Quick Counts .... nope

[Wavebird99]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

Ive been messing with quick counts extensively myself and I have to sort of agree with what some others have been saying, but heres my take:


Pitching is much MUCH more difficult and hitting is far easier - part of the challenge of hitting is developing the at bat and learning to get your pitch. This is pretty much taken away with quick counts, allowing you to swing away at any good pitch you see and also draw walks at a far higher rate.

On the flip side, I find pitching to be far, far more difficult. Im generally really good at pitching in this game, which is why I find it so frustrating to generate so many 3 ball counts, especially with great pitchers like David Price who dont tend to walk too many guys.

My last quick counts game I played with the Rays and D. Price and I walked 7 batters in 5 innings. It was kind of absurd. And they smacked me around a bit too.

[Greencollarbaseball]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I think QC brings walks, on both sides, up to a realistic number. So me personally, I don't have a problem starting with a 3 ball count while pitching.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[THESHAMISASHAME]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I completely understand why people love a feature like QCs. The more options the better, IMO.

But... there is no way in hell I could ever get into using them. For me, the pitcher/batter battle is 95% of any given baseball game. And to truncate that facet of the game in anyway completely cheapens the results.

I love working the count, fighting pitches off, and all of the cat and mouse games that fall in between. And when I'm not working the count, some of my best hits(and misses...)come on that aggressive first pitch ambush swing.

See but heres the point most are missing HOW the game is programmed and though its different in QC mode its still alot the same and IMO it just compresses each at bat and I still get many pitcher/batter duels with 10 pitches or more but you just dont see the first 4 or 5 filler pitches .( just wasted time anyways because of how the games AI is programmed )

I personally never liked how SCEA did the whole pitcher vs batter battle and thought it was very anti climatic most of the time but with QC mode it actual lays it all in front of you right in your face !

Each pitch you gotta be ready , its constant excitement you just dont get in the full purposely drawn out regular mode game which can actually get quite boring game in and out to many gamers like me .

But the bottom line this game is amazing but not only for Quick Counts the greatest thing in sports video games since the EA NHL skill stick but because it offers so many ways to play while still keep sim to its roots . SCEA !

In Closing think of Quick Counts like a boxing heavy weight prize fight that you pay for on pay preview that has all the extras and things you just dont want like low ranked light weights or women boxing filler and thats how I see Quick Counts Mode as " The Main Event Of MLB 14 "

[Armor and Sword]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I completely understand why people love a feature like QCs. The more options the better, IMO.

But... there is no way in hell I could ever get into using them. For me, the pitcher/batter battle is 95% of any given baseball game. And to truncate that facet of the game in anyway completely cheapens the results.

I love working the count, fighting pitches off, and all of the cat and mouse games that fall in between. And when I'm not working the count, some of my best hits(and misses...)come on that aggressive first pitch ambush swing.

I absolutely agree with that. The Pitcher/Batter showdown is the core of the game. No question. I still play full games. In fact my new rule has been play 2 QC one Full every series. Or 2/2 in a 4 game set. I love that aspect. I also enjoy full games more. But…..I am a Show junkie and want to play multiple seasons with various classic rosters as well as my franchise and that just was not possible playing full game as I really want to play every game. With QC and mixing in QC games with full games I am getting the best of both worlds now.

It's a balance I have been woking with thus far and it is going great. At first it was very hard because the approach to an AB on QC is far different than playing a full game. But I love the challenge and more importantly I love the fact I am almost at the All-Star break in my NYY franchise and I would say I have played 25 full games and the rest were QC. So I am getting a full meal. More games, more fun.

But again. I agree on your point and that is why playing the full game is the heart and soul of this game. And QC does not capture that aspect quite like working a count from 0-0 and getting a feel for apithcers stuff that day. It can't. But it is a great feature and should further evolve in future iterations of The Show.

[DJ]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I'm a big fan of the QC feature but I do feel like in some ways it has made me more undisciplined at the plate. Working the count and drawing walks was something I really worked on, starting with MLB 10. I probably won't be able to correct this new pattern unless I abandon QC.

With that said, I'll trade fewer walks for being able to play 2 games in the time it took me to finish 1.

[Cardot]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

Final words: ASB 05 had it perfect with the counts including all counts and multiple options for the generated counts (batters, pitchers, random, smart). Hopefully SCEA investigates what they can do to improve the feature.

Yeah, ASB '05 was the only game I made it through all 162...with the generated count. I played with the 2-1 count for every batter. It gave enough wiggle room to bunt, steal or take a pitch. But really sped things up in addition to producing more walks.

[Russell_SCEA]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

OP, I have been asking for generated counts (QC's) for years and SCEA finally made it a reality. I think ASB 05 is still the GOAT all-around baseball game BUT this year's game is awfully close because of excellence in other areas.

Some post history to show I was asking for this:

3-2-2011http://www.operationsports.com/forum...2&postcount=52


12-22-2011http://www.operationsports.com/forum...6&postcount=13


Then Knight165 chimed in:



And then the man, the myth, the legend, the guy holding up the Astros sign in my franchise game last night acknowledged that the message was received...

12-26-2011




I am truly grateful to have such an awesome representation of the game of baseball in The Show. Last night I'm watching a Show-motion replay of a swing that resulted in a double in the gap and I can't get over how spot on the swing and overall fluidity of the play was.

Back on topic: I love the option and will never not use it. I've always had the very common issue of not walking enough and this type of option is what I need. Here's an inning I had on offense last night:

#3 hitter Jason Castro: Walk
#4 hitter Matt Dominguez: Walk
#5 hitter Adam Dunn: Infield Fly
#6 hitter Jon Singleton: Walk

Bases loaded with one out and I didn't even record a hit!!!

#7 hitter Alex Presley: GIDP

Final words: ASB 05 had it perfect with the counts including all counts and multiple options for the generated counts (batters, pitchers, random, smart). Hopefully SCEA investigates what they can do to improve the feature.

What are all of the options for generated counts from ASB?

[NDAlum]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

What are all of the options for generated counts from ASB?

Here are all of the options:

1. 0-0 count
2. 1-0 count
3. 1-1 count
4. 0-1 count
5. 2-0 count
6. 2-1 count
7. 2-2 count
8. 1-2 count
9. 3-0 count
10. 3-1 count
11. 3-2 count
12. Random counts
13. Batter counts
14. Pitcher counts
15. Smart counts

Random counts: They were just completely random and could be any of the first 11 listed

Batter counts: Counts that favored the hitter (1-0, 2-0, 3-1, etc)

Pitcher counts: Counts that favored the pitcher (0-1, 1-2, 0-2)

Smart counts: Counts that took into account how the pitcher/hitter were currently performing. For example, a pitcher on a roll against a hitter in a slump would likely start the count with a count that favored the pitcher.

[Steven78]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

Damn that puts this game to shame.

[p_rushing]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

Pitching I get way too many 3-0, 3-1, and 3-2 counts.

Closing with Kimbrel, I'm 2-2 and hardly any saves. I've given up too many walks and blown saves because I end up walking guys or giving up hits because QC gives me 3 ball counts. I'm almost ready to stop using QC or having to sim when I have him pitch.

[Russell_SCEA]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

Here are all of the options:

1. 0-0 count
2. 1-0 count
3. 1-1 count
4. 0-1 count
5. 2-0 count
6. 2-1 count
7. 2-2 count
8. 1-2 count
9. 3-0 count
10. 3-1 count
11. 3-2 count
12. Random counts
13. Batter counts
14. Pitcher counts
15. Smart counts

Random counts: They were just completely random and could be any of the first 11 listed

Batter counts: Counts that favored the hitter (1-0, 2-0, 3-1, etc)

Pitcher counts: Counts that favored the pitcher (0-1, 1-2, 0-2)

Smart counts: Counts that took into account how the pitcher/hitter were currently performing. For example, a pitcher on a roll against a hitter in a slump would likely start the count with a count that favored the pitcher.

The only one I really like at all is random the other options wouldn't be fair or balanced.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

The only one I really like at all is random the other options wouldn't be fair or balanced.

You guys have a real good thing going here Ramone.

My personal opinion is that it's nearly perfect as is, but could use the following tweaks:

1. If 3 ball counts were toned slightly back (literally producing maybe one less walk per team per game. Meaning the finest of fine tuning).

2. If relievers brought in mid-inning had freshly generated counts. The same goes for pinch hitters (along with relievers brought in mid-inning receiving the stat result from their first batter faced. Currently the result goes to the pitcher who was subbed out. I filed a bug report).

3. If you allowed the option for the game to generate a 0-0 count when a pitcher is hitting with a runner on base and less than two outs. Similar to the logic that asks you if you want to pinch hit for your pitcher.

I actually don't want to see option 3, personally. But so many people are requesting it.

I also never want to see 0-0 counts in any situation either. There's no way I could see it being implemented without prolonging game times or drastically reducing the frequency of the currently generated counts. However, I do know if anyone can do it, it's you guys! I just love the pace of the game so much right now!

[Jr.]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

The only one I really like at all is random the other options wouldn't be fair or balanced.

The more options the better... I hope y'all never forget that

[OhioCub]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I'd like to see a quick counts lite, in other words, one that starts with only 0-1, 1-1, 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1. Nothing with 2 strikes or 3 balls. One pet peave I have with the current setup is when the CPU brings in a new pitcher and you have to start with 2 strikes. I always like to see a pitch from a new pitcher before swinging and obviously can't always do that with 2 strikes.

[p_rushing]

Re: Quick Counts .... nope

I want to see counts based on the pitchers control and the number of balls they normally throw with the batter stats also used.

I'll have to get my stats for Kimbrel, but I think I'm 1-6 on save attempts. Most of the counts have 3-X, so I'm having to throw fastballs. So I'm walking or giving up HRs. Kimbrel should rarely see a 3 ball count and I feel its mainly what I see.

Next game I play, I'll see if I can keep track of it.


For hitting, I want to be able to start the count over at 0-0 if I want to bunt. I hate having a bunting situation and getting a 3-2 count.