Unrealistic stats continuing
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
I sorted the players by potential in the MLB roster I believe... it's right at the end of regular season so I am actually not sure how that compares to 25-man, etc.
Typically, how many A, B, etc., potential prospects do you see in the draft each year? I thought the game was always trying to balance them out, meaning when some A-potential players go out of the system (retirement, etc.), then they generate the equal number of A-potential players.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
I don't know if this means anything, but before update 1.18 I embarked on a franchise with the Astros and on the SCEA stock roster (before the first roster update) there was one player in particular that took a strange curve.
He was a SCEA CAP his name was Herbert Hathaway, an A potential right fielder. After gaining is full potential (91) at the age of 23 in the second year of a 6 year pact, he proceeded to decline every single year to the point that he dropped to an 80 at age 27. He was a very good hitter and his stats remained fairly static and he never dropped down in potential until the last year of the deal. I let him go in free agency so I didn't pay attention to him any longer but I thought it was kind of cool that he didn't do what I thought and expected him to do. He declined leading up to his prime, which was rare for this game.
Now I'm wondering if something happened when they played with progression/regression 'cause this doesn't seem to be happening anymore from what you guys are telling and showing me...T.K.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
I believe there's supposed to be some kind of balance, but maybe the limit for the number of A's and B's was increased? It did seem like there were more high potential players in the default roster this year, Here are the numbers of A's per team, SCEA players not included:I sorted the players by potential in the MLB roster I believe... it's right at the end of regular season so I am actually not sure how that compares to 25-man, etc.
Typically, how many A, B, etc., potential prospects do you see in the draft each year? I thought the game was always trying to balance them out, meaning when some A-potential players go out of the system (retirement, etc.), then they generate the equal number of A-potential players.
BAL - 4
BOS - 4
NYY - 5
TBR - 2
TOR - 5
CHW - 2
CLE - 7
DET - 7
KCR - 4
MIN - 3
LAA - 6
OAK - 2
SEA - 6
TEX - 3
HOU - 9
ATL - 6
MIA - 7
WAS - 3
NYM - 8
PHI - 3
CHC - 10
CIN - 6
MIL - 7
PIT - 5
STL - 3
ARI - 4
COL - 9
LAD - 5
SDP - 5
SFG - 9
That's 159 A's SMFH... For OSFM we try to shoot for ~50 which is what Knight said the limit was around, so it was definitely increased this year...Bakin' soda, I got bakin' sodaComment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
Thanks for the numbers. Is that about 50 A-potential limit for the entire leagues, or just per draft class?I believe there's supposed to be some kind of balance, but maybe the limit for the number of A's and B's was increased? It did seem like there were more high potential players in the default roster this year, Here are the numbers of A's per team, SCEA players not included:
...
That's 159 A's SMFH... For OSFM we try to shoot for ~50 which is what Knight said the limit was around, so it was definitely increased this year...Comment
-
Comment
-
-
Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
There are some Very Sad and Cruel Comments in this thread and I personally made one of those comments and have admitted my mistake and repented of it.
Thanks to the OP for starting this thread.
I only own and play MLB The Show and the game is great. I have never played RTTS and now I do not want too.
Maybe with the extra memory of the PS-4, SCEA is able to fix the progression issue for those who find it to be a problem and a hindrance for those who want 100% realism.Last edited by vcu9; 04-14-2013, 02:03 AM.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
It's not just about 100% realism, I'd just like to hit my mid-30's and not have to pitch against lineups filled with hitting machines and on the flipside hit against absolute schmucks.There are some Very Sad and Cruel Comments in this thread and I personally made one of those comments and have admitted my mistake and repented of it.
Thanks to the OP for starting this thread.
I only own and play MLB The Show and the game is great. I have never played RTTS and now I do not want too.
Maybe with the extra memory of the PS-4, SCEA is able to fix the progression issue for those who find it to be a problem and a hindrance for those who want 100% realism.
It also get's progressively worse year by year. My last season the lowest team BA was a .304 and a minimum runs scored of over 1000.Last edited by etched Chaos; 04-14-2013, 04:15 AM.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
One would think that when the programmers were checking the game, they would actually sim a franchise for about ten years to make sure the results were somewhat realistic.
Or, maybe in the future, baseball becomes more like softball because fans are idiots and want to see slugfests, so MLB goes back to superhard baseballs and loaded bats to make it more appealing to dumb fans.Comment
-
Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
I would like to think so, but how do you explain every single team having over 1000 runs? Did they test it and just ignore it? Did they test it and just say, $%^& it no one will notice? Does every team scoring 1000 runs and having a batting average over .300 sound realistic to you?
It is obvious it was overlooked or there would not be these results.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
It really doesn't work like that. Most likely a (this is a educated guess) late change to the application was introduced and missed. It happens in development.I would like to think so, but how do you explain every single team having over 1000 runs? Did they test it and just ignore it? Did they test it and just say, $%^& it no one will notice? Does every team scoring 1000 runs and having a batting average over .300 sound realistic to you?
It is obvious it was overlooked or there would not be these results.
To pretend they simply wouldn't test it or ignore is actually pretty ridiculous if you know the first thing about application development.Comment
-
Re: Unrealistic stats continuing
It's not just about 100% realism, I'd just like to hit my mid-30's and not have to pitch against lineups filled with hitting machines and on the flipside hit against absolute schmucks.
It also get's progressively worse year by year. My last season the lowest team BA was a .304 and a minimum runs scored of over 1000.
You are right, my friend. Thanks for simming that far into the future. Now I know that I will not waste my time with RTTS unless this is fixed in the future. I appreciate you sharing this with us.Comment

Comment