Good idea or bad?

[tessl]

IRL Rockies position players have inflated numbers due to park effects and when they move on to another team their numbers decline.

Would it be reasonable for the Show to program in a % decline in offensive attributes when a player leaves Colorado?

[nemesis04]

Re: Good idea or bad?

There already is a park effect for Colorado so in theory the players on that team would realize that boost by playing more games there. You should not punish a player's individual skill to compensate for it.

[tessl]

Re: Good idea or bad?

There already is a park effect for Colorado so in theory the players on that team would realize that boost by playing more games there. You should not punish a player's individual skill to compensate for it.

I understand that but if they are traded to another team their numbers decline because they no longer play 81 in Coors. I'm not adamant about it but it seems like a % decline in some attributes like contact and power would be realistic for a player who is traded away or for that matter when they play on the road.

It would probably be difficult to program but if done properly it would be an accurate reflection of what happens IRL. Just a thought, no big deal.

[kehlis]

Re: Good idea or bad?

I understand that but if they are traded to another team their numbers decline because they no longer play 81 in Coors. I'm not adamant about it but it seems like a % decline in some attributes like contact and power would be realistic for a player who is traded away or for that matter when they play on the road.

It would probably be difficult to program but if done properly it would be an accurate reflection of what happens IRL. Just a thought, no big deal.

Your missing his point. Attributes are already (for a lack of a better term) increased by playing in Coors so there is already a natural decline in them when moving on to another team.


You don't have more power playing in Colorado then you do playing elsewhere. You hit more homeruns playing in Coors because of the altitude, not because your personal attributes change. This is already built into the game.

[Will I Am]

Re: Good idea or bad?

So are attributes affected in other parks as well? Thinking of At&t where it is much harder to hit hrs.

[tessl]

Re: Good idea or bad?

Your missing his point. Attributes are already (for a lack of a better term) increased by playing in Coors so there is already a natural decline in them when moving on to another team.


You don't have more power playing in Colorado then you do playing elsewhere. You hit more homeruns playing in Coors because of the altitude, not because your personal attributes change. This is already built into the game.

I understand that. I'll give an example of what I'm talking about. Dickerson in 2015 hit .395 in Coors, .257 away from home. In 2014 .363 in Coors, .252 away from home. In the final live roster update on 11-16 Dickerson had attributes of:
con vs R 90
con vs L 70
pwr vs R 72
pwr vs L 63

That is based upon the formula SCEA uses to derive attributes which is something like 50% for most recent season and 25% for each of the two previous seasons.

When Dickerson is in Coors in the Show those attributes get an additional boost from park effects but if I am a team with a neutral park effect and I acquire him in a trade in the show I get those attributes which are based upon what he did with the Rockies over the last 3 years. In the show if I acquire him in a trade he could win the batting title for me. IRL in a neutral ballpark he is a .250 hitter.

I won't push the point, I'm not complaining, just a thought.

[kehlis]

Re: Good idea or bad?

I understand that. I'll give an example of what I'm talking about. Dickerson in 2015 hit .395 in Coors, .257 away from home. In 2014 .363 in Coors, .252 away from home. In the final live roster update on 11-16 Dickerson had attributes of:
con vs R 90
con vs L 70
pwr vs R 72
pwr vs L 63

That is based upon the formula SCEA uses to derive attributes which is something like 50% for most recent season and 25% for each of the two previous seasons.

When Dickerson is in Coors in the Show those attributes get an additional boost from park effects but if I am a team with a neutral park effect and I acquire him in a trade in the show I get those attributes which are based upon what he did with the Rockies over the last 3 years. In the show if I acquire him in a trade he could win the batting title for me. IRL in a neutral ballpark he is a .250 hitter.

I won't push the point, I'm not complaining, just a thought.

I just don't know how else to explain this to you.

Attributes don't change in real life based on where you are playing, only ballpark affects do and that's accurately represented in the show.

Dickerson doesn't have higher attributes playing in CO than he does anywhere else. The ballpark affect is what gives him better numbers.

Thusly, when he changes teams, his attributes are still accurately represented.

[kehlis]

Re: Good idea or bad?

Lets try this actually.


Take you or I. Not professional baseball players.

My personal attributes wouldn't change whether I'm hitting in Pittsburgh or in Colorado but hitting (or pitching) in each environment has different affects on the ultimate result (altitude in CO, humidity in PA).


And as someone who has played baseball at a competitive level in both states you can actually take this as me actually saying something rather than someone making something up.

[cardinalbird5]

Re: Good idea or bad?

I agree with tessi. Players do not get an artificial inflation to their attributes for playing at Coors but the ball does travel further there in the game, so indirectly Rockies hitters will hit better there on top of their current attributes.

This goes for other parks too like AT&T and PETCO. Players like Upton would have had better numbers if they played at Coors or in Chase field IRL.

I think it would be cool to see the attributes adjusted by their park and the quality of pitchers they face.

I am mainly an online player, so to me it does not feel right when I use Colorado on the road in an online game and I have the best lineup in the game. The same goes for Diamond Dynasty....

I am not complaining but I just think ballparks have a drastic effect on how players hit, so why not adjust them for the ratings?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cardinalbird5]

Re: Good idea or bad?

I just don't know how else to explain this to you.

Attributes don't change in real life based on where you are playing, only ballpark affects do and that's accurately represented in the show.

Dickerson doesn't have higher attributes playing in CO than he does anywhere else. The ballpark affect is what gives him better numbers.

Thusly, when he changes teams, his attributes are still accurately represented.

The only MLB stadiums that have a stadium factor built in the game is Chase and Coors. Dickerson should not have 80 power at sea level and 5000 ft above sea level imo. If each ballpark had the elevation factor built in then I would agree.

With the current rosters, Colorado has the best lineup home or away. We all know Colorado is a mediocre offense on the road.

Again, I mainly play online...so Dickerson changing teams is irrelevant to the online community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Will I Am]

Re: Good idea or bad?

The only MLB stadiums that have a stadium factor built in the game is Chase and Coors. Dickerson should not have 80 power at sea level and 5000 ft above sea level imo. If each ballpark had the elevation factor built in then I would agree.

With the current rosters, Colorado has the best lineup home or away. We all know Colorado is a mediocre offense on the road.

Again, I mainly play online...so Dickerson changing teams is irrelevant to the online community.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You know this for fact, speaking of Coors and Chase? It wouldn't be right if a player can hit hrs. as easy in SF as in Cincinnati.

The players in Colorado should have lower power #'s to begin with if their overall power #'s are a result of how they hit in Coors.

[cardinalbird5]

Re: Good idea or bad?

Yes i heard it was Coors Chase and a few ST parks.

Agreed the players attributes should be slightly adjusted to compensate for elevation...I am sure guys like Dickerson and Cargo would be above average if they went to a different team but the splits do not lie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk