Steven Harmon issue

[muns]

Ok before this even starts its not what you guys think it is.

I wanted to start its own thread, because I didnt want to take away from Columbus and what Turner did, cause flat out he earned it by winning 7 out of his last 10. Nor did I want to muddy up that thread anymore than i already did.

My question is, i just dont understand Markus response on the OOTP Forums.

I posted last night over there, and Alan Followed up with the injury factor that I didnt put into my post like an ass (thanks btw), so I was hoping to get at least somewhat of an answer.

I was expecting a response like something of the affect "that it depends on that talent randomness your league settings is on" yada yada yada.

Instead Alan got a response from Markus on what he posted and its this.

When injuries are off then OOTP 'simulates' injuries in the development with sudden drops in order to keep the system straight. Otherwise it would be messy since too few player would suffer talent drops and the average quality of all players in the league would rise over time, which is unrealistic...

Now i consider myself pretty simple and basic, but im totally confused by this.

I take that comment as there is no point to have the Injuries button period then if its just going to simulate the injuries anyway? Plus he didnt address the 70 point drop. I can see dropage, but not 70 points.

That sounds like a great excuse so that he doesnt have to try to explain that something might be wrong???

Am I seeing that wrong cause I am simple and cause it happend to one of my guys? Or does that make sense to anyone as there would not be any talent drops?

Id rather post and look like an ass in front of you guys rather than post over there first and get fanboy responses.

Im just trying to rap my head around whats going on and try to avoid it from happening again, but I doubt im gonna get anywhere near that kinda goal.

[ekcut]

To me it sounds like this....and forgive me it is early and I have a bad ass headache, so I may be writing an answer to something totally unrelated...

Players experience random bumps and lumps in potential ratings, the frequency of which is determined by the development ratings settings in the setup page. I believe DC uses a variance of the "RonCo" settings.
But those settings are not the only factor that determines if a player bumps or lumps. When a player is injured, especially a long term injury, their chance of experiencing a ratings lump is greatly increased. I know I have seen studies being done on the OOTP boards to determine the extent of that(granted, those studies were just being started, and I never checked back to see results)
Because we play an injury free league, in order to keep the talent pool at a reasonable level, it sounds like Markus has the game treat some players at random like they were injured (even if they don't miss any playing time) thus increasing their chance of a huge lump. (is wondering if anyone is impressed with his use of 'thus')
So the way I interpret this, your player, had we been in an injury 'on' league, would have suffered a bad ass injury...possible career ending...because we are in an injury free league, that player was still able to play, but because of this imaginary injury (which didn't take him out of the lineup) he was eligable for the huge ratings drop....and got shafted.

Why Markus described it like he did, is German Technology (flips a royalty nickel at DC for stealing his line) i don't see why he didn't just exclaim that players in non-injury leagues in order to keep the talent pool at a reasonable depth, will sometimes experiance random catastrophic ratings lumps like injured players do in 'injury on' leagues.

Does this make sense?
Does this even answer the question you were asking?

[TimGuru]

It sounds to me like ekcut has interpreted things correctly, thats about what I read it to mean. It makes sense in a way, if players developed strictly according to age most would follow very similar arcs.

[ekcut]

Wow..I just looked, and no wonder your team struggled. His ratings vs righties is brutal (oddly vs lefties are still good). You got gang raped in the shower by OOTP my friend. In any other league that would be a heartbreaking ratings lump to a promising player, that stuff happens to everyone (except maybe Alan who is 'one' with the baseball gods) but in a fast paced league, that lump means you had a hitter hit .350 for two months, and then .150 after that...without the ability to remove him from the lineup...
Crappy hand you were dealt dude....it could happen to anyone! (except maybe Alan, who is 'one' with the baseball gods)

[Alan T]

Yeah, basically what Markus said I feel can be interpreted as:

Your player suffered a career ending injury with the associated talent drop, but since your league has injuries off he can keep playing but the talent drop remains and is important in order to keep the overall league balance of player talent at some decent level.


------------------------------

That is my interpretation of what he said, and I can understand why he would want to make sure there is some way for player talent drops in an injury-free league to balance players that get sudden talent increases randomly, but the problem I have is he can't in one hand say that doesn't happen anymore in OOTP9 and then in the other hand say it does for a specific reason.

[Young Drachma]

Most ridiculous answer ever.

Injuries off isn't really injuries off. And he passes it off like "well, of course. Why wouldn't this be right?"

Wowsers.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by ekcut

To me it sounds like this....and forgive me it is early and I have a bad ass headache, so I may be writing an answer to something totally unrelated...

Players experience random bumps and lumps in potential ratings, the frequency of which is determined by the development ratings settings in the setup page. I believe DC uses a variance of the "RonCo" settings.
But those settings are not the only factor that determines if a player bumps or lumps. When a player is injured, especially a long term injury, their chance of experiencing a ratings lump is greatly increased. I know I have seen studies being done on the OOTP boards to determine the extent of that(granted, those studies were just being started, and I never checked back to see results)
Because we play an injury free league, in order to keep the talent pool at a reasonable level, it sounds like Markus has the game treat some players at random like they were injured (even if they don't miss any playing time) thus increasing their chance of a huge lump. (is wondering if anyone is impressed with his use of 'thus')
So the way I interpret this, your player, had we been in an injury 'on' league, would have suffered a bad ass injury...possible career ending...because we are in an injury free league, that player was still able to play, but because of this imaginary injury (which didn't take him out of the lineup) he was eligable for the huge ratings drop....and got shafted.

Why Markus described it like he did, is German Technology (flips a royalty nickel at DC for stealing his line) i don't see why he didn't just exclaim that players in non-injury leagues in order to keep the talent pool at a reasonable depth, will sometimes experiance random catastrophic ratings lumps like injured players do in 'injury on' leagues.

Does this make sense?
Does this even answer the question you were asking?

This was a dead on interpretation of what was going on. Still doesn't make any sense.

As a side note, we stop using Ronco's settings, as it wasn't really helpful for a league like this. Our player development/aging modifers are all set to .500 or half, so players should develop half as fast as the game average and age half as slowly as the game would have them go normally. I think it explains why guys have tended to last longer in recent years and why prospects don't really start to emerge until their mid-20s.

I think it serves us well, though.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Most ridiculous answer ever.

Injuries off isn't really injuries off. And he passes it off like "well, of course. Why wouldn't this be right?"

I hate to be a Markus defender, and I agree that this is pretty silly, but I'm going to quibble with you on one point there. From a strictly literal point of view (he is a German, after all) injuries -- in the sense of, "a player gets hurt and is out for a variable amount of time" -- are off. You don't lose playtime or have careers potentially ended early because someone gets hurt.

However, there is another factor, which is the random talent development. We all know that under normal settings, when "this player gets injured", there is often a sharp drop in talent development to go along with the injuries. Essentially what OOTP does, with injuries off, is just crank up the number of "Joe Blow's wife left him and his father died and his dog ran away with his cat and they're living in a condo in Hawaii and he doesn't really want to play the game any more" events that happen.

So yeah, injuries are off. It's just that Markus did a shitty job of explaining an unexpected and rather poorly implemented effect that this has on another aspect of the game.

That all said: I agree. Muns got rectally owned by something dumb, and it sucks.

[Young Drachma]

"Joe Blow's wife left him and his father died and his dog ran away with his cat and they're living in a condo in Hawaii and he doesn't really want to play the game any more" events that happen.

Nicely put, sir.

[muns]

Thanks to all who responded and have helped try to get me to grasp this concept that I still just flat out dont understand.


Ekcut- your answer made total sense, and I got what Markus meant to say now.


I think Markus and his answer is BS though. Instead of having guys take huge hits with ratings (that have already fully developed) and simulate an injury when injuries are off (still cant grasp that at all) why not just have guys that dont develop? Wouldnt that be a better way to control the quality of players that would be unrealistic over time? Isnt having injuries off being unrealistic to begin with? If thats what we want, not sure I get why the option is there to begin with if he can impliment it?

Am i wrong?

The guy hits 357. and 350 the first 2 months with 24 stolen bases, and then hits in the .100's four out of the next 5 months after the simulated injury... He wouldnt have had a chance to be an all star right??


Mind of I jack some people thought in this thread and make a bigger post in the OOTP forums with them?

[muns]

I hate to be a Markus defender, and I agree that this is pretty silly, but I'm going to quibble with you on one point there. From a strictly literal point of view (he is a German, after all) injuries -- in the sense of, "a player gets hurt and is out for a variable amount of time" -- are off. You don't lose playtime or have careers potentially ended early because someone gets hurt.

Kaos- I kinda disagree. That guy does loose playing time, cause he cant hit for crap against righty's now somehow, but he sure can bang this shit out of a lefty pitcher. Hell of a simulated injury there lol

His career is basically over, because there are 90% more righty pitchers in the league than there are lefties ( I overstated that, but you get my point)

So while technically it wasnt a career ending injury, it really is, cause I dont want a guy taking up a roster spot to get maybe 50 at bats a year to face a lefty pitcher

[fairly]

Markus could fix this by postponing the ratings drop until the season is over, but in his defense he probably never imagined anyone playing the game the way FOOL plays it.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by muns

Mind of I jack some people thought in this thread and make a bigger post in the OOTP forums with them?

Only if you like being frustrated beyond belief.



It's a b.s. answer, but that's German Engineering.

[Alan T]

I am guessing if you go back to the ootp boards and hammer Markus more about this you will just get more frustrated with him, with ootp and it will eat up your enjoyment from the league.

based on his response, it seems likely that this is -exactly- how he intends for it to work, and I doubt anyone will convince him otherwise. If no one can convince him of the issues with player development already, this one piece won't be different I don't imagine.

[muns]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I am guessing if you go back to the ootp boards and hammer Markus more about this you will just get more frustrated with him, with ootp and it will eat up your enjoyment from the league.

based on his response, it seems likely that this is -exactly- how he intends for it to work, and I doubt anyone will convince him otherwise. If no one can convince him of the issues with player development already, this one piece won't be different I don't imagine.

Ahhh it was really frustrating last night, and ive voiced my opinion here about it being frustrating, but its time to move on and try to Catch Columbus and hold off the rest of the RL

I am however going to go over there and post, just because the answer again makes no sense to me, but it wont kill my enjoyment for this league. I enjoy everyone around here too much for that to happen.

If i have another young key guy get crapped on next year, then my ootp feelings might change and it will hurt some, but ill cross that bridge if i ever come to it.

Thanks for the talks everyone

[magic_number]

Just to let my fellow GM's know that I'm keeping tabs on FYI stuff like this... yes I'm a lurker, but only b/c I hate jf379r0v;2vlrgqe8 so much. I do like to read though, so keep it up & bed-e-bye for me (I'm gonna kill my alarm clock in about 4 hrs, hopefully I'll beat the rap).

Peace out.

[TimGuru]

Here's another OOTP beaut:

Allan Osborne is the ONLY pitcher in my AA system. He was in the 2 slot of my "5" man rotation, because I moved Micah Green up and never bothered to push Allan into the 1 slot.

He pitched zero innings in 1976.

WHY?

[magic_number]

Originally Posted by TimGuru

Here's another OOTP beaut:

Allan Osborne is the ONLY pitcher in my AA system. He was in the 2 slot of my "5" man rotation, because I moved Micah Green up and never bothered to push Allan into the 1 slot.

He pitched zero innings in 1976.

WHY?

Did you ever get an answer?? Just wondering.

[muns]

Originally Posted by magic_number

Did you ever get an answer?? Just wondering.

I have a good guess. You have the minors manager managing that stuff, and he up and decided not to give your guy a spot that he prob should have deserved.

it has happened to me a few times before and just took it in stride. Another fun ootp quirk

[kaosfere]

Another WTF: Platooning doesn't work for me during spring training. I can set two guys to split starts at a position evenly... and one of them always ends up getting about 18, and the other only 6.

The hell?

[Young Drachma]

Yeah I see no real good way for the AI to platoon. So I try to avoid it when I can.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Another WTF: Platooning doesn't work for me during spring training. I can set two guys to split starts at a position evenly... and one of them always ends up getting about 18, and the other only 6.

The hell?

Spring training is.. well spring training. I mentioned somewhere in a past season the limitations of spring training. Basically the AI does what it wants to. You can control who starts, but since spring training it tries to play everyone, you can't control how little or much someone plays that easily.

Best approach if you absolutely don't want a player to play during spring training, simply leave them off of the roster. Anyone else, it is hit or miss depending on what the AI feels like.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Anyone else, it is hit or miss depending on what the AI feels like.

And not even the AI knows what it feels like.

*It* wants to give everyone a chance. *I* want to give everyone a chance. And yet, when I explicitly ask it to let two different people try out for one position... it tries to "give everyone a chance" by giving one of them 3/4 of the starts.

Conclusion: The AI is a demented schizoid with psychopathic tendencies.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

And not even the AI knows what it feels like.

*It* wants to give everyone a chance. *I* want to give everyone a chance. And yet, when I explicitly ask it to let two different people try out for one position... it tries to "give everyone a chance" by giving one of them 3/4 of the starts.

Conclusion: The AI is a demented schizoid with psychopathic tendencies.

Chances are the people you want starting are starting as expected.. just the AI might be taking them out of the game prior to their first at bat. Check to see how many games they played in the spring.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Chances are the people you want starting are starting as expected.. just the AI might be taking them out of the game prior to their first at bat. Check to see how many games they played in the spring.

Hmm. That makes so little sense that it's entirely possible. In fact, perhaps even probable. I can't remember what my exact depth charts looked like for the spring last year. I'll have to pay attention this time around and see if that's what's happening.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Hmm. That makes so little sense that it's entirely possible. In fact, perhaps even probable. I can't remember what my exact depth charts looked like for the spring last year. I'll have to pay attention this time around and see if that's what's happening.

I don't know exactly who you are talking about, but glancing at your roster, I see a few guys who had more Games played than at bats during spring training. It's just a guess.

[kaosfere]

It wasn't about anyone in particular, just a general annoyance I've had in the past. This explains it fairly well, I s'pose. Thanks.