19th century settings

[dcpcarmona]

Originally Posted by mjj55409

Exactly what I did, yes. The other cool thing is that if you have the historical ids set correctly, the players will be loaded on the correct teams in 1871. Assuming you are using real and not fictional players.

Are you manipulating other settings (e.g. creation modifiers, etc.)? Thanks.


dcc

[mjj55409]

Originally Posted by dcpcarmona

Are you manipulating other settings (e.g. creation modifiers, etc.)? Thanks.

No; I'm not. I've checked the box for Import Player Creation Modifiers, but this is not a fictional league, so I don't think that comes into play anyway.

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by Mr. Capo

1871, real MLB totals:

AB: 10,822
H: 3,101
2B: 434
3B: 239
HR: 47
BB: 393
HBP: ?
SO: 175
BABIP: .288

Gave these a spin tonight (although I took the HBP from 1884 and divided to roughly mirrored the same about of stats as 1871) and saw what happened. Here's the rough results with a 36 game scheduele:

Average was REALLY low. One hitter led the league with .282, but only four hit above .200

Home run leader ended at 14, the remaining five was at 10+

For RBI's the league leader had about .75 a game at 25, 5th had 19

League leader in wins had eight, 5th place was tied with 4. I'm thinking that OOTP cant' handle anything lower then three man rotations, as I'm seeing results where pitchers will be taken out early with no ingury recorded.

Leaue leader in ERA was 1.13, but fifth was 2.60. Was this era apprpriate?

K's are off in left field. 204 K's in 36 games? Needless to say that's probably the screwup right there.

[plannine]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

League leader in wins had eight, 5th place was tied with 4. I'm thinking that OOTP cant' handle anything lower then three man rotations, as I'm seeing results where pitchers will be taken out early with no ingury recorded.

Is your roster size 15 or 16. The game seems to handle 2 man rotations without any real problems. Bench players will be used to pitch if necessary. A very large percentage of runs should be unearned....so ERA's and BA's should be lower then expected.

I've had some realistic 1860's scores in my Great Lakes (test) League
(This week Detroit 25 Ann Arbor 3, Pontiac 47 Flint 15, Lansing 35 Grand Rapids 20, Port Huron 78 Adrian 3). In the 78-3 game, 50 of the runs were unearned, since there was 27 errors made by the Adrian team) Adrian has lost all 16 of their games, so far, while Pontiac has won all of theirs. After 20 games, i'll will attempt to adjust various setting, and finish out the (30 game) season.
Note: Teams are only playing 2 games a week, Friday & Saturday.....

[canadiancreed]

Originally Posted by plannine

Is your roster size 15 or 16. The game seems to handle 2 man rotations without any real problems. Bench players will be used to pitch if necessary. A very large percentage of runs should be unearned....so ERA's and BA's should be lower then expected.

I've had some realistic 1860's scores in my Great Lakes (test) League
(This week Detroit 25 Ann Arbor 3, Pontiac 47 Flint 15, Lansing 35 Grand Rapids 20, Port Huron 78 Adrian 3). In the 78-3 game, 50 of the runs were unearned, since there was 27 errors made by the Adrian team) Adrian has lost all 16 of their games, so far, while Pontiac has won all of theirs. After 20 games, i'll will attempt to adjust various setting, and finish out the (30 game) season.
Note: Teams are only playing 2 games a week, Friday & Saturday.....

For the roster size I left it at 25, with expanded and reserve rosters disabled. I had heard of issues if you had it lower then 25, but they may be a leftover from the 6.5 days.

As for settings i found the era_modiers and extra_settings work nicely that are included in the database folder. The only kicker was that K's were still too high, but I fixed that by dropping the modifier to .050 or so. Now the leaders for K's are averaging about 40K's a seaosn (36 game seasons)

[swampdragon]

The game can handle one man rotations just fine, if your schedules spread out the games the way they were actually spread out. Generated schedules won't work, though.

[ctorg]

This is exactly the sort of thing that could be fixed pretty well with the touch of a button in OOTP6 but can't now. I used to press one button to adjust the league totals for historical accuracy - it could be hit at any point in the season and would adjust based on a survey of players' ratings (apparently) - and I'd get reasonably accurate results, or at least close enough that I could tweak them a bit and get what I wanted.

[dcpcarmona]

Originally Posted by ctorg

This is exactly the sort of thing that could be fixed pretty well with the touch of a button in OOTP6 but can't now. I used to press one button to adjust the league totals for historical accuracy - it could be hit at any point in the season and would adjust based on a survey of players' ratings (apparently) - and I'd get reasonably accurate results, or at least close enough that I could tweak them a bit and get what I wanted.

We need this back. Have you mentioned this to the Big Head?

dcc

[ctorg]

Originally Posted by dcpcarmona

We need this back. Have you mentioned this to the Big Head?

dcc

I made a thread about it here: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=147318

Unfortunately, it didn't cause much of a stir.

[Garlon]

dpcarmona and ctorg - we do not need that feature back. The leaue totals modifiers calculate everything as precisely as possible. That button you refer to in OOTP6, may have been intended to give you accurate results, but that's not what the outcome turned out to b regardless of how wel you think it may have worked. The modiiers re-calculate dynamically each season, they are not set in stone anywhere. The game looks at your leagues simulated outcomes on a per AB basis of the previous season an then maks a calculation for next season for how much to increase or decrease the likelihood of things like HRs and K's on a per AB basis for the next season in order to hit those actual historical ratios.

[BaseballMan]

When i sim from the 19th century i dont try to get as accurate as after 1900.
I tend to think of it as my leagues development years like with national league when there were like 8 strikes for a strikeout. I dont want a player hitting 50 hrs
but it wont bother me if they hit 10. I just dont like to see the 19th century players having records that probably cant be broken by modern players like 60 wins in a season. At the same time i still want 19th century players to be able to
get 3,000 hits.

[BaseballMan]

Is there any way to use recalculate ratings based on player's real stats
if you start a historical/fictional league before 1901? I dont see why this function couldnt be used for the 19th century players as well. Since isnt the computer just looking at the stats and recalculating the ratings based on that data? If it can calculate ratings to import 19th century players then it should be able to recalculate them too. If not it really doesnt do any good to start in 1871 if you cant use the recalculate because then players like Ruth wont develop into Ruth the hitter unless you use a edited database.

[Garlon]

BaseballMan - the recalc modes don't currently support pre-1901. When you use the work-around to start in 1871 the option to do 1/3/5-yr recalc is not available. This needs to be corrected for next year's game. As you said, the stats are there, so the game can do the necessary calculations.

[BaseballMan]

Yeah its not so much i expect stats too be as accurate as modern leagues but
it would be nice to have the same options as the modern leagues. More than anything else just give us the ability to start in 1871 without having to do a work around. Let us worry about getting roster size, schedules, adding estimated data to the data base etc etc, i just wish we could start a league in 1871 and have the same functions as modern leagues.

[dcpcarmona]

Just wondering if there are any updates to the 19th C settings for player creations and league totals?