate the real life Major Leagues when beginning from that point. |
|
04-17-2013, 09:01 AM | #8 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,273
|
I disagree. If you use the real teams and real schedules, transactions I don't think the stats are that far off any more than 19th century. After all it doesn't matter how many strikes it takes for a K the game still sees a K.
Problem is with all the different leagues and teams it may be better to use a separate database of rookies for each league. Otherwise they all would end up in AL or NL due to abbreviation limit. If its separate and you only have rookies for the players league in that database you shouldn't see Union Association teams or players in that league. Except for transactions. It's just easier for newbies to use the ootp way because even if they set up the first year what if someone wants to start in a later year with an d number of teams. But I don't think stats are far off. If you have Radbourn getting 80 wins then maybe its the schedule or something like that. I do wonder if a player who pitched 600 innings is compared to a player who pitched 200 for that year or is he compared to a modern pitcher for fatigue. |
04-17-2013, 11:59 AM | #9 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The OC
Posts: 6,347
|
For people new to the game, it's probably appropriate to explain it as Charlie did. The 19th century is a fair amount to work if you want accurate outputs, teams, schedules, etc. It's good to note that when that work is done you can get a pretty solid approximation, but the dozen or so people who care about this will find a way to get the information to anyone who's truly willing to take it on.
__________________
Looking for an insomnia cure? Check out my dynasty thread, The Dawn of American Professional Base Ball, 1871. |
04-17-2013, 05:08 PM | #10 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,166
|
Hey, there are more than a dozen of us. There has to be at least 15, 16!
__________________
FABL -- Chicago Chiefs |
04-17-2013, 06:17 PM | #11 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Inside The Game
Posts: 30,807
|
I have attempted to do a 1871 - 1901 league but with fictional players vs real. I gave up at 1875. This will be my 1st new league on 14 so I dont have to manually change the logos and uniforms myself. I dont know if the default or Spritz DB will bring players to teh accurate teams in 1872, I know it wont for 1871. I might try and place them automatically during the Inaugural draft.
|
07-17-2013, 12:09 AM | #12 |
Minors (Single A)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 55
|
I have played more OOTP pre-1901 than post 1901. Talk about a daunting, fun, frustrating, satisfying game. I've played it with all the extra leagues, without the extra leagues, manual transactions, computer transactions, free agents, no free agents and everything in between. It is hard. I would not suggest it for the new OOTP player. But to even suggest to someone that an actual "history" can't be created is not accurate. It's not going to mirror real life, but neither will your post 1901 league. You just got to want it.
|
07-17-2013, 01:43 PM | #13 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Inside The Game
Posts: 30,807
|
Not sure if I said this before in this thread but I tried once to get it 100% accurate then release a QS at 1901. I got to 1874 and gave up. Now I am just doing fictional players, minus minorities with real teams, parks, & leagues.
__________________
Go today don't wait for tomorrow It isn't promised, all the time you get borrowed Don't live your life for other people Don't bottle your emotions till they crack and fill a couple just sorrows Take your mind and refocus go get a paper write your goals out Throw your middle fingers to all your haters "Stay Strong" |
07-17-2013, 02:28 PM | #14 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,625
|
Quote:
When people ask about historical accuracy in the game, it is almost never the case that they're asking if it's possible for the user to spend hours customizing the game to get there. It's to ask if OOTP offers it out of the box, which is does not for pre-1901 saved games. |
|
07-17-2013, 03:51 PM | #15 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 307
|
Quote:
I've gotten realistic consistent pre-1900 season stats with a little hard work.
__________________
________________________________________________ Coming soon! Legendary Baseball League.... stay tuned! |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|