Accuracy

[jagcnco]

I'm playing a historical league, starting in 1901. I think I must have the settings wrong because so far the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate thoughts on how I can "fix" this. I would include the settings I have in this thread but don't know which ones might be potentially impacting the standings and individual performances.

Thanks in advance!

[BaseballMan]

Theres no way someone can help you without knowing what
is not accurate to you and what settings you are using.
For example i had a pitcher go 62-8. Without knowing that it was John Clarkson from the year 1885 in which he won 53 games you might get the impression the accuracy was way off.

Anyway there is a ton of information in the forums.
Most likely someone may have already had the same problem.
I would advise setting up a test league.
Run different settings. Find out what you like and is acceptable to you.
Most of all backup your league.
Especially after you've setup your first season.
Backup often. Can't stress this enough.
Iv'e played the game since ootp2 and there are times i miss something or something happens.
Btw did i mention backup your league?

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by jagcnco

I'm playing a historical league, starting in 1901. I think I must have the settings wrong because so far the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate thoughts on how I can "fix" this. I would include the settings I have in this thread but don't know which ones might be potentially impacting the standings and individual performances.

Thanks in advance!

OOTP is not designed to optimize the accuracy of individual player performance. It is designed to optimize the accuracy of league wide performance.

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by jagcnco

I'm playing a historical league, starting in 1901. I think I must have the settings wrong because so far the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate thoughts on how I can "fix" this. I would include the settings I have in this thread but don't know which ones might be potentially impacting the standings and individual performances.

Thanks in advance!

Have you considered that real life the best team might not have won?

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by jagcnco

I'm playing a historical league, starting in 1901. I think I must have the settings wrong because so far the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate thoughts on how I can "fix" this. I would include the settings I have in this thread but don't know which ones might be potentially impacting the standings and individual performances.

Thanks in advance!

What mode did you choose? Default, Replay, Career, or Random Debut?
Did you change any other settings during your setup?

You need to give us this kind of info otherwise, we have no idea how to help. there are so many different settings that can be changed in this game and people play this game in so many different ways. So, the more info you can give us on how you set up your game and any changes you made to it, could give us the tools to help.

Even some screenshots of your settings, just to make sure something was not set wrong.

[Garlon]

Actually, the game is designed to produce accurate results for players and for the league.

Try these settings for career play:



Global Settings

Use Complete Scouting System: Off

Us Coaching System: Off

Enable Owner Goals: Off

Enable Storylines: Off



Players & Team

Enable Injuries: Off

Position Player Fatigue: High (note: You will need to reset this to High every season because the game will keep resetting it to Low or Moderate depending on your season.)

Use Player Personality Ratings: Off

Show & Use Player Morale System: Off

Disable Player Development: Check

Disable Player Development Lab: Check

Disable Player Development Focus: Check



AI Settings

Ratings Weight: 90

Current Year Stats Weight: 5

Previous Year Stats Weight: 3

2 Years Ago Stats Weight: 2



Rules

Active Roster Size: See Table

Reserve Roster Size: No Limit

Expanded Roster Size: Rule Disabled

Amateur Draft Date: December 1st

Amateur Draft Number of Rounds: 30

Enable Advanced Draftee Signing: Off



Financials

Financial System: Off



Options

Allow Rainouts: Off

Schedule Spring Training: Off



Historical

Automatically adjust league strategy when advancing to next season: Off (See Table)

Retire players according to history: Check

Players miss seasons according to history: Off

Automatically import historical rookies: Check

Recalc player ratings based on real stats after each year: Check

Recalculate potential ratings after each year: Check

Ratings recalculation base: 5 years

Double weight of current year stats: Check

Base Potential Ratings on: Remaining Years of Career

Base Fielding Ratings on: 3-year Period

Base Pitcher Stamina on: 3-Year Period

Adjust Hitters with fewer than X At-Bat: 1100

Weaken Hitters with fewer than X At-Bat: 550

Adjust Pitchers with fewer than X Innings: 180

Weaken Pitchers with fewer than X Innings: 125



Stats & AI

Automatically adjust league strategy when advancing to next season: Off (See Table)

Typical Starting Rotation Size: See Table

Starting Rotation Mode: See Table

Default Starters in Relief: See Table

Number of Relievers (non-DH League): See Table

Number of Position Players (no-DH League): 14

Number of Relievers (DH League): See Table

Number of Position Players (DH League): 14

Allow two-way players: See Table

Use Relievers: Normal

Use of Closers: See Table

Use of Openers: 0 (Never)

Pitcher Stamina: See Table

Pinch Hit for Pitchers: See Table

Pinch Hit for Position Players: Very Rarely

Defensive Substitutions: Very Rarely

Stealing Bases: Very Often

Hit & Run: Normal

Bunting (Batters): Very Often

Bunting (Pitchers): Rarely

Ban Infield Shifts: Yes

Infield Shifts: Very Rarely

Catcher Framing Impact: 0

Use Auto-Calc of modifiers (Recommended): Check

[Edward ohare]

"Actually, the game is designed to produce accurate results for players and for the league."

Accurate player results? Over what time span? Certainly not for a season. Unless they repealed the law of large numbers or put program restrictions on randomness.

[Garlon]

Well, I play 1871-2023 games and players are accurate.

Player ratings and based on rate stats and results are determined by the log5 method, so you do get great results. There are no restrictions on randomness, there is only probability.

Pick a player and I will post results of a saved game.

You may want to go through the first post of this thread:

https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=353034

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by Garlon

Well, I play 1871-2023 games and players are accurate.

Player ratings and based on rate stats and results are determined by the log5 method, so you do get great results. There are no restrictions on randomness, there is only probability.

Pick a player and I will post results of a saved game.

You may want to go through the first post of this thread:

https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=353034

If there is a player who has 135 hits in 512 ABs for a .264 BA and hit 20 doubles, 11 HRs, and walked 69 times what is the greatest amount he would deviate from that, plus and minus, in your game?

[luckymann]

The fact is this. People such as Garlon will present you with a set of results from a highly controlled environment that tells you the game is incredibly accurate. They are completely within their rights to do so and are strictly correct in what they say.

However, it is also misleading and disingenuous because, with every deviation you take from that controlled environment, the accuracy slips just a little.

So if you're using historical minors or ahistorically applying a DH or simply deviating in any way from the vast array of settings Garlon has listed the slippage begins and it increases exponentially the further you step outside the circle.

It's like you're wearing a jumper with a loose thread that you pull. Next thing you know you're wearing a vest, then a scarf, then nothing at all....

As the game continues to grow and offer ever more options, the tradeoff continues to widen between the "sandbox effect" and high levels of accuracy. This is only to be expected and 100% acceptable, at least in my book.

I only wish the people who purportedly represent the company would do us all a favour and acknowledge this rather than continue to make these nonsensical claims of high accuracy that apply to about 1% of the way the game is being played by the people who have paid for it.

I still think this game is marvellous and an unbelievable achievement. Only give us the credit of not being fools and idiots is all I ask. Truth and realism over shell games and sales patter, please.

Just my $0.02 worth.


G

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

If there is a player who has 135 hits in 512 ABs for a .264 BA and hit 20 doubles, 11 HRs, and walked 69 times what is the greatest amount he would deviate from that, plus and minus, in your game?

If you are using REPLAY it's going to be REALLY close. People like Garlon pretty much do NOTHING but make sure that the historic game is as accurate as possible! if I have a question about historic stuff, he is like one of the main people I ask because of his knowledge of the historical aspect of OOTP.

Now, if you are playing in any mode other than replay mode, then no, you are going to have deviations from the historical stats because players are going to play games they didn't play in, they are going to play in years they didn't play in, they might play past years that they left because of death or medical issues.

[Rain King]

Kind of having a pointless discussion in here since nobody has defined what "accurate" even means...and the OP didn't even bother to provide an example.

Everybody is kicking at a different goal post.

[Garlon]

If you want to answer such questions as the odds of batting exactly .264 over 512 AB in OOTP, I suggest using a binomial calculator.

https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial



Here is a comparison of Ty Cobb 1909-1913 real vs OOTP in my current saved game.

Ty Cobb

BA: real vs OOTP

1909: .377 vs .373

1910: .382 vs .365

1911: .419 vs .415

1912: .409 vs .408

1913: .389 vs .397

1909-1913: .396 vs .391

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Garlon

If you want to answer such questions as the odds of batting exactly .264 over 512 AB in OOTP, I suggest using a binomial calculator.

https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial



Here is a comparison of Ty Cobb 1909-1913 real vs OOTP in my current saved game.

Ty Cobb

BA: real vs OOTP

1909: .377 vs .373

1910: .382 vs .365

1911: .419 vs .415

1912: .409 vs .408

1913: .389 vs .397

1909-1913: .396 vs .391

How did Milt Wilcox do in your replay? Tom Brookens? Ray Oyler? Jim Gosger?

[Garlon]

Real vs OOTP

Player: BA/OBP/SLG/OPS


Dave Kingman: .236/.302/.478/.780 vs .238/.301/.475/.776

Tom Brookens: .246/.296/.367/.663 vs .251/.302/.373/.675

Ray Oyler: .175/.258/.251/.508 vs .193/.272/.285/.557

Jim Gosger: .226/.309/.331/.640 vs.230/.301/.341/.642


For Milt Wilcox

ERA: 4.07 vs 4.06

ERA+: 97 vs 99

IP/GS: 6.4 vs 6.5

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Garlon

Real vs OOTP

Player: BA/OBP/SLG/OPS


Dave Kingman: .236/.302/.478/.780 vs .238/.301/.475/.776

Tom Brookens: .246/.296/.367/.663 vs .251/.302/.373/.675

Ray Oyler: .175/.258/.251/.508 vs .193/.272/.285/.557

Jim Gosger: .226/.309/.331/.640 vs.230/.301/.341/.642


For Milt Wilcox

ERA: 4.07 vs 4.06

ERA+: 97 vs 99

IP/GS: 6.4 vs 6.5

Thanks.

[Edward ohare]

Originally Posted by Garlon

If you want to answer such questions as the odds of batting exactly .264 over 512 AB in OOTP, I suggest using a binomial calculator.

https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial



Here is a comparison of Ty Cobb 1909-1913 real vs OOTP in my current saved game.

Ty Cobb

BA: real vs OOTP

1909: .377 vs .373

1910: .382 vs .365

1911: .419 vs .415

1912: .409 vs .408

1913: .389 vs .397

1909-1913: .396 vs .391

That is not the question I asked.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by jagcnco

I'm playing a historical league, starting in 1901. I think I must have the settings wrong because so far the accuracy leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate thoughts on how I can "fix" this. I would include the settings I have in this thread but don't know which ones might be potentially impacting the standings and individual performances.

Thanks in advance!

This is a matter of a mix of fact and personal perceptions. So, i'll just say look at the outcomes either from a league-wide perspective or individual batter perspective and sometimes a mix of both... Adjust th league total modifiers to get what you want to see.

I like to focuse on individual player results more than league-wide stats. e.g. in this era you'd want to see X number of .400 hitters etc... so you modify the hits modifier to get the right proportions at the top or however you want to focus.

Modifiers are fairly intuitive but some nuances to understand. e.g. if you increase hits (in effect raising league batting average), that is like a rising tide for most other offensive stats. more hr, more 2b, more 3b, more stolen bases in proportion to what they were before you changed the hits modifier. So, if you change one thing that dominos into another, consider if you should reduce anything else or if it's only a matter of a few hr, who cares, right? Stick to only changing one major stat like hits at a time along with any dominos you want to pre-emptively fix. These sorts of tweak can take years to really fine-tune.

Focusing on individual results will not always result in relatively accurate league-wide stats and being forgiving about the range of what "normal" actually is. There's a lot of variance for 1 season.

you could further tweak player creation modifiers, but not so sure how that effects distribution curve, and therefore may never actually fix anything. if it's just a rising or ebbing tide, still gonna have to choose between league-wide accuracy and numbers you want to see from the individuals.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Edward ohare

That is not the question I asked.

You've asked a lot of questions in this thread, some seemed pretty rhetorical and/or basically impossible to answer (i.e. "If there is a player who has 135 hits in 512 ABs for a .264 BA and hit 20 doubles, 11 HRs, and walked 69 times what is the greatest amount he would deviate from that, plus and minus, in your game?") so not really sure what you are wanting Garlon to answer.

Meanwhile, you have yet to provide any explanation as to how you define "accurate" while making statements about how OOTP is "designed" and being passive aggressive with one of the people involved in that design for historical.

So, maybe you should be the one to expand on your statement that "OOTP is not designed to optimize the accuracy of individual player performance.".

If this debate is going to be had, these type of things need to be specified if anyone is going to be on the same page.

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by luckymann

The fact is this. People such as Garlon will present you with a set of results from a highly controlled environment that tells you the game is incredibly accurate. They are completely within their rights to do so and are strictly correct in what they say.

However, it is also misleading and disingenuous because, with every deviation you take from that controlled environment, the accuracy slips just a little.

So if you're using historical minors or ahistorically applying a DH or simply deviating in any way from the vast array of settings Garlon has listed the slippage begins and it increases exponentially the further you step outside the circle.

It's like you're wearing a jumper with a loose thread that you pull. Next thing you know you're wearing a vest, then a scarf, then nothing at all....

As the game continues to grow and offer ever more options, the tradeoff continues to widen between the "sandbox effect" and high levels of accuracy. This is only to be expected and 100% acceptable, at least in my book.

I think you are talking past each other. Both things are true. The game starts from a core of stunning accuracy - the ability to reproduce historical results among teams and players and leagues - that provides a solid base for experimenting with alternative realities, by design. There's nothing misleading about reproducing and praising that. Not brag; just fact.

For those of us who like to experiment (no color bar, high TCR, no WW1 or WW2 loss of players, no historical injuries), the expected "deviation" only makes sense if it is from a common, reliable, accurate "mean". Josh Gibson hitting 50 HR only makes sense if the original world had the Babe hitting 60 HR.

Changes based on user preferences are not "slippage". They are "accurate" given the variables that have been introduced, in the sense of "if this had happened (or not happened), this is our best guess as to how things would have changed."

Note that this is true even with very slight departures from IRL. I can leave everything as is, switch Kyle Schwarber and Trea Turner in the Phillies' batting order, and track the results. Does placing your (slow) best power hitter in the heart of the order, and a fast slasher leading off, produce more runs?

Not an old jumper unraveling; but patches and stitches (dye?) applied to the basic jumper. Oh, I'm not good at metaphors and analogies. As you point out, this is intended and 100% acceptable. It's why many of us play the game at all.