RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> PureSim Baseball



Message

SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 8:00:35 PM)

You know, if he could code it to accept user vids, then we could install vids that we like ourselves.  Or say like a screensaver display.  Things like that we could customize.  That type of open-endedness would really make the game very personal for players.



wlfcards -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 9:47:08 PM)

1.  While playing a game have a fatigue meter on the pitchers.
2.   Add a rating if a player is streak prone
3.   Class A minor players should have an age limit & be exempt from expansion pool.
4.  Be able to define expansion pool as to how many players can be protected



Abev -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 9:48:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wlfcards

2.   Add a rating if a player is streak prone



Bill James says theres no such thing as streaks.[:D]



Abev -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 9:50:45 PM)

I am getting alot of players who have decent ratings but havnt been picked up by a team for a few years.

So they havnt played for 3 years, what the heck are they doing? Can we retire them earlier?



KG Erwin -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 10:11:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wlfcards

1.  While playing a game have a fatigue meter on the pitchers.



Respectfully, man, I can't go with this. When one is managing, you don't have a "fatigue meter" in the dugout, now do you?

Now, maybe we could have an option for "visits to the mound", with actual limits, to determine the "real" fatigue level. This could be a reasonable compromise. However---what pitcher is gonna tell you that he's wearing out? The mound visit is nothing more than giving a pat on the back and buying time for a reliever to warm up, so maybe it ISN'T a good option to add.

In PS, we don't have to worry about warming-up relievers, which is great. This is an implied routine.

Other than that, you gotta pay attention to pitch counts and the pitch speed. If you follow these closely, as any good manager should, then you can tell when your starter is faltering.

Of course, giving up three consecutive walks may also give you a hint that the guy on the mound is in trouble [:D].



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 10:29:08 PM)

You know, I am going to reverse course and generally back KG on this.  I originally asked if we could code it so when we inspected the pitcher's player card, his current fatigue level would show.  But guess what?  I have been managing some games and it is waaaay more interesting to look at pitch counts, pitch speeds and the EN rating of your pitcher, and then determine how he is doing.  There is very little you can do in text sim managing, so I'd prefer to have this something I am responsible for.

Truth is, I'd prefer to keep it as it is right now.  Just watch that fastball at the beginning of the game and later in the game. That tells you a lot!



KG Erwin -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/6/2006 10:48:53 PM)

I'm with you on this, Phil.  The game makes some compromises on some managerial aspects, but when it comes to pitcher management, the human player shouldn't have any more info than a real-life manager.  

Thanks for thinking it out and agreeing with me on this. [;)]

Glenn  



rpommier -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/7/2006 12:44:48 AM)

I'm going to give that method a try, I usually can tell the amount of counts a guy can go after managing awhile.  I've never tried looking at pitch speed.  One thing though, does your method work with finesse pitchers?  say someone with a low speed but high control?

One argument in defense of some type of indicator is that we can't actually "see" the pitcher so that we can get a sense of his fatigue.  So some "gamey" feature wouldn't do much harm.

Rod



Sonny -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/7/2006 2:56:49 AM)

How do you ask the pitcher if he is tired?[:D]



Abev -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/7/2006 3:05:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Now, maybe we could have an option for "visits to the mound", with actual limits, to determine the "real" fatigue level. This could be a reasonable compromise. However---what pitcher is gonna tell you that he's wearing out? The mound visit is nothing more than giving a pat on the back and buying time for a reliever to warm up, so maybe it ISN'T a good option to add.


I like this. A mound visit would be really good. And since thepitcher never tells the truth, add some randomness to what the "pitching coach" thinks the condition of the pitcher is.



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/7/2006 3:47:45 AM)

That would be nice.

With finesse pitchers, you'll still see a big drop on their fastball.  It's just a matter of physics that isn't avoidable.  If you look at that one image I posted in another thread (on in-game stats or whatever), you'll see a pitcher with 6 velocity was down to a 66mph fastball after heaving 139 pitches.  Amazing he could even get it up that high.



VanScoy -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 10:25:27 PM)

It has been said in this thread before but #1 for me is having ratings change within the course of the year!!!! Please!



akcranker -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 10:42:04 PM)

About the pitcher fatigue arguement.. I agree with KG on this one.  Ever since I read a post by him mentioning to watch the fastball speed I've been hooked on doing it in every game I manage.  I watch pitch speeds, endurance and pitch count.  Like Sittingduck said there's not much to do when managing and I'd at least like to keep this part.

About the pitcher giving up 3 walks being an indicator that your pitcher is in trouble.... I've had a few games where my pitcher did that to the first 3 batters of the game.. in that situation do you expect me to pull my pitcher?  I don't.. if he gives up a few runs so be it.. I'll let my offense pick up the slack.  If they can't well then I lose the game... my decision.  I've seen way too many times where the AI will pull thier starting pitcher that early though and that shouldn't happen IMO.



PadresFan104 -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 10:46:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VanScoy

It has been said in this thread before but #1 for me is having ratings change within the course of the year!!!! Please!


I've been trying to figure out the reason why this is important, and I can't. Can you explain why this would help the gameplay? Why and how would the ratings change?

Also, I'm assuming you are talking about the visibile ratings. If you are talking about the ones we can't see that influence performance, then yes I can see this.



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 11:17:30 PM)

Did someone talk about 3 walks somewhere?  I didn't get that.



akcranker -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 11:25:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

Did someone talk about 3 walks somewhere? I didn't get that.


Yea KG talked about it in post #185

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Other than that, you gotta pay attention to pitch counts and the pitch speed. If you follow these closely, as any good manager should, then you can tell when your starter is faltering.

Of course, giving up three consecutive walks may also give you a hint that the guy on the mound is in trouble .

< Message edited by KG Erwin -- 8/6/2006 8:18:34 PM >



wlfcards -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 11:42:59 PM)

Another game (perhaps Microsoft Baseball)  had a monetary allocation (could be either a fixed amount for each team or reduce total salaries allowed) between scouting, manager & player development.  You picked the type of manager such as good with young pitchers or good with old players.  Also, at spring training you allocate where money is spent on development - power hitting, new defensive postion.  My recollection is that you set a team wide allocation and could specially allocate for 5-10 players.



VanScoy -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/8/2006 11:49:19 PM)

Because for me, it is more like real life, where players will decline and develop within the scope of the year. There is really no reason to watch a player during the year in the minors because he will always be a 19 contact until sept., guaranteed. Same with an aging player. Will he hold it together one more year? I am missing some of that flavor. Yes, I know visible ratings are only part of it. But still, I like that option.



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/9/2006 1:03:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jcdcubs

I have seen too many players with about 50 BB and 100 So. Should add K or SO rating just like ootp. Like Gwynn, Grace, Boggs - More walks than strikeouts.


I gotta admit - there needs to be some guys with excellent EYE ratings who produce more BBs than Ks. Especially in their late 20's (I checked the Baseball Almanac and that is when most guys with good discretion were in their prime for selection).

Need to look at this at some point.



PadresFan104 -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/9/2006 1:40:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VanScoy

Because for me, it is more like real life, where players will decline and develop within the scope of the year. There is really no reason to watch a player during the year in the minors because he will always be a 19 contact until sept., guaranteed. Same with an aging player. Will he hold it together one more year? I am missing some of that flavor. Yes, I know visible ratings are only part of it. But still, I like that option.


I see your point, but I guess I feel like that would make the game too easy. What's the point of watching your players performance on the field (or watching their stats rise and fall), if you can simply wait for his rating to jump (or decline) past a certain value?

I realize that in real life, scouting reports are constantly updated. Maybe some sort of mid-season ratings adjustment based on a combination of playing time and internal factors would be sort of cool...



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/9/2006 1:53:11 AM)

Van Scoy, I realize what you're looking for.  But I'll admit, if the ratings go up then that is the system revealing 'yes, this guy really has improved, just as the stats support'.  And I really don't want that.  I want to have to judge for myself whether this has happened.  And as usual, one season usually isn't enough to judge a player's progress.

So if the game dynamically upgrades (or worse yet, downgrades) ratings during the season, then that takes my guesswork right out of it. And cheapens the game, IMO.



Woodruff -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/9/2006 2:24:58 AM)

Vanscoy, my argument against that would be...why let the player's ratings drive what you do with him during the season? Shouldn't his performance drive it?

I've had a VERY MEDIOCRE shortstop give me one very good season, and then blow for the other four or five seasons I had him. But for that season (or at least most of it, probably), his ratings didn't reflect his value to the team at all.

Beginning of the season (and during trade talks) is really the time when ratings "matter". And that's mostly the only time(s).

Or maybe I'm just weird.



Amaroq -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/9/2006 4:21:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck
Van Scoy, I realize what you're looking for. But I'll admit, if the ratings go up then that is the system revealing 'yes, this guy really has improved, just as the stats support'. And I really don't want that. I want to have to judge for myself whether this has happened. And as usual, one season usually isn't enough to judge a player's progress.

So if the game dynamically upgrades (or worse yet, downgrades) ratings during the season, then that takes my guesswork right out of it. And cheapens the game, IMO.


Wow, I think I'm very much in opposition to you, guys - I'm with VanScoy.

My interpretation of the current game is that there is only one point - Spring Training - when a player actually improves or ages. That doesn't make sense to me, in the real world: a young player may well improve from day to day, and an older player may not have the speed in September that he started the season with in April.

Consequently, I want the *engine* to perform aging calculations intermittently throughout the season, perhaps once a month or so.

The thrust of your argument with VanScoy seems to be that you want the dynamic changes, but hidden from the user, to keep the challenge of guesswork.

I think you'll still get that - you can see that a player is declining, but he's still putting up the numbers, and the trade deadline is approaching: do you keep him, hoping he'll continue to produce through the playoffs, or do you move him *for a worse player*, because you're worried about him being worse by season's end?

From a metaphor point of view, I don't think that makes sense: the players on my team, my coaches (and me!) are seeing every day, in bullpen sessions, in batting practice, etc, so it makes sense to have more information than just 'stats' to judge by. Obviously, opposition teams we have scouts looking at.

To the difficulty point, I actually think that makes the game more difficult - I can't simply hoard the best 25 players, and run them out there all season. In fact, a team which is the best on Opening Day, if left unchanged, might not be the best come the start of the playoffs. That's cool - it requires me to pay more attention to your club on a day-to-day basis.

On the trading front, I think it makes the game more dynamic, as you get teams where, on April 1st, the veteran catcher was better than the young backup... but by June 30th, the AI can see that, not only is the younger player performing better, but the ratings have changed enough that he's rated the better player, too - and that encourages the team to make a trade.



Nukester -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/12/2006 9:09:23 PM)

Bump



KG Erwin -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/12/2006 9:31:10 PM)

Good points being raised, but I prefer the end of season ratings changes, at least for way I play.  Following stats in the minors as the season progresses gives you a hint as to whether a particular player is in the proper level. 

For me, to have to track the individuals' ratings changes during the season is too much detail, and requires too much micromanagement.  You guys know how I feel about adding unneccessary complications.

In my view, spring training is the time when you sit back and evaluate your players' progressions or regressions.   Once a year. 

A few players wear two hats --one as GM, and the other as day-to-day manager.   I'm one of that group, so I may be representing a minority opinion here. 

One more point -- a guy in the minors might see a 10-point jump in a rating during the course of season (using the 1-100 scale), but do I wanna be informed every week or two that Joe Blow in A ball has had a 1 point increase in his Power rating (from say, 25 to 26? )      



SittingDuck -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/12/2006 9:42:29 PM)

I understand your statement, Amaroq, and if this was pre-PS2007, I'd agree. But now that ratings are absolute, I disagree. If we were back in what I think was a clearly superior system - the scouts system (and this is where I think 2007 took a big dive for innovation, speed freaks be damned) - then I would say absolutely let the ratings fluctuate (as they once did, I believe).

Obviously you are correct in what occurs IRL with the honing of skills and the degradation of skills. But currently, with the ratings being absolute and reflecting what the game perceives as the true value of the player (by its standards), it is a much easier game, and thus has lost something (to me).

I think - know - that losing scouts/managers was a backwards move. Adjusting how/when the scouts did their analysis was, IMO, the route to go. That should have eliminated some processing time and would have still left you with what you are desiring, the 'input' of the coaching staff and scouts. Have a hidden rating that drives stuff, but uses the coaches/scouts (that really is what 'scouts' should be viewed as when looking at your own team) opinions as the 'feedback loop'. It makes for more uncertainty, harder work and watchfulness, and yes, it creates a bit more of a human presence in the game (even if it really is only the AI).

I think the ratings need to rise/fall at the end of the season to reflect the player's accomplishments and maybe a little (not as much as now!) after ST. Ideally you'd have the scouts doing slight changes here and there, preferably at the AS break. In fact, I would prefer an analysis after ST, at the break, and at the end of the season. In between, I must infer value and talent myself.

But I am not a coder, this is not my game and thus, whatever. But if we get a game that changes ratings dynamically through the season, thus basically taking the ENTIRE need for me to analyze out of it and being more like having God himself hold Stengel, Weaver and Anderson, etc. by the hand, then we might as well just reveal the hidden rating.



modred -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/14/2006 3:15:04 AM)

The ability to remember seperate custom filters for batters and pitchers.



Woodruff -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/14/2006 5:17:09 AM)

I'm not sure if this is what you're referring to or not, but I find it TERRIBLY frustrating that every time I make a lineup change to my team, whatever column I had sorted by is resorted (by I believe last name).

It's not difficult to have the game simply remember how the column was sorted until I request a re-sort myself.

Please add this, as the way it is now it adds a great deal of "pain" to simply modifying my roster.



motnahp -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/14/2006 7:19:35 AM)

A couple things I'd find very useful for Multiplayer associations in future releases:

(1) Eliminate the trading deadline of August 1st for MP leagues. Leagues should be able to use their own parameters. This would also benefit historical replay leagues where players often change rosters late in the year.

(2) Add the ability to make "cash-for-player" transactions, or waiver signings.

As it stands now, both of these issues can be worked around with the "Edit Player" function, but the change of teams does not show up in any transaction history and I think it spoils some of the beauty of the new Almanac feature.



Amaroq -> RE: PureSim is on a roll / PureSim 2008 brainstorming thread! (8/14/2006 9:29:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Woodruff
I'm not sure if this is what you're referring to or not, but I find it TERRIBLY frustrating that every time I make a lineup change to my team, whatever column I had sorted by is resorted (by I believe last name).

It's not difficult to have the game simply remember how the column was sorted until I request a re-sort myself.

Please add this, as the way it is now it adds a great deal of "pain" to simply modifying my roster.


I absolutely agree. This would be a great change.



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.28125