Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 26 Available - FHM 11 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 26 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Out of the Park Baseball 22 > OOTP 22 - General Discussions

OOTP 22 - General Discussions Everything about the brand new 2021 version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB and the MLBPA.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-28-2021, 01:03 PM   #1
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
What specific things can be done to improve the AI?

I see people saying that the AI needs to get better, and I don't disagree; unfortunately, many times it's just "make trade more better" on the one extreme or "here is a situation where I feel like the game should not have done this one thing even though it sort of makes sense in context". Neither, I don't think, give the devs much to work with.

Instead, I'm going to lay down a few rules that I'd like to see the AI abide by that I don't think it takes into account, or at least doesn't do often enough. Please feel free to add more of your own, tell me where my rules are dumb, and so on.

- When constructing a roster, the primary backup for any given position player should not be a person who's starting somewhere else. That also means that if you're carrying, say, 4 OFers, that 4th OF should at least be able to play passable CF. IME having your starting 2B also be the 2nd string SS leads to situations where, frankly, not very good shortstops wind up playing waaaay too much.

- After like 1950 or so, rotations are pretty well set and few if any teams are using starters in relief. I'm doing a game that I just "took over" after simming out from 1946-68 and basically what seems to have happened in the 60s is that some pitchers started to get used like it was 1925 all over again, which led to some... weirdness.

- This might hamstring the AI further but I feel like it ought to make a determination in which, if it feels a given player is good enough to start, that player needs to start. If you have 2 3rd basemen who should both start, train one of them at a new position, maybe trade one, but I don't think it's historically or currently accurate to have a situation where you're sitting one of them.

- Speaking of, especially with fictional leagues I think the AI should be a bit more willing to retrain older players to play left field and first base. It's actually not that bad at that but this could definitely improve IMO.

- Conversely it feels like sometimes OF range in particular doesn't get correlated well enough with speed. Like, sure, there are times when a guy who doesn't steal much and isn't really a terror on the basepaths can become a league average CF (Dave Henderson from the 1980s comes to mind) but conversely I think it's very, very rare that a very fast player doesn't have the *range* to be a good CF. There may be other reasons why you don't want to put a Rickey Henderson or a Brian Hunter in CF - the lack of a quality arm (which I think is what kept Henderson in left) or bad, bad hands (that was Hunter's issue IIRC) - but not range.

- 2 way players were rarely if ever used from around the early 20s until... Shohei Ohtani, really, and the game should reflect that. If a player can do both, the AI ought to make a decision on whether said player with pitch or play in the field and stick to that. Yes, there were *very* occasional exceptions but even the biggest outlier of a 2-way guy - Brooks Kieschnick - pitched a grand total of 72 games in his career, all of those at the tail end of his career when he was essentially not used in the field anymore. Rick Ankiel made the transition from pitcher to outfielder but was never used as a 2 way player either. Another example I can think of, John Olerud, was never used as a pitcher in the big leagues in spite of being a lights-out starter in college. Hell, even Babe Ruth really only had like 2 seasons in which he was used as a 2-way guy beyond the occasional spot appearance. I appreciate that the game produces guys like this that you can make choices with, but, like, Ohtani is just about the only guy who's ever done both on a regular basis in the past hundred years.

- This may also make the AI less competitive but sunk cost fallacy exists and it should fall victim to it. If a guy gets signed to a 10 year, $250M contract, he should start until it is 100% crystal clear that he can't play anymore. Say what you will but there was literally a guy in the league this very season who was finally released after 5 *years* of replacement lever play as a starter, and the contract was a big part of it.

- This is a repeated gripe of mine and I'm never sure if I get the point across, but the game is waaaaay too good, like it's perfect at this, at noticing when veterans begin to lose it. Scouting can be properly inaccurate and scattershot when players are new but what I never see is the AI mis-evaluating vets. If you see a 10 year veteran have suddenly lower ratings, even on the lowest scouting settings you can be 100% sure that that player actually took a talent hit. You will never, ever see a talent drop to a vet that didn't actually happen, and you will also rarely if ever see a veteran player's talent dip without a scouting report that tells you so. What ought to happen instead, in order to reflect reality, is that it should take multiple years for scouts to accept that a vet has lost it. In the aforementioned case of Pujols I'm sure that he kept getting playing time because they had the real-life equivalent of an OOTP scouting report that said he was still a 75/80 player. You should have to decide with these older players whether your scout is right and the guy's just in a slump or if he's lost it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 01:46 PM   #2
t-bone shuffle
All Star Reserve
 
t-bone shuffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The dull edge of the blade
Posts: 867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
- Conversely it feels like sometimes OF range in particular doesn't get correlated well enough with speed. Like, sure, there are times when a guy who doesn't steal much and isn't really a terror on the basepaths can become a league average CF (Dave Henderson from the 1980s comes to mind) but conversely I think it's very, very rare that a very fast player doesn't have the *range* to be a good CF. There may be other reasons why you don't want to put a Rickey Henderson or a Brian Hunter in CF - the lack of a quality arm (which I think is what kept Henderson in left) or bad, bad hands (that was Hunter's issue IIRC) - but not range.
This and I'll take it a step further and say that this applies at SS as well. I'd say almost all really good defensive SS's have at least above average MLB level speed. Like your example above, someone like Andrelton Simmons is a great fielding SS who doesn't have big time speed, but he can do everything else on the defensive side of the ball as to make him essentially elite. Too often (and I'd say this is almost exclusively a fictional thing), I'll see a SS carrying a range of 8, and a speed of 3 (1 to 10 scale).

Along with this I'll continue my feeling that there needs to be some type of "athleticism" rating. To try and find a way to determine if a player can/should be a candidate to learn new positions. For every Mookie, who could certainly play an acceptable level at any IF position, there is a Trout who would look to have all the necessary tools, but almost certainly couldn't play MLB level SS or 2B (IMO). I do think this is a fictional issue mostly and just something I'd like to see in some form.
t-bone shuffle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 02:02 PM   #3
klkitchens
Minors (Triple A)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bone shuffle View Post
This and I'll take it a step further and say that this applies at SS as well. I'd say almost all really good defensive SS's have at least above average MLB level speed. Like your example above, someone like Andrelton Simmons is a great fielding SS who doesn't have big time speed, but he can do everything else on the defensive side of the ball as to make him essentially elite. Too often (and I'd say this is almost exclusively a fictional thing), I'll see a SS carrying a range of 8, and a speed of 3 (1 to 10 scale).

Along with this I'll continue my feeling that there needs to be some type of "athleticism" rating. To try and find a way to determine if a player can/should be a candidate to learn new positions. For every Mookie, who could certainly play an acceptable level at any IF position, there is a Trout who would look to have all the necessary tools, but almost certainly couldn't play MLB level SS or 2B (IMO). I do think this is a fictional issue mostly and just something I'd like to see in some form.
Well, from personal anecdotal experience, the speed "seems" like it could be right. Quickness and speed aren't the same thing. I used to be pretty good in the infield or pitcher as a big guy. I could "burst" pretty well, but never could sustain a good run enough to be in the outfield for example, or stretch a single into a double. By the time I got to first I'd be pretty out of breath, lol. But a quick shot, knowing the position and moving on the pitch, etc I could move pretty well over the short range. Just don't hit three in a row to me
__________________
-----
klkitchens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 02:29 PM   #4
markprior22
All Star Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: springfield, illinois
Posts: 1,234
Really like your ideas syd
markprior22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 03:08 PM   #5
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
- When constructing a roster, the primary backup for any given position player should not be a person who's starting somewhere else... having your starting 2B also be the 2nd string SS leads to situations where, frankly, not very good shortstops wind up playing waaaay too much.
Sometimes I have a team that when my SS is tired, I want my sub to come in at 2B and my starting 2B to move to SS.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 05:00 PM   #6
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherblues View Post
Sometimes I have a team that when my SS is tired, I want my sub to come in at 2B and my starting 2B to move to SS.
This is a nice idea, but I don't think the game actually knows how to do this. At best, what happens is that if your 2B is tired or you're playing the backup every X games, your starter will be on the bench and that will "free" them to play SS if you have them listed as the backup there. I'd come up with some way to fix that but I'm not sure how the game's going to be able to conceive of it without messing the way the lineup screen looks, etc.

You can also achieve what you want to do, of course, by setting up 7 day lineups but IME that gets really, really micromanagey and I personally would rather not need to do that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 05:02 PM   #7
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bone shuffle View Post
This and I'll take it a step further and say that this applies at SS as well. I'd say almost all really good defensive SS's have at least above average MLB level speed. Like your example above, someone like Andrelton Simmons is a great fielding SS who doesn't have big time speed, but he can do everything else on the defensive side of the ball as to make him essentially elite. Too often (and I'd say this is almost exclusively a fictional thing), I'll see a SS carrying a range of 8, and a speed of 3 (1 to 10 scale).

Along with this I'll continue my feeling that there needs to be some type of "athleticism" rating. To try and find a way to determine if a player can/should be a candidate to learn new positions. For every Mookie, who could certainly play an acceptable level at any IF position, there is a Trout who would look to have all the necessary tools, but almost certainly couldn't play MLB level SS or 2B (IMO). I do think this is a fictional issue mostly and just something I'd like to see in some form.
Yeah, there's also the big issue that it's just plain easier to create abilities like IF Error and OF Range by looking at statistics than it would be to create abilities like Quickness and First Step by doing the same. I do play pretty much entirely fictional (except when I dabble in PT) so I'd be OK with a tools-based approach, but that may be a tough ask...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 05:29 PM   #8
KBLover
All Star Reserve
 
KBLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 580
I like all of your ideas except the one about 2-way players.

I get it. History and Ohtani is the first...but what if my universe makes another Ohtani?

In my oldest save, the game generated another Ohtani-type player and he ended up in the Hall alongside Ohtani. Played two-way his whole career.

Under your ideas, the AI would have cut half of his worth.

I would rather the AI use the player in both roles until there's evidence that the player in question is leaning one side or another. Or, have a manager/GM personality setting that dictates their preference/attitude towards two-way players. At least then it's organic and it can shift as the GM's do as the universe goes on.

For example, back then Bobby Witt, Jr. was rated as a SS/3B along with some pitching ability as was, I think it was Jo Adell. I played each two way until Witt, Jr. showed he had far better ability as a hitter and his pitching side diminished. Same with Adell - he never developed any more pitching skill, it started to fade so he was just an OF.

Later, there was Luke Leto, a P/2B. His pitching side faded and he made the Ankiel switch - going from pitcher to hitter.

I think the evidence, guided by strategy tendency, should tell the AI what to do, not just default to "no two-way" just because "there weren't many before".

Last edited by KBLover; 05-28-2021 at 05:32 PM.
KBLover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 06:42 PM   #9
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
This is a nice idea, but I don't think the game actually knows how to do this. At best, what happens is that if your 2B is tired or you're playing the backup every X games, your starter will be on the bench and that will "free" them to play SS if you have them listed as the backup there. I'd come up with some way to fix that but I'm not sure how the game's going to be able to conceive of it without messing the way the lineup screen looks, etc.
Agreed, the game engine gets confused and does weird things with it. It'd be great if it worked, and I think it *should* just work by simply putting a starter as the main backup in another position. Same thing in the OF, when sometimes the best option when my CF is tired is to just slide one of the other guys from corner OF to CF, and put my sub at LF or RF.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 07:23 PM   #10
KBLover
All Star Reserve
 
KBLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherblues View Post
Agreed, the game engine gets confused and does weird things with it. It'd be great if it worked, and I think it *should* just work by simply putting a starter as the main backup in another position.

And the AI will actually do this - so it's even more interesting it doesn't work well with it.

It's like it's coded to understand it on the depth chart but when it goes to write the lineup card the game, it gets confused by it's own depth chart.
KBLover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 08:25 PM   #11
OutS|der
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: In A Van Down By The River
Posts: 2,665
Infractions: 0/1 (1)
I agree with all as well except for the 2-way players and any AI decisions that as based on historical like starters in relief. We need better AI for fictional leagues as well so both those don't apply. If I have 2-way players switched on I want the AI to be more aggressive in using them, I want great hitting pitchers as DH and if they have any experience at other positions I want them to have just as much chance as anyone else to start.
OutS|der is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 09:08 PM   #12
OrangeP47
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 805
I'll just echo the general sentiment in here that these are all great ideas, but I want to preserve the 2-way setting for fictional leagues. I'd actually say the best way to do that is probably give us a few more settings for customization, or in other words, allow us to specify just what percent of incoming players will be 2-way players, though for a realistic level it'd probably be such a small modifier I'm not sure how to format it, you'd probably have to take the significant digit out pretty far, but that's like probably the very least concern regarding that proposal. On the flip side, if someone wants to run a fictional league where everyone's a 2-way player, well...

If such a setting already exists, my apologies for overlooking it, I've not messed around with that area much.

Last edited by OrangeP47; 05-28-2021 at 09:09 PM.
OrangeP47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 10:14 PM   #13
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
I'm all for the game allowing for 2 way players (and I do almost entirely fictional)... what I'm saying is that by default, the AI should take a 2 way player and do just one of the things with him for the most part. If you want to add a "use 2 way players" check or slider tied to era settings, I'd be totally OK with that; I'm just saying that I can list all of the players in the past century who pitched regularly and played in the field regularly (I'll include DH here) at the same time on one hand and still have a couple fingers left over. That in turn tells me that a realistic game, fictional or otherwise, should have these kinds of players be very rare.

Again, if what we want is yet another option in an already truly massive options menu, sure, let's do that. I kind of hope we don't miss the forest because of one or two pretty trees though.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 10:16 PM   #14
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by KBLover View Post
And the AI will actually do this - so it's even more interesting it doesn't work well with it.

It's like it's coded to understand it on the depth chart but when it goes to write the lineup card the game, it gets confused by it's own depth chart.
Right. I feel like step one, the AI should be constructing rosters as if it can't take starters at another position and use them as backups. I keep seeing the AI do stuff like carry 3 3rd basemen and no middle infielders except for the starters, and then expect the 2B and SS to back each other up somehow.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 10:35 PM   #15
OrangeP47
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
I'm all for the game allowing for 2 way players (and I do almost entirely fictional)... what I'm saying is that by default, the AI should take a 2 way player and do just one of the things with him for the most part. If you want to add a "use 2 way players" check or slider tied to era settings, I'd be totally OK with that; I'm just saying that I can list all of the players in the past century who pitched regularly and played in the field regularly (I'll include DH here) at the same time on one hand and still have a couple fingers left over. That in turn tells me that a realistic game, fictional or otherwise, should have these kinds of players be very rare.

Again, if what we want is yet another option in an already truly massive options menu, sure, let's do that. I kind of hope we don't miss the forest because of one or two pretty trees though.
Normally I'd agree with this sentiment too, except for the fact that the feature is pretty much already here is my thinking. The rest of the suggestions are additive, but that suggestion felt subtractive, my comment about customization non-withstanding.

I suppose I should clarify what I mean: With so few real life examples, there's functionally no difference between a realistic setting level and just turning the feature off entirely in my opinion. Historical can just control it at the player level.

Last edited by OrangeP47; 05-28-2021 at 10:45 PM.
OrangeP47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2021, 10:48 PM   #16
ezpkns34
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 703
Are AI-run teams subjected to Owner Goals too? If so, maybe allowing AI teams off from that?
ezpkns34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2021, 07:41 PM   #17
KBLover
All Star Reserve
 
KBLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
I'm all for the game allowing for 2 way players (and I do almost entirely fictional)... what I'm saying is that by default, the AI should take a 2 way player and do just one of the things with him for the most part. If you want to add a "use 2 way players" check or slider tied to era settings, I'd be totally OK with that; I'm just saying that I can list all of the players in the past century who pitched regularly and played in the field regularly (I'll include DH here) at the same time on one hand and still have a couple fingers left over. That in turn tells me that a realistic game, fictional or otherwise, should have these kinds of players be very rare.

I don't want a default.

Because if the game generates a rare player, you'll never see it because the default will be to ignore the possibility.

Like I said, I got one (and exactly one so far) in my other save. That one would be 0 (and Ohtani wouldn't have been used realistically at the time either) if the default was "no 2-way ever".

Ohtani was rare - but the Angels didn't say "no 2-way ever". They let him see if he could do it, and he did, and it stuck. THAT is what I want from the AI.

Evaluate the player. If he's possibility good at both, let him do it. It should be rare that he is indeed good at both or develops to average or better in both, but the player should get the chance and the evidence will show if he's a rare one or not.

Replacing an always with a never is not better. Better is using the evidence logically to make a decision, imo.

As far as the strategy slider - it's realistic. The Angels did but maybe another team/manager wouldn't. Just makes sense in a living world to have managers have different opinions (just like with the rare Opener/Follower strategy).

It wouldn't in a menu, it would be part of a manager's profile.

Last edited by KBLover; 05-29-2021 at 07:45 PM.
KBLover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2021, 02:31 AM   #18
ezpkns34
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 703
Brendan McKay still slated to be a 2-way player when he debuts? Or did the injury put a halt to that plan?

Last edited by ezpkns34; 05-31-2021 at 02:32 AM. Reason: spelling is hard
ezpkns34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2021, 03:49 AM   #19
prorta
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 56
Let me add to this....I play all fictional league, and I am seeing a bunch of AI teams not resigning "key" > age 25-27 > Extremely Popular players. The free agency market in my league is loaded with lots of players that fit this criteria. The teams that the players came from have more then enough money to resign them, and also, have no backup to that particular position that comes close to it.

And YES...allow extension contracts is allowed in my league. This is the ONLY version where this has happened to me. Is this a bug?
prorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2021, 10:34 PM   #20
NoOne
Hall Of Famer
 
NoOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,258
Infractions: 1/0 (0)
on the defensive end, if they made more logical qualifications regarding defensive abilities instead of experience, it might shift the infield around more... it can shift that 2b over, but the current logic doesn't account for that outcome, yet or rarely would occur.

it gets pretty complicated.. tossing bandaids on it can have the opposite effect and make it a tangled mess...


re-write it broken down to incremental logic...

I think the team building and planning related decisions could use a re-work. maybe there's already a well-thought out framework capable of expanding.. if not.. work on one that is, even if conceptually for a couple years when bored.

if it is a bunch of bandaids piling after 20+ years, doubley so.

without knowing a general sense of how it works now, impossible to give constructive crticism. can only hope a gist of an idea sparks something. a gist of the loops of incremental choices, available metrics to use as qualifications within that logic etc etc..

i think you'd have to create an outline... revise it.. revise it some more.. then once happy with an overall process, add all those layers to the onion... a framework that is built to be augmented in endless ways based on individual incremental decisions/choices, even if not coded yet. An more complete framework would save a ton of effort anytime it is re-assessed or augmented. all mapped out previously, even if a funciton isn't written out, yet.

The decisions and how you go about handling them won't change often... may need to add a variable here and there.

love this stuff, but without organization and a little insight, just running around like a chicken with its head cut off.

no matter how perfect it can be, someone will always feel something is off... often times due to code, but i'd love to see the actual ratio of when it is something perfectly normal and even has happened in the MLB, just not the few years someone has watched. Bet you can find something i've written that fits that bill... i try to be aware of such things, but just human nature to fall prey to it.

Last edited by NoOne; 05-31-2021 at 10:44 PM.
NoOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 05:56 PM.

 

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 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2024 Out of the Park Developments