CPU vs CPU

[DaiYoung]

Re: CPU vs CPU

I know Dai is currently testing the pitcher consistency slider and I'm still may drop the steal success slider a touch too to allow for more attempts to be caught.

Yep I'm going to experiment with that slider tomorrow. I'l try dropping it to zero for the day and see what happens. Looking for a way to get more walks since they become somewhat scare once you curb the CPU offense. Hopefully the effect on WP won't be too severe but that might be wishful thinking - Rick Ankiel's record might be under threat.

As for the CPU hitting sliders, I reckon I'm going to settle at something like Power -2 or -1, Solid Hits default. I've almost finished the 50 game trial with both sliders at -2 and runs per game per team is only 3.19, MLB average in '10 was 4.38.

Variety of outs seems fine to me although I must admit I'm not keeping that data. If you read Nomo's thread he's keeping track of fly balls, ground balls - all is OK iirc.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Yep I'm going to experiment with that slider tomorrow. I'l try dropping it to zero for the day and see what happens. Looking for a way to get more walks since they become somewhat scare once you curb the CPU offense. Hopefully the effect on WP won't be too severe but that might be wishful thinking - Rick Ankiel's record might be under threat.

As for the CPU hitting sliders, I reckon I'm going to settle at something like Power -2 or -1, Solid Hits default. I've almost finished the 50 game trial with both sliders at -2 and runs per game per team is only 3.19, MLB average in '10 was 4.38.

Variety of outs seems fine to me although I must admit I'm not keeping that data. If you read Nomo's thread he's keeping track of fly balls, ground balls - all is OK iirc.

I wouldn't bring consistency to zero. Go 2 or 3 to start. This is a very sensitive slider. Even one click is noticeable.

[Joey Sauce]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Hey guys, I have been playing CPU vs CPU games since the first day this came out and thought I was alone in my quest haha..glad to see I was wrong.

From my experience so far I have noticed these couple things:

1: I saw too many steals with some teams like the Mets and then none with the Giants - I guess it varies by team. Also because some teams steal too agressively i saw too many caught stealings - (there should be like 1 every 4 games and i saw 2 in one game)

2: No HBP, I have yet to see even one

3: too many throwing errors, not enough fielding errors

4: Saw two complete games by SPs in a 6 game span..that just doesnt happen - according to 2010 MLB stats, there was a complete game thrown once every 27 games -maybe raise manager hook or lower sp stamina?

5: also, too many double plays

-anyone have a solid slider set that they have been getting legitimately realistic cpu vs cpu?

[tgreer]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Good to see you again TGreer....you're right about the HRs. I'm the same, I like to have my stats are realistic as possible. The main concern we have at present seems to be the number of WPs which cause the advancement of runners in certain situations. Unfortunately this is part of the AI which we can't do anything about via sliders. We've posted it on the bugs forum to see if SCEA can reduce it's occurence.

I'm getting to a point where I'm pretty happy with the results. I've spent my final holiday today watching loads of cpu v cpu games using my settings. Seeing loads of variation in hits/scores per game.....just watched Seattle come back from 6-1 down after 7 to beat the A's 8-6. Yet another game saw the Giants defeat the Rockies 1-0...the second successive 1-0 game between the two teams.

What I'm rolling with is: All default except

Power -1 (from default)
Timing -2
Solid Hits -4
Starter Stamina +1
Pitch speed Max
Field Errors +1
Steal Freq +3

This is for both human & cpu - just in case it affects home & away like it did in the past.

Hope that helps, give them a go and see what you think. All sliders are subjective to what we want to achieve, my ideas will be different to Dai's - which is good - however, I think we're pretty close as to where we are going, give or take the odd difference.

I know Dai is currently testing the pitcher consistency slider and I'm still may drop the steal success slider a touch too to allow for more attempts to be caught.

Thanks Ninjoid! Watched 4 exhibition games on fast play with these, all with #3 starters. Here are the results:

Cin 1 7 1
Fla 3 9 0
2B, HR, 2 SB, CS, 4 BB, 14 K

Tex 3 9 0
Tor 5 11 0
2 2B, 3 HR, 3 BB, 9 K

KC 7 11 0
Min 3 10 0
5 2B, 4 HR (wind blowing out helping out the xbase cause) 4 BB, 9 K

Cle 2 6 0
Bal 3 7 0
2 2B, 2 HR, 2 SB, 5 BB, 10 K, WP

Game Avg. for these 4:


R=27 (6.75) (little low for #3 starters? or probably just my small sample size)
H=70 (17.5)
E=1 (0.25)
2B=10 (2.5)
HR=10 (2.5)
BB=16 (4.0) (see Runs?)
K=42 (10.5)
SB=4 (1.0)
CS=1 (0.25)
WP=1 (0.25) (have yet to see the problems u guys have ran into, even with the 4 game MOM I did before these)

No doubt in my mind these play better than the Default. I know you have tested MANY more games than I have (8). You still comfortable with these? Ready to start my real MOM franchise and not look back. I'm not one who likes to change settings once I have started. Thanks for this topic, good stuff

[Ninjoid]

Re: CPU vs CPU

I'm eagerly waiting Dai's testing on the consistency slider...unfortunately I'm back to work now as my holiday is over so my testing will be somewhat reduced to what I can cram in on an evening.

My sliders aren't finalised, just what I have at the moment. As I say I'm looking forward to Dai's testing as it could be that this slider may be the key.

[ocat]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Still no pitch speed displayed for CPU vs CPU games, grrrrrr!

[Ninjoid]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Dai - has your testing thrown anything up today?
Ta

[DaiYoung]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Dai - has your testing thrown anything up today?
Ta

Smallish sample size but here's what I have, Ninjoid...

From 12 games with the pitch consistency slider at zero. Pertinent results:

Stats are per team per game (MLB 2010 numbers in brackets)

BB 3.19 (3.25)
K 6.86 (7.06)
WP 0.82 (0.34)
HBP 0.22 (0.32)

Good news - walks are up, strikeouts aren't down, HBP up a little.
Bad news - WP obviously very high

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Smallish sample size but here's what I have, Ninjoid...

From 12 games with the pitch consistency slider at zero. Pertinent results:

Stats are per team per game (MLB 2010 numbers in brackets)

BB 3.19 (3.25)
K 6.86 (7.06)
WP 0.82 (0.34)
HBP 0.22 (0.32)

Good news - walks are up, strikeouts aren't down, HBP up a little.
Bad news - WP obviously very high

I'm impressed! HBP aren't sky high! That's promising.

Are the bulk of WP still coming from the 'catcher slowness/runner agressiveness' variety?

Anyway, all in all, if they end up patching the WP issue, than consistency seems to be the key.

Good stuff so far. Hopefully offense doesn't explode as you continue to test this.

[DaiYoung]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Offense hasn't been altered significantly, heroesandvillains. I'm currently 34 games into testing at Power -2, Solid Hits default, runs per game is still around about 3.75 which is almost the same as when I started the Pitcher Consistency experiment.

I'd say there has been a greater variety of WP. There's been a few that have gone completely over the catcher's head, hadn't seen that on default.

I shouldn't really mention the 'E' word one week after the game's release but I do wonder if editing each catchers' blocking ability might help.

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Offense hasn't been altered significantly, heroesandvillains. I'm currently 34 games into testing at Power -2, Solid Hits default, runs per game is still around about 3.75 which is almost the same as when I started the Pitcher Consistency experiment.

I'd say there has been a greater variety of WP. There's been a few that have gone completely over the catcher's head, hadn't seen that on default.

I shouldn't really mention the 'E' word one week after the game's release but I do wonder if editing each catchers' blocking ability might help.

I'm thinking that, and/or catcher reaction. I'm pretty sure, if I recall correctly, that catchers have a reaction attribute. Don't quote me on that. But, they may get themselves to the ball faster that way. If your near your PS3, feel free to check. Otherwise, I'll check in a few hours and report back tomorrow.

[DaiYoung]

Re: CPU vs CPU

I'm thinking that, and/or catcher reaction. I'm pretty sure, if I recall correctly, that catchers have a reaction attribute. Don't quote me on that. But, they may get themselves to the ball faster that way. If your near your PS3, feel free to check. Otherwise, I'll check in a few hours and report back tomorrow.

Heh, I had to check before I posted last because I wasn't even sure there was a blocking attribute. Yes, there is also a reaction attribute. I wonder if that might have a knock on effect on SB success rate though?

[Heroesandvillains]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Heh, I had to check before I posted last because I wasn't even sure there was a blocking attribute. Yes, there is also a reaction attribute. I wonder if that might have a knock on effect on SB success rate though?

Wow...didn't think of that. Hmmmm...

There's no way it would trump arm strength and such though. Do you think? I don't know. Man, wouldn't it be a pain to edit EVERY catcher EVER over the course of your franchise?

Maybe not...15 points each to start. Maybe a bit much, but decent for testing.

Either way, I'm glad WP are still less than 1 per team, per game. Even though it will have a modest impact on runs, it's not like it's 3 per team per game like last year.

[Cimmarov]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Good to see you again TGreer....you're right about the HRs. I'm the same, I like to have my stats are realistic as possible. The main concern we have at present seems to be the number of WPs which cause the advancement of runners in certain situations. Unfortunately this is part of the AI which we can't do anything about via sliders. We've posted it on the bugs forum to see if SCEA can reduce it's occurence.

I'm getting to a point where I'm pretty happy with the results. I've spent my final holiday today watching loads of cpu v cpu games using my settings. Seeing loads of variation in hits/scores per game.....just watched Seattle come back from 6-1 down after 7 to beat the A's 8-6. Yet another game saw the Giants defeat the Rockies 1-0...the second successive 1-0 game between the two teams.

What I'm rolling with is: All default except

Power -1 (from default)
Timing -2
Solid Hits -4
Starter Stamina +1
Pitch speed Max
Field Errors +1
Steal Freq +3

This is for both human & cpu - just in case it affects home & away like it did in the past.

Hope that helps, give them a go and see what you think. All sliders are subjective to what we want to achieve, my ideas will be different to Dai's - which is good - however, I think we're pretty close as to where we are going, give or take the odd difference.

I know Dai is currently testing the pitcher consistency slider and I'm still may drop the steal success slider a touch too to allow for more attempts to be caught.

Are you playing the game on all star level if not what do you have it set at.

[nomo17k]

Re: CPU vs CPU

Smallish sample size but here's what I have, Ninjoid...

From 12 games with the pitch consistency slider at zero. Pertinent results:

Stats are per team per game (MLB 2010 numbers in brackets)

BB 3.19 (3.25)
K 6.86 (7.06)
WP 0.82 (0.34)
HBP 0.22 (0.32)

Good news - walks are up, strikeouts aren't down, HBP up a little.
Bad news - WP obviously very high

The numbers look very promising, but one thing that concerns me about the pitch consistency set to zero is that, if I understand correctly, it makes a pitcher very erratic in a "random" way, isn't it? I've read the whole discussions last year how people experimented with pitch control/consistency and a sort of unexpected way these sliders affect how CPU pitches, but I still don't know how exactly control/consistency work.

My understanding (from the online manual) is that pitch control affects the size of circle around the desired pitch location, and the actual pitch is more likely to land inside that circle. So a pitcher with better control has a smaller circle whereas a poor control pitcher has a larger circle. If this is all there is, a pitcher would almost never throw a very erratic pitch (like behind a hitter).

Now, the pitch consistency changes the size of that circle by a huge margin occasionally (the frequency controlled by the pitch consistency slider) to sort of imitate how a pitcher just totally misses the target once in a while.

If this is the way it works, is it desirable to make pitchers very erratic like that?

Being a nerd I tried to do a simple experiment this evening to actually test this hypothesis, but I can only see 25 pitches at a time with pitcher analysis, so the small sample size kinda killed it for me. Data can still be accumulated, but it's quite boring to keep pitching fastballs down the middle with classic pitching (the best way to intend to pitch to the same location) and collect data in the end.

Does anyone know exactly the relation between control and consistency?