Player performance: Sim vs. Gameplay

[SirSaab]

I’ve been playing (and loving) OOTP now for about two weeks, and I am enjoying it thoroughly. However, I’ve noticed that results while playing versus simming, particularly with pitchers, are vastly different.

For example, with Blake Snell on the mound, my sim results are typically MUCH more in line with Snell-like performances than if I actually play the game. In particular, pitchers seems to be much more homerun prone whilst playing, versus simming.

Is this a known phenomenon, or perhaps something I’m basing on too small a sample size? I have noticed that the homeruns typically fly when attempting to “pitch around.” Perhaps it’s the effect of a pitcher trying to be too fine and leaving balls over the plate? Or maybe I’m making excuses for a system that isn’t optimally geared toward actually playing out games?

Similarly, with hitters, I notice that when I PLAY, I make plenty of contact and get on base, but rarely does a ball leave the yard (usually while the other team is absolutely shelling my staff). Though when I sim, HR rates seem “normalized.”

Thoughts/comments/critiques/suggestions?

[SirSaab]

...and don’t even get me started on Chris Paddack. LOL. I know that he’s a *decent* but not in any way dominant pitcher IRL, but man, in-game he’s an absolutely useless dumpster fire of an arm.

Last night I angrily asked sim Paddack out loud if he wanted to start throwing batting practice because he’s so good at it. My wife was quite perplexed hahaha

Having him give up 6 runs in 3-1/3 and LOWER his era was pretty vexing

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by SirSaab

I’ve been something I’m basing on too small a sample size?

In the absence of further evidence, this is the most likely answer

[BirdWatcher]

This is a question that comes up often in these parts, and it does seem that quite a few gamers, especially those who are relatively new to OOTP, sense that there is a difference in outcomes when you play out the games as opposed to simming them.
Now, with the caveat that obviously the more you control in-game in terms of strategic management you could be having a bit of an effect on outcomes, no real evidence has ever been shown to indicate that this is true.
And, in fact, the developers have asserted many, many times that no difference in the game engine between playing games out and simming exists.

So, yes, almost surely a small sample size issue and a product of the human mind being very attuned to patterns and then often placing meaning on those patterns where no meaning exists (or at least not the one we have intuited.)

[SirSaab]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

In the absence of further evidence, this is the most likely answer

While I appreciate the Occam’s Razor approach, I posited the question here precisely because I lack the evidence, and was looking to the distinguished OOTP vets such as yourself for guidance LOL

[SirSaab]

Originally Posted by BirdWatcher

This is a question that comes up often in these parts, and it does seem that quite a few gamers, especially those who are relatively new to OOTP, sense that there is a difference in outcomes when you play out the games as opposed to simming them.
Now, with the caveat that obviously the more you control in-game in terms of strategic management you could be having a bit of an effect on outcomes, no real evidence has ever been shown to indicate that this is true.
And, in fact, the developers have asserted many, many times that no difference in the game engine between playing games out and simming exists.

So, yes, almost surely a small sample size issue and a product of the human mind being very attuned to patterns and then often placing meaning on those patterns where no meaning exists (or at least not the one we have intuited.)

This makes sense, and I’m glad to hear it’s something the devs have chimed in on. I’m going to play around with perhaps not pitching around big bats as often, because I think that’s probably where my issue is. Although I believe Snell in particular should be a guy capable of competently pitching around a batter, perhaps I ask that of my staff in general, too often.

[The_Offspring187]

As someone who has played out the last 7 full seasons in my league game for game, I find my stats are in line with what they were when I was simming as well.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by SirSaab

This makes sense, and I’m glad to hear it’s something the devs have chimed in on. I’m going to play around with perhaps not pitching around big bats as often, because I think that’s probably where my issue is. Although I believe Snell in particular should be a guy capable of competently pitching around a batter, perhaps I ask that of my staff in general, too often.

I would disagree. Snell is the type of pitcher who shouldn't have to pitch around anyone, except in a few circumstances where a mistake could significantly change the game, and only if it's a crucial game.

[Déjà Bru]

A long time ago, Markus came out with the blanket statement that there is no difference between simulating and playing out game results other than where you make different managerial decisions than the AI would have made. Otherwise, same simulation engine, similar (not exactly same due to built-in randomness) results no matter how you play.

Over time, that is. The "small sample size" idea needs to be kept in mind.

That's been my impression. If the game has deviated from this, it would be news to me. It would also seem to have been a conscious decision on the part of the designers, which I doubt. I also doubt that it would have gone unnoticed by them and beta testers.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

That's been my impression. If the game has deviated from this, it would be news to me. It would also seem to have been a conscious decision on the part of the designers, which I doubt. I also doubt that it would have gone unnoticed by them and beta testers.

It would be quite difficult to detect
It would take A LOT of data

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

A long time ago, Markus came out with the blanket statement that there is no difference between simulating and playing out game results other than where you make different managerial decisions than the AI would have made. Otherwise, same simulation engine, similar (not exactly same due to built-in randomness) results no matter how you play.

Over time, that is. The "small sample size" idea needs to be kept in mind.

That's been my impression. If the game has deviated from this, it would be news to me. It would also seem to have been a conscious decision on the part of the designers, which I doubt. I also doubt that it would have gone unnoticed by them and beta testers.

It's also been pointed out by the developers and many of us who post that the set up, care and maintenance of two sim engines would be a complete waste of time and resources.

[SirSaab]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

I would disagree. Snell is the type of pitcher who shouldn't have to pitch around anyone, except in a few circumstances where a mistake could significantly change the game, and only if it's a crucial game.

I understand your premise. I agree, a guy with Snell’s talent shouldn’t *have to* pitch around guys (your point actually reinforces my thought that perhaps I’m creating the issues by asking talented players to do so). My statement was more that he should be able to. Of course, if your coach is CONSTANTLY asking you to nibble off the plate against guys, your performance is probably going to suffer.

The community has been very helpful here, making me realize that actually the issue is probably that I’m micromanaging too much and not letting my staff’s stuff work for itself.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by SirSaab

I understand your premise. I agree, a guy with Snell’s talent shouldn’t *have to* pitch around guys (your point actually reinforces my thought that perhaps I’m creating the issues by asking talented players to do so). My statement was more that he should be able to. Of course, if your coach is CONSTANTLY asking you to nibble off the plate against guys, your performance is probably going to suffer.

The community has been very helpful here, making me realize that actually the issue is probably that I’m micromanaging too much and not letting my staff’s stuff work for itself.

I'm not pointing figures at you, but you're probably right. If you watch a lot of games on TV, pitchers don't pitch around batters all that often. It might happen with a runner or runners in scoring position and first base open with the other team's best hitter up every once in a while, and it'll occasionally happen with the pitcher on deck in an obvious situation when he won't be pinch-hit for, but it's not a strategy used daily and multiple times per game. In my experience, the pitch around function in OOTP is meant to mirror that. So using it against the middle of the order on a regular basis is probably going to lead to some negative consequences.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by RchW

It's also been pointed out by the developers and many of us who post that the set up, care and maintenance of two sim engines would be a complete waste of time and resources.

There certainly doesn't need to be two sim engines. Just one that doesn't work as intended then users play out games


Note: I'm not suggesting that it doesn't work properly when users play out games

[mytreds]

Yes, simulating a game and playing out a game provides, on average, different results because each type of simulation is different.

When playing out a game introduces more variables to the simulation, thus the more unexpected is perceived to happen. Thus because we see each play play out when we don’t quick sim, our minds latch on to what we think as “abnormal” happenings instead of seeing the 162 game picture. So we see more of the “wow what a horrible start!” or “ this guy would never go 0-5!” instead of the more average results.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by mytreds

Yes, simulating a game and playing out a game provides, on average, different results because each type of simulation is different.

When playing out a game introduces more variables to the simulation, thus the more unexpected is perceived to happen. Thus because we see each play play out when we don’t quick sim, our minds latch on to what we think as “abnormal” happenings instead of seeing the 162 game picture. So we see more of the “wow what a horrible start!” or “ this guy would never go 0-5!” instead of the more average results.

This is incredibly misleading. The only difference between simulating a game and playing out a game is the human manager and the decisions he/she makes. The type of simulation is not different.

[itsmb8]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

This is incredibly misleading. The only difference between simulating a game and playing out a game is the human manager and the decisions he/she makes. The type of simulation is not different.

So theoretically, playing out a game with AI managers on both sides is just a slowed down version of normal simulating?

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

So theoretically, playing out a game with AI managers on both sides is just a slowed down version of normal simulating?

Yes, the sim engine is exactly the same as the game engine, to the point that the sim engine generates results and then sends them over (separately) to the 3D game engine and the text display engine (which is why sometimes the PBP doesn't really match what you see on the field). It's been like this... I think since the start, actually, which is a lot easier to understand when the game isn't doing anything with graphics and is only outputting text.

Don't let the graphics fool you: this is *not* a physics-based game, not in the least.

[The_Offspring187]

Originally Posted by itsmb8

So theoretically, playing out a game with AI managers on both sides is just a slowed down version of normal simulating?

This is why I play GM only and let my managers make the in game decisions. I have gotten typical results watching every game as simming.

[ClownFundamentals]

"Pitch-around" needs to be expanded upon and better clarified.

For starters, what does it even mean and when is it situationally effective? (especially in sim games) It could mean anything from an unintentional intentional walk with the pitcher on deck to simply being more careful not to give the opposing team's best power hitters fastballs down the middle even if that means a few more walks.

I'm also surprised that the sabermetric strategy presets have "pitch around" set so low. Although it's generally agreed upon that intentional walks are rarely a good idea, my understanding of modern pitching strategy is that pitchers are throwing way more balls, trying harder to paint the corners and get swings and misses, and not pitching to contact as much as pitchers in past eras did.