Scripted Innings!

[redsox4evur]

Re: Scripted Innings!

Can't go by cpu vs cpu. There would have to be a human selected for this boost or penalty to show up as I'm sure the game can tell the difference between who is or isn't playing.

Why??? Please tell me then what button I can press to initiate a comeback. It would be really great to know so that I can win some more games in the later innings. CPU v. CPU is the best way to do it actually because there is NO human input that can cause irregularities. Such pitch selection, leaving starter in too long, etc.

[Will I Am]

Re: Scripted Innings!

Why??? Please tell me then what button I can press to initiate a comeback. It would be really great to know so that I can win some more games in the later innings. CPU v. CPU is the best way to do it actually because there is NO human input that can cause irregularities. Such pitch selection, leaving starter in too long, etc.

Well if there is a boost/penalty (and I'm not saying there is), the whole point of it would be to keep humans happy and excited. The cpu I'm sure doesn't care if wins by 100 or loses by 100.

Oh and as far as selecting that button, you'd have to go back and fire up mlb 09 for that.

[forme95]

Re: Scripted Innings!

Wouldnt there be more scoring in DD games because of the simple fact that you can load your team with high rated players? I am not a DD player so I do not know the ins and outs of playing it.

[bcruise]

Re: Scripted Innings!

Sigh... I know, I just didn't know if CPU vs. CPU meant he is "watching these games be played out," or he is letting them get simulated.

He does an entire thread on this subject each year, with extremely detailed info from those games....it's definitely about watching the games play out.

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...5-version.html

[nomo17k]

Re: Scripted Innings!

DD games for nomo17k (52 9-inning games with one 10-inning game and 2 where it looked like a quit in the 9th):

Inn. | Trailing | Other
1st | 4% | 14%
2nd | 7% | 12%
3rd | 14% | 16%
4th | 13% | 15%
5th | 7% | 11%
6th | 6% | 13%
7th | 18% | 8%
8th | 15% | 9%
9th | 15% | 3%

The team trailing after 6 scored 48% of their runs in innings 7-9.

Thanks for tallying up the numbers for my own games; was curious how it would look for my own games (FWIW I've never felt the effect of comeback or late inning boosts in those games that I played).

One thing with the way those numbers are computed, though, is that if my understanding of how "Trailing" is defined here is correct (not sure about this), your sample may be biased toward the games that you actually "expect" run-scoring to be higher in 7-9 innings, if that team's ability to score is actually perfectly even in each inning.

What I mean is, if "Trailing" means that the team being sampled is behind right after the 6th inning in that specific game, it's likely that your sample of "Trailing" includes more games in which the team in question under-performed *purely due to luck* through the fist 6 innings, compared to the team's expected run-scoring ability.

That means, if they end up performing on the expected level over the next 7 - 9 innings (as the team should), the fraction of runs scored in those innings should naturally come up higher in that sample. This doesn't require run-scoring ability to change at all over the course of the game.

So I think the higher percentage of run-scoring in 7 - 9 innings could be misleading in that sense.

[Woodweaver]

Re: Scripted Innings!

I've mentioned this before in past comeback code discussions and I will say it again..... I suspect all of this is linked to that old option we used to have in MLB 09!!

Back then we could switch comeback code on/off and the description tallies with what azstdogg is seeing with his stats - especially the part about bigger leads seeing a bigger rally.

I suppose the question is was this option taken out of our hands or did the developers come up with another way to even games out??

No. Option gone. Code gone. The answer remains, no. There is no mistake, oversight, misstatement, or hidden agenda.

The CPU vs CPU samples seem to more closely match the MLB statistics, but HUM vs HUM sample is displaying a slightly different trend with some plausible explanations as to why....

What is the most obvious variable here?

[tnixen]

Re: Scripted Innings!

The game is totally scripted but I still love it..

No it's not!!!

This whole scripted non sense has me laughing my head off! lol

[riker147]

Re: Scripted Innings!

No it's not!!!

This whole scripted non sense has me laughing my head off! lol

Like.... Literally off???? Cuz..... That would be gross!!!!

Sent from my NCC-1701 using Tapatalk.

[vidgames]

Re: Scripted Innings!

No comeback code...but a boost to teams losing is obviously the flaw that is killing the game.

[Padgoi]

Re: Scripted Innings!

No. Option gone. Code gone. The answer remains, no. There is no mistake, oversight, misstatement, or hidden agenda.

The CPU vs CPU samples seem to more closely match the MLB statistics, but HUM vs HUM sample is displaying a slightly different trend with some plausible explanations as to why....

What is the most obvious variable here?

If this is true (and part of me wants to believe you because you seem very adamant about this), how does the game differentiate difficulty levels? In other words, what makes the game harder on Rookie then say Hall of Fame? How do the developers "manufacture" more competitiveness on higher difficulties?

[ryanmc564]

Re: Scripted Innings!

someone call the people who made the "making a murderer" doc. and get them to make a doc about this "making a comebacker" (the lies and deceit of a video game company and the customers who go thru great lengths to expose the truth).




probably should mention: that I for one don't care if there is a code or not. I still enjoy playing the game no matter how many times its frustrated me.

[bcruise]

Re: Scripted Innings!

If this is true (and part of me wants to believe you because you seem very adamant about this), how does the game differentiate difficulty levels? In other words, what makes the game harder on Rookie then say Hall of Fame? How do the developers "manufacture" more competitiveness on higher difficulties?

B Ma addressed this once a few years ago (and I assume it hasn't changed):

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...5&postcount=37

Note he does mention hitting bonuses for the CPU on higher levels, but in no way implies that this only kicks in or is triggered by a certain point in the game - it's global and active through the whole game as long as those higher difficulties are selected.

If there was a comeback mode ON TOP of this, the CPU would probably never be beatable on those levels.

[Padgoi]

Re: Scripted Innings!

B Ma addressed this once a few years ago (and I assume it hasn't changed):

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...5&postcount=37

Note he does mention hitting bonuses for the CPU on higher levels, but in no way implies that this only kicks in or is triggered by a certain point in the game - it's global and active through the whole game as long as those higher difficulties are selected.

If there was a comeback mode ON TOP of this, the CPU would probably never be beatable on those levels.

So basically on higher levels, the CPU gets a boost in certain areas. How is this realistic? Why wouldn't they differentiate the difficulty levels by simply making the CPU pitch more to corners or making the pitching meter harder to hit? For example, if I can have a team ERA on Allstar of 2.45 because I can pitch to corners all day by hitting the pitching meter, then wouldn't it be smart to simply make the meter harder to hit on HoF, thus making pitches more hittable? Does the CPU need a hitting boost to fabricate a harder difficulty? And this doesn't take into account anything regarding azst's late-game statistics and why the trailing team seems to score a much higher percentage of their runs in the later innings. Again, something seems amiss.

[KingMansaMusa]

Re: Scripted Innings!

So basically on higher levels, the CPU gets a boost in certain areas. How is this realistic? Why wouldn't they differentiate the difficulty levels by simply making the CPU pitch more to corners or making the pitching meter harder to hit? For example, if I can have a team ERA on Allstar of 2.45 because I can pitch to corners all day by hitting the pitching meter, then wouldn't it be smart to simply make the meter harder to hit on HoF, thus making pitches more hittable? Does the CPU need a hitting boost to fabricate a harder difficulty? And this doesn't take into account anything regarding azst's late-game statistics and why the trailing team seems to score a much higher percentage of their runs in the later innings. Again, something seems amiss.

Ur on to something keep going.

[azstdogg]

Re: Scripted Innings!

Thanks for tallying up the numbers for my own games; was curious how it would look for my own games (FWIW I've never felt the effect of comeback or late inning boosts in those games that I played).

One thing with the way those numbers are computed, though, is that if my understanding of how "Trailing" is defined here is correct (not sure about this), your sample may be biased toward the games that you actually "expect" run-scoring to be higher in 7-9 innings, if that team's ability to score is actually perfectly even in each inning.

What I mean is, if "Trailing" means that the team being sampled is behind right after the 6th inning in that specific game, it's likely that your sample of "Trailing" includes more games in which the team in question under-performed *purely due to luck* through the fist 6 innings, compared to the team's expected run-scoring ability.

That means, if they end up performing on the expected level over the next 7 - 9 innings (as the team should), the fraction of runs scored in those innings should naturally come up higher in that sample. This doesn't require run-scoring ability to change at all over the course of the game.

So I think the higher percentage of run-scoring in 7 - 9 innings could be misleading in that sense.

You are correct in how I defined Trailing (behind by 1 or more runs at the end of the 6th inning).

It may very well be true that splitting the data in that manner creates a bias towards games that one would expect to see runs in later innings. However, just because a team is trailing, doesn't mean it didn't score runs nor does it mean it under-performed (not sure if we can easily determine what their normal performance level is). Though at the same time only the trailing team could have scored 0 runs, so it is entirely possibly that it was under-performing in the 1st half of the game. So, here is a comparison for both segments with exactly 2 and exactly 3 runs scored in the first 6 innings.

Run distribution when team scores exactly 2 runs in innings 1-6 and is Leading/Trailing after the end of the 6th:
Inn. | Leading | Trailing
1st | 12% | 9%
2nd | 12% | 6%
3rd | 8% | 10%
4th | 12% | 9%
5th | 11% | 11%
6th | 12% | 13%
7th | 12% | 19%
8th | 14% | 9%
9th | 8% | 14%
-------------------------------
7-9 | 33% | 42%

(Thus this is all instances where a team was leading after 6 innings and that team had only scored 2 runs in the first 6 innings, so 2-0, and 2-1 games. And the same for trailing - the team trailing after 6 only scored 2 runs, so any 2-3, 2-4, 2-X games.)

Run distribution when team scores exactly 3 runs in innings 1-6 and is Leading/Trailing after the end of the 6th:
Inn. | Leading | Trailing
1st | 13% | 12%
2nd | 10% | 12%
3rd | 13% | 14%
4th | 11% | 10%
5th | 11% | 6%
6th | 14% | 7%
7th | 9% | 10%
8th | 11% | 14%
9th | 8% | 16%
----------------------------------
7-9 | 28% | 39%

So if this evens out the under-performing bias, shouldn't the data align a little better for innings 7-9? Or is the best explanation that when it's HUM vs HUM there are too many variables at play that we can't expect it to align with real MLB game data.

Again, I don't believe there is a comeback code (possibly unintended consequences of a complex code?; non-visible bug like the catcher freeze or bat boy issue?; leftover '09 code but Woodweaver says that was removed; just randomness of the data?) but was curious enough to run the data. And more curious when user data started to align with the theory. And found it interesting that the data aligns with the '09 game explanation of the 2P Comeback Handicap that saintjimbo1885 posted a few pages back.