TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

[KBLover]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

My 14 carry over is in 2019.

Yeah, in 6 games the CPU has only made two infield throwing errors for me with my setting at 9.

One was by a fairly decent catcher trying to stop a steal of third. He rocketed the throw over the 3B head.

The second was by a poorly rated SS making a throw to first on a rush play, pulling the 1B off the bag.

Would you believe me if I told you that 2 in 6 games is a rarity? Usually it's lower.

That's just amazing how different our experiences are.

I wish I had kept the data for when I was on 9 like you. It was comical. MLB The Sandlot 18 more like it.

Maybe I'm just in an error-prone stretch lol. I wouldn't think Reaction would have anything to do with throwing errors? Like the fielders are "caught off guard" by the bad throw and can't save the error or something? It's the only other major difference in our fielding.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

That's just amazing how different our experiences are.

I wish I had kept the data for when I was on 9 like you. It was comical. MLB The Sandlot 18 more like it.

Maybe I'm just in an error-prone stretch lol. I wouldn't think Reaction would have anything to do with throwing errors? Like the fielders are "caught off guard" by the bad throw and can't save the error or something? It's the only other major difference in our fielding.

Actually yes, turning up fielder reaction has cleaned up fielding a bit. 6 games is hardly enough of a sample size to confirm it (I turned it up 6 games ago, I never post immediate changes), but if it is true, good catch.

I laughed at The Sandlot 18. As a side note, I would totally play that game. Imagine The Show engine running on neighborhood lots and famous diamonds from movies. THAT would be a game mode that would finally take my attention (at least partially) away from my carry over.

[The Kid 24]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

WW, Im guessing you'll update OP with new changes when locked in, correct?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Operation Sports mobile app

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

WW, Im guessing you'll update OP with new changes when locked in, correct?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Operation Sports mobile app

Yup, and I'll make a post.

I'll also try to update all of the settings in the vault as well, but no guarantee on that one.

[The Kid 24]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Yup, and I'll make a post.

I'll also try to update all of the settings in the vault as well, but no guarantee on that one.

Sounds good, yep I get it.

Thoughts on KB's fielding sliders?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Operation Sports mobile app

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Sounds good, yep I get it.

Thoughts on KB's fielding sliders?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Operation Sports mobile app

Still trying to figure out why he is seeing such different results then I am.

I wouldn't be insulted if you used his sliders for fielding though, I'm only here as a resource. I've always been a big believer that sliders should be tailored to the individual. This whole thing started as an offshoot to the directional hitting guide since people were asking me about sliders there. I use the other slider makers as resources, particularly Armor and Nomo. The more we build off each other the better slider sets we can make.

[KBLover]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

LUL

Bogaerts has made a throwing error in the third straight game.

He's got Knoblauch syndrome going on over here lol

[NolanRyansSnowmonkey]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

What I have right now, broken across my franchises (using current fielding sliders and primary franchises - I've played more than 14 games this cycle , though these are mixed HoF/Legend but that doesn't matter for fielding - otherwise it would be like 2 games with the current Legend sliders lol - I keep them separate but combined them for this).

18 COL (fresh '18 Rockies fantasy, currently in Year 1)
17 BOS (BOS carryover started in MLB 17, not-fantasy, currently in Year 2)
14 MIA (MIA carryover started in MLB 14, non-fantasy, currently in Year 14)

IFE = IF fielding error, OFE = OF fielding error
ITE = IF throw error, OTE = OF throw error

(Taken from nomo's spreadsheet, which I use with some modifications to add other stats I wanted to track, targets taken from nomo's spreadsheet as well. Targets in [ ] )

CPU Errors:

18 COL -
1 IFE, 1 OFE, 1 ITE, 5 games, 0.6 per game

17 BOS -
0 IFE, 0 OFE, 2 ITE, 4 games, 0.5 per game

14 MIA -
2 IFE, 0 OFE, 3 ITE, 5 games, 1.0 per game

Total per game rates
0.21 [0.24] IFE, 0.07 [0.07] OFE, 0.43 [0.24] ITE, 0.00 [0.02] OTE


Human errors (auto field, buttons with no meter throws for most ratings influence)

18 COL -
0 IFE, 0 OFE, 1 ITE, 0 OTE, 5 games, 0.2 per game

17 BOS -
2 IFE, 0 OFE, 2 ITE, 0 OTE, 4 games, 1.0 per game

14 MIA -
0 IFE, 2 OFE, 2 ITE, 0 OTE, 5 games, 0.8 per game

Total per game rates
0.14 [0.24] IFE, 0.14 [0.07] OFE, 0.36 [0.25] ITE, 0.00 [0.02] OTE


Throwing errors have been most prevalent for whatever reason. This is with lower slider there than TheWarmWind, whose setting I based from. We're both at a loss as to why lol, but I'm guessing it's ratings differences, especially from our carryovers (we both have one from '14, I think mine is farther along).

This is interesting.
Here is the setup i have used for every single test game since release.

Infield Error (IFE) - 9
Oufield Error (OFE) - 7
Infield Throwing Error (ITE) - 7
Outfield Throwing Error (OTE) - 7

BTW This is all CPU fielding. But when ive tested manual user fielding ive been all over the board with sliders, So ill stick with CPU fielding for now.

As you already know, i also use Nomo's spreadsheet (also with many of my own modifications snd formulas) and the same targets.

This is over 200 games over several franchises, combined for this comparison:
This only includes up to and including patch 1.07.

I also included KB's settings and error rates for easy reference.

Per Game Errors (MLB target in parentheses):

9 - IFE .15 (.24) 7-KB- .21
7 - OFE .06 (.07) 7-KB- .07
7 - ITE .24 (.24) 7-KB- .43
7 - OTE .01 (.02) 6-KB- .00

Two things stand out.

1 - I have less Fielding Errors at 9 than you have at 7.
(FWiW - I have Fielder Speed and Reaction at 2 and 2). This is odd to me.

2 - I have considerably less throwing errors than you at the same setting. (FWiW - my IF arm strength is at 5).

Im curious to get your thoughts on this.

[KBLover]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Per Game Errors (MLB target in parentheses):

9 - IFE .15 (.24) 7-KB- .21
7 - OFE .06 (.07) 7-KB- .07
7 - ITE .24 (.24) 7-KB- .43
7 - OTE .01 (.02) 6-KB- .00

Two things stand out.

1 - I have less Fielding Errors at 9 than you have at 7.
(FWiW - I have Fielder Speed and Reaction at 2 and 2). This is odd to me.

2 - I have considerably less throwing errors than you at the same setting. (FWiW - my IF arm strength is at 5).

Im curious to get your thoughts on this.

I...have no idea lol

It went up with 2 more errors in my '17 BOS franchise, both on infield throws in the last game for me (SS Bogaerts, 1B Hosmer). CPU made a fielding error on the infield (SS Andrus).

Your guess is as good as mine.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

@NolanRyansSnowmonkey what are your arm strength settings?

Edit: nevermind I saw you posted them.

So we do know that more settings then errors effect errors, so my two explainations are that:

1. There is an inversion point with arm strength where it becomes detrimental.

Or

2. I was wrong about arm strength helping prevent errors, but the difference between arm strength at 5 and 6 is well within variance.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Operation Sports mobile app

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Having a really tough time making a decision on something. I wanted to lock in my hitting sliders but I'm worried that CPU strike frequency is too low, especially on the HoF setting.

Here is my issue in full:

I'm seeing a lot of high pitch counts early, resulting in SP getting pulled a lot in the 4th and 5th innings. This COULD be because I've been facing a lot of teams with bad pitching of late (I had two series against the Rays, where in my carry over their pitching is worse then many teams minors), and staying with the course is the best answer, however... their pitch counts aren't completely unreasonable when they are getting pulled. Twice now I've had SPs in close games get pulled with under 80 pitches thrown and energy still in the green. Once was with CPU hook at 7, the other at 6. Both pitchers were losing, but pitching well.

The options I'm considering:

Further pushing up SP staminas in order to encourage the CPU to leave starters in longer.

Accept that there is no good solution for CPU bullpen management, and that my dream of a "Set it and forget it" setting is a fool's errand.

Turn up CPU strike frequency on HoF from 1 to 2. I'm scared of this option because of the domino effect that it could have (an issue that has already been discussed in this thread).

Go back up to Legend hitting. The pitching up there really was better.


Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated. I'm kind of at an impasse here juggling all of my options and figuring out which one is best. Of course just staying the course is also an option.

[KBLover]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Having a really tough time making a decision on something. I wanted to lock in my hitting sliders but I'm worried that CPU strike frequency is too low, especially on the HoF setting.

What is the Zone % (not Strike % as they are different)? That's what I use to guide all decisions regarding whether or not to mess with CPU pitching and how I want to if I must for either that reason or other reasons.

MLB Average is 45.5% last season and so far this year it's even lower...at 43%, which is really interesting.

Zone % of pitchers in MLB so far this year:
https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.as...ers=0&sort=9,d

Further pushing up SP staminas in order to encourage the CPU to leave starters in longer.

I like this idea. I tend to avoid it because it seems CPU pitchers tire more slowly than mine at equal stamina and pitch count, but there could be reasons for that. Regardless, this has the least side effects. Lowering Manager Hook (slower hook) a notch or two might help as well (debatable, admittedly) ?

Accept that there is no good solution for CPU bullpen management, and that my dream of a "Set it and forget it" setting is a fool's errand.

This might be an unfortunate reality because we have access to so little options for altering bullpen logic. That said, you might can get it closer and then just leave it be.

Turn up CPU strike frequency on HoF from 1 to 2. I'm scared of this option because of the domino effect that it could have (an issue that has already been discussed in this thread).

This would be my option of last resort...and I'd be equally likely to just accept it until I can think of a different idea. Granted, I am dogmatic about Zone % as it's a big part of the whole dynamic of the pitcher-batter confrontation and the cat-and-mouse of the duel.

Go back up to Legend hitting. The pitching up their really was better.

I'd try this before changing strike frequency for sure. Heck, it's half the reason why I'm now tweaking mine on Legend.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

What is the Zone % (not Strike % as they are different)? That's what I use to guide all decisions regarding whether or not to mess with CPU pitching and how I want to if I must for either that reason or other reasons.

MLB Average is 45.5% last season and so far this year it's even lower...at 43%, which is really interesting.

Hmm, I have no hard data, but zone percentage is somewhere in between 39 and 48% by my estimation. I do have an issue with first pitch strikes though, which are way down, I'd estimate at around 33 to 40% (compared to the near 50% clip I was getting in 17). This revelation does open up a new option though: should I raise CPU pitch consistency? I hate messing around with the consistency and control sliders, and I feel messing around with either will also have a domino effect, but at this point I'm open to all options.

PS I usually build around feel, not stats. I feel that building around stats alone is inherently flawed, as you can come up with settings that mimic real life stats but are a far cry from mimicking real life looks and physics. Don't get me wrong, I feel like building around stats is viable, and also an important resource, but stats can have flaws just like humans. For example, Nomo still has his baserunner speed at 5, a setting that I know to be flawed. His setting works statistically because he has balanced around it, but the fact of the matter is that players run faster than that.

I think it's healthy for the community to have both people like me and people like you. It is through discussions like this with diametrically opposed mentalities that we find the best settings for both ourselves and the community.

PPS I realize that building off of feel alone is also inherently flawed. I'm just to lazy to keep track of hard data. Hence why I ask the stat heads for help.

[KBLover]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

Hmm, I have no hard data, but zone percentage is somewhere in between 39 and 48% by my estimation. I do have an issue with first pitch strikes though, which are way down, I'd estimate at around 33 to 40% (compared to the near 50% clip I was getting in 17). This revelation does open up a new option though: should I raise CPU pitch consistency? I hate messing around with the consistency and control sliders, and I feel messing around with either will also have a domino effect, but at this point I'm open to all options.

Honestly, I would leave it. That's a low 1st strike rate but like you said, raising it might cause a domino effect. That's why I go by overall Zone % and not per-count Strike %. Sequencing is often random even in the real game (pitchers can't do what they want at will and even if they do, it often relies on chasing which may or may not happen), so I look for the overarching trend/result and let the count-by-count chips fall where they may.

40-48% is fine for Zone%, imo. Heck, look at that leaderboard I linked. Range is basically 40-50%. I'd say 40-48 is "good enough" and go with it.

PS I usually build around feel, not stats. I feel that building around stats alone is inherently flawed, as you can come up with settings that mimic real life stats but are a far cry from mimicking real life looks and physics. Don't get me wrong, I feel like building around stats is viable, and also an important resource, but stats can have flaws just like humans. For example, Nomo still has his baserunner speed at 5, a setting that I know to be flawed. His setting works statistically because he has balanced around it, but the fact of the matter is that players run faster than that.

Right...which I could prove objectively by hand-timing the runners, which is why I am at 8 baserunner speed. So I looked up information for it and tried to gear guys towards that across all speed levels. Which is objective data/stat information.

It's also why my IF throws are at 10, it's the closest I can get to mimicking the hardest infield throws as shown by Statcast (and it's still too slow, imo, for the absolute cannon arms).

To me, stats inform us to behavior of the players. Zone % is an example. How do pitchers pitch? 60% strikes doesn't tell the whole story. Is strike rate flawed? No, but it's only half the story. Zone % + Chase rate is the process and one of those is squarely in control of the user (Chase rate) when facing the CPU which means the user must consider his/her own tendencies...which is where objective data comes in.

Like if I griped about getting 55-57% strike rates when I chase an average of 20% of the time...that's silly. My own tendency tells me why I'm "off".

I think it's healthy for the community to have both people like me and people like you. It is through discussions like this with diametrically opposed mentalities that we find the best settings for both ourselves and the community.

100% agree. Always healthy for a vibrant community to have multiple view points and approaches.

I just don't think feel vs stats is an opposition. I think one can be used to help the other. If a stat is off (and it's not from your own play), then feel can tell you if you need to bother. If the feel is off, an objective look can tell you what might be going askew. That's how I try to use both anyway.

Sometimes, I think the feel is "off" but when I play the game and get the data, it's pretty much on point and what was "off" was either some sequencing or my approach when I had chances to turn it make in my favor. Or if I compare that game to the other 7 or 8...it was just an "off" game. Happens. That's baseball.

In fact, that's what led me to look at your fielding sliders. I was objectively getting hardly any errors and it seemed like every play, no matter the difficulty, was made easily. So, I looked around and thought yours were some unorthodox sliders for errors (always catches my eye lol) and I'm like "I'll try that".

Suddenly, both "feel" and "stats" looked better. While I'm getting way more throw errors for whatever reason, plays have risk, not all are perfect, realistic mental mistakes showed up (misreading balls, not judging perfect carems, etc).

That's why I don't think they are enemies. They just need to be worked together.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: TheWarmWind's Impact Sliders

I just don't think feel vs stats is an opposition.

This. Glad we're on the same page.

Sorry for bringing it up, glad it was unnecessary to.