JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

[JoshC1977]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

Does anybody happen to know if, in franchise mode, the player energy bar (which is tied to durability ratings) has a real impact on player performance? For example, if a player has a half-full energy bar (but you're not getting prompted to give him a rest day) will he hit and play defense with the same abilities as if they had full energy? Or would abilities be diminished to some extent?


If thought I noticed a difference in performance over time but it could have just been coincidence.

My gut feeling is that it does have an impact; especially for pitchers. I tend to have a lot better outings when my SPs (in particular) start with a full bar. There are just so many moving parts with this game, it's impossible to truly suss out.

My angle is this. In real life, there is an impact. I role play as though the game portrays a similar impact. Whether it does or not....who knows? From my immersion perspective, I roll with it as though it does and make strategic decisions accordingly. If it truly does, great. If it doesn't...well, I'd honestly not rather know that and keep that illusion alive.

[steelersd26]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

If it truly does, great. If it doesn't...well, I'd honestly not rather know that and keep that illusion alive.

I live and die by this motto in all of my sports games, even if I find out these things have no effect on gameplay lol. It helps with immersion so much.

[Armor and Sword]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

Thanks! I guess it could have just been placebo thinking that abilities may be tied to how much energy they have left in the tank.

With pitchers you want a full bar or they cannot pitch as long. But sometimes you have no choice. But if I see a 4th or 5th starter on 3/4 of a tank....I may call up a pitcher for spot start.
But everyday players....once it get’s below half I typically give them the day off.
If you let it get to a 1.4 of a tank for lack of a better term they are far more susceptible to injury.

The dreaded snowflake is the more telling sign of performance issues (cold streak).

Can that happen playing with a low energy guy and not giving him a day off? Yeah...for sure.

Like Josh said....use it and interpret it anyway that helps you get into your franchise.

For me.....I want my everyday guys playing almost every game...but the bar tips me off when they need a day off...or two.

There is no wrong answer.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

When it comes to position player durability, I prefer to think of it as minor playable injuries. Everyday aches and pains that come with the territory of being a high-end athlete.

Can you play through them? Absolutely.
Will they effect performance? It's possible, but probably not.
Should you play a player who's energy bar is low or near empty? Probably not.

[JoshC1977]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

I'm going to go WAY off-topic here for a second. But this discussion on fatigue and it's impact on performance really brings this line of thinking out to me....

There are SO many aspects of the mode that are 'uncertain'. There are so many aspects of the mode that are not forward facing to the user.

Take player quirks. A guy has a quirk that says he plays better in day games. How much better? What ratings are modified and by how much?

Take fatigue. Does it affect player performance? If so, how much? Do ratings get modified or is it an additional dice roll?

Take the uncertainty with scouting. Does it matter if you scout cross-region? If so, how much potential error is added? What formula is applied? How possible is it to get a 100% accurate report?

Does morale really matter in-game? What ratings get impacted and by how much?

I can go on and on and on...

Here is where I lose some folks...I don't want to know the answers. I don't want to see that much numeric-based detail. I don't want to know how the under-pinnings of the game operate. Many people might say that not knowing (or being able to adjust them) makes the mode seem 'shallow'. They think that if it doesn't have a screen describing it or a button to push, that it isn't "robust enough".

That is where I disagree - I think that layer of uncertainty adds a whole layer of immersion. You have to figure it out, you have to muddle your way through sometimes, sometimes you can completely mis-interpret things. It's why this mode is so daggone amazing. Then compare it to a horribly unimmersive franchise mode like NBA 2k...they just hand you five trillion settings and let you have at it. So great, you can customize to your heart's content...but all the mystery is lost, all the allure and uncertainty is gone....why even bother? It's not a franchise experience at that point, it's just a simulator.

You see this across gaming. Games with all these little 'helpers' enabled. You get a compass that tells you exactly where to go, little reflections that light-up key objects, mini-maps that track everywhere you need to go. The amount of hand-holding that games have these days is insulting (fortunately, many games allow you to turn them off). Don't give me a cursor on a map that tells me where to go, have a NPC give me rough directions and let me figure it out. Sometimes, the wandering is the most immersive part; and I think sports games are exactly the same way. Let me figure out how things work, let me muddle and wander around through things. Let me...gasp...make mistakes!

[forme95]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

I'm going to go WAY off-topic here for a second. But this discussion on fatigue and it's impact on performance really brings this line of thinking out to me....

There are SO many aspects of the mode that are 'uncertain'. There are so many aspects of the mode that are not forward facing to the user.

Take player quirks. A guy has a quirk that says he plays better in day games. How much better? What ratings are modified and by how much?

Take fatigue. Does it affect player performance? If so, how much? Do ratings get modified or is it an additional dice roll?

Take the uncertainty with scouting. Does it matter if you scout cross-region? If so, how much potential error is added? What formula is applied? How possible is it to get a 100% accurate report?

Does morale really matter in-game? What ratings get impacted and by how much?

I can go on and on and on...

Here is where I lose some folks...I don't want to know the answers. I don't want to see that much numeric-based detail. I don't want to know how the under-pinnings of the game operate. Many people might say that not knowing (or being able to adjust them) makes the mode seem 'shallow'. They think that if it doesn't have a screen describing it or a button to push, that it isn't "robust enough".

That is where I disagree - I think that layer of uncertainty adds a whole layer of immersion. You have to figure it out, you have to muddle your way through sometimes, sometimes you can completely mis-interpret things. It's why this mode is so daggone amazing. Then compare it to a horribly unimmersive franchise mode like NBA 2k...they just hand you five trillion settings and let you have at it. So great, you can customize to your heart's content...but all the mystery is lost, all the allure and uncertainty is gone....why even bother? It's not a franchise experience at that point, it's just a simulator.

You see this across gaming. Games with all these little 'helpers' enabled. You get a compass that tells you exactly where to go, little reflections that light-up key objects, mini-maps that track everywhere you need to go. The amount of hand-holding that games have these days is insulting (fortunately, many games allow you to turn them off). Don't give me a cursor on a map that tells me where to go, have a NPC give me rough directions and let me figure it out. Sometimes, the wandering is the most immersive part; and I think sports games are exactly the same way. Let me figure out how things work, let me muddle and wander around through things. Let me...gasp...make mistakes!

100% LOVE THIS THOUGHT!!!

[jrnlgrn]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

100% LOVE THIS THOUGHT!!!

100% agreed as well. I think The Show is the only playable sports game that comes close to mimicking a player/team having an off year or random poor performances and hot/cold streaks.

[Cliffking]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximizee Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

Pretty excited to test this set. Gotta couple questions for you, Josh

1) what's your hitting methodology? (contact swing, power swing, analog up, analog down, etc)

2) do you take any extra steps (lead) with your base stealers?

3) how about pitching? Do you hold the button 100% on certain pitches? Tap on different ones?

4) with api on default, I'm assuming you call your own pitches?

[JoshC1977]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximizee Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

Pretty excited to test this set. Gotta couple questions for you, Josh

1) what's your hitting methodology? (contact swing, power swing, analog up, analog down, etc)

2) do you take any extra steps (lead) with your base stealers?

3) how about pitching? Do you hold the button 100% on certain pitches? Tap on different ones?

4) with api on default, I'm assuming you call your own pitches?

1. It varies....depends on the hitter and situation. I will say that I use normal swing about 99% of the time.
2. No, it's totally unnecessary
3. Long winded explanation will be below....
4. Yes, I think that relying on the CPU to call pitches removes user mental skill from the equation and is therefore not 'sim'.


As far as pitch press duration for classic, this is something I wrote a couple of years ago that Armor usually keeps in his slider thread. This should give you at least a little flavor of the intricacies of the interface...

That said, you definitely have some control over pitch outcome. How long you hold the button matters. It affects pitch speed, command, and the amount of break on breaking pitches. It just isn't 'push a button and go'...there is far more subtlety in it. In fact, if you simply tap the button, it is an excellent way to get shelled".

When pitching in classic, you have about a 1 second time period before you get the controller vibration (i.e. max-effort). The following are my observations...

Max effort pitches (holding the button down till the vibration) result in the following:
- More velocity
- Less control
- A sharper break on breaking pitches
- Pitches tend to rise more

Minimum effort pitches (tapping the button) results in the following:
- Less velocity
- Better control
- "Loopier" breaking balls (especially curves/sliders
- Pitches sink more (due to lower velo) - changeups will pretty constantly wind up in the dirt

In many cases, an "intermediate" duration is optimal. However, you can vary this from pitch to pitch (i.e. like a pitcher adding/subtracting from the speed of the pitch). This is a tremendous way to keep hitters off-balance to help to avoid them getting solid contact/timing.

One other thing I would add...think of the button press duration as a pitcher's arm velocity during the pitch. A max effort press is a faster arm velocity, a 'tap' is a slower arm velocity.


One other thing...I HIGHLY recommend using one of the following rosters (in order of preference):

1. Bacon's Fictional Roster
2. The 80s Strat-O-Matic Roster
3. The 1987 Full Minors Roster
4. The 1993 Full Minors Roster

One final item. If playing on All Star doesn't work for you, then use the dynamic difficulty setting to ramp up to All Star + and then lock-in to that setting for BOTH hitting and pitching.

[Cliffking]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximizee Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

1. It varies....depends on the hitter and situation. I will say that I use normal swing about 99% of the time.
2. No, it's totally unnecessary
3. Long winded explanation will be below....
4. Yes, I think that relying on the CPU to call pitches removes user mental skill from the equation and is therefore not 'sim'.


As far as pitch press duration for classic, this is something I wrote a couple of years ago that Armor usually keeps in his slider thread. This should give you at least a little flavor of the intricacies of the interface...

That said, you definitely have some control over pitch outcome. How long you hold the button matters. It affects pitch speed, command, and the amount of break on breaking pitches. It just isn't 'push a button and go'...there is far more subtlety in it. In fact, if you simply tap the button, it is an excellent way to get shelled".

When pitching in classic, you have about a 1 second time period before you get the controller vibration (i.e. max-effort). The following are my observations...

Max effort pitches (holding the button down till the vibration) result in the following:
- More velocity
- Less control
- A sharper break on breaking pitches
- Pitches tend to rise more

Minimum effort pitches (tapping the button) results in the following:
- Less velocity
- Better control
- "Loopier" breaking balls (especially curves/sliders
- Pitches sink more (due to lower velo) - changeups will pretty constantly wind up in the dirt

In many cases, an "intermediate" duration is optimal. However, you can vary this from pitch to pitch (i.e. like a pitcher adding/subtracting from the speed of the pitch). This is a tremendous way to keep hitters off-balance to help to avoid them getting solid contact/timing.

One other thing I would add...think of the button press duration as a pitcher's arm velocity during the pitch. A max effort press is a faster arm velocity, a 'tap' is a slower arm velocity.


One other thing...I HIGHLY recommend using one of the following rosters (in order of preference):

1. Bacon's Fictional Roster
2. The 80s Strat-O-Matic Roster
3. The 1987 Full Minors Roster
4. The 1993 Full Minors Roster

One final item. If playing on All Star doesn't work for you, then use the dynamic difficulty setting to ramp up to All Star + and then lock-in to that setting for BOTH hitting and pitching.

Thank you so much for this break down!

[JoshC1977]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

With my 'gut' telling me that I am likely going to stick with MLB20 for franchise mode for quite a while; I thought I would go ahead and keep things going here.

In the last slider update I posted (back in October) I lowered the fielding speed and fielding reaction sliders down to 4. I'm going to ballpark that I've played around 50 games or so at these settings. If I focus on individual animations; yes, they do typically look a little 'cleaner' at times. But, when I look holistically at the overall game environment, something just doesn't quite balance-out. In short, there's just way too many hits the fall into the gaps, too many little dribblers that get past defenders. Even if the slider changes only directly impact the outcome of 2-3 ABs per game; that can have a pretty dramatic impact on pitcher confidence, which can then devolve into more and more hits.

I'm not a huge "stat guy" with my video games; but it's hard for even me to ignore it when my team batting average has shot up from the .250s to the .280s (and it's definitely been this way on the CPU offensive side). I've also seen a number of contact-oriented guys with contact ratings in the 70s (but low power) hit close to or over .300...with big spikes (like .320s/.330s) since the change. I'd much prefer those guys to be more in the .270s - .280s. If you think about it, a contact rating of 60 is considered to be "league average"....in that context, seeing guys with contact in the 70s pretty consistently running up into the .300s doesn't quite make sense (and I have enough of a sample size that I feel it isn't "noise" in the data).

Some people might say "then lower the contact slider"...but then, you're just adding more complexity than is needed. Now you begin impacting the duel between pitcher and batter; and I genuinely like where we are with it right now. The big thing to me is lowering that BABIP (which we unfortunately cannot easily track - but it feels a bit too high for my taste). So, the "right move" for me is to revert those two fielding sliders (speed and reaction) back to default. The funny thing is that I went through this same process last year...vouching hard for default for a long while, switching to 4/4, and then reverting it back.

So yes, I'm going to revert the OP back to defaults. While the lower sliders help 'stretch' the fielding rating a bit (which is good); it's condensing the hitting ratings a fair bit more (which is not good). I'm going to 'take the hit' on the fielding side for the sake of a little better balance.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

With my 'gut' telling me that I am likely going to stick with MLB20 for franchise mode for quite a while; I thought I would go ahead and keep things going here.

In the last slider update I posted (back in October) I lowered the fielding speed and fielding reaction sliders down to 4. I'm going to ballpark that I've played around 50 games or so at these settings. If I focus on individual animations; yes, they do typically look a little 'cleaner' at times. But, when I look holistically at the overall game environment, something just doesn't quite balance-out. In short, there's just way too many hits the fall into the gaps, too many little dribblers that get past defenders. Even if the slider changes only directly impact the outcome of 2-3 ABs per game; that can have a pretty dramatic impact on pitcher confidence, which can then devolve into more and more hits.

I'm not a huge "stat guy" with my video games; but it's hard for even me to ignore it when my team batting average has shot up from the .250s to the .280s (and it's definitely been this way on the CPU offensive side). I've also seen a number of contact-oriented guys with contact ratings in the 70s (but low power) hit close to or over .300...with big spikes (like .320s/.330s) since the change. I'd much prefer those guys to be more in the .270s - .280s. If you think about it, a contact rating of 60 is considered to be "league average"....in that context, seeing guys with contact in the 70s pretty consistently running up into the .300s doesn't quite make sense (and I have enough of a sample size that I feel it isn't "noise" in the data).

Some people might say "then lower the contact slider"...but then, you're just adding more complexity than is needed. Now you begin impacting the duel between pitcher and batter; and I genuinely like where we are with it right now. The big thing to me is lowering that BABIP (which we unfortunately cannot easily track - but it feels a bit too high for my taste). So, the "right move" for me is to revert those two fielding sliders (speed and reaction) back to default. The funny thing is that I went through this same process last year...vouching hard for default for a long while, switching to 4/4, and then reverting it back.

So yes, I'm going to revert the OP back to defaults. While the lower sliders help 'stretch' the fielding rating a bit (which is good); it's condensing the hitting ratings a fair bit more (which is not good). I'm going to 'take the hit' on the fielding side for the sake of a little better balance.

I think your issue might be the bat exit velocity floors, which are also controlled by the contact slider. If you take a look at the bat exit velocity speeds (not what they look like, but the actual bat exit velocity posted), you'll notice they are way too high on average. I'm convinced that this game twists the perception of time based on various slider settings.

I was in a situation where the bat off the ball feel felt great and looked great, but then there would be what looked like a soft bouncer at short that my backup SS would then whip across the diamond at what appeared to be nearly twice the speed, and then the posted exit velocity velocity would pop up as 79 MPH!

So I decided to instead balance the speed of the game based on speeds relating to bat exit velocities, and something kind of crazy happened. Despite lowering most of my fielding sliders to 1, the game actually appeared to speed up! It may be an optical illusion due to just perception and relativity, but the my fielders seemed much more snappy, and instead the bat exit appearance was more closely aligning with the posted bat exit velocity speeds.

That of course changes the batting "feel".

Just thought I'd post this for your consideration.

[jrnlgrn]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

With my 'gut' telling me that I am likely going to stick with MLB20 for franchise mode for quite a while; I thought I would go ahead and keep things going here.

In the last slider update I posted (back in October) I lowered the fielding speed and fielding reaction sliders down to 4. I'm going to ballpark that I've played around 50 games or so at these settings. If I focus on individual animations; yes, they do typically look a little 'cleaner' at times. But, when I look holistically at the overall game environment, something just doesn't quite balance-out. In short, there's just way too many hits the fall into the gaps, too many little dribblers that get past defenders. Even if the slider changes only directly impact the outcome of 2-3 ABs per game; that can have a pretty dramatic impact on pitcher confidence, which can then devolve into more and more hits.

I'm not a huge "stat guy" with my video games; but it's hard for even me to ignore it when my team batting average has shot up from the .250s to the .280s (and it's definitely been this way on the CPU offensive side). I've also seen a number of contact-oriented guys with contact ratings in the 70s (but low power) hit close to or over .300...with big spikes (like .320s/.330s) since the change. I'd much prefer those guys to be more in the .270s - .280s. If you think about it, a contact rating of 60 is considered to be "league average"....in that context, seeing guys with contact in the 70s pretty consistently running up into the .300s doesn't quite make sense (and I have enough of a sample size that I feel it isn't "noise" in the data).

Some people might say "then lower the contact slider"...but then, you're just adding more complexity than is needed. Now you begin impacting the duel between pitcher and batter; and I genuinely like where we are with it right now. The big thing to me is lowering that BABIP (which we unfortunately cannot easily track - but it feels a bit too high for my taste). So, the "right move" for me is to revert those two fielding sliders (speed and reaction) back to default. The funny thing is that I went through this same process last year...vouching hard for default for a long while, switching to 4/4, and then reverting it back.

So yes, I'm going to revert the OP back to defaults. While the lower sliders help 'stretch' the fielding rating a bit (which is good); it's condensing the hitting ratings a fair bit more (which is not good). I'm going to 'take the hit' on the fielding side for the sake of a little better balance.

What about keeping either reaction or speed at four. Could leaving one or the other still achieve the effect you originally going for but also help with the batting average issue you see or do they need to remain synced up.

[JoshC1977]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

What about keeping either reaction or speed at four. Could leaving one or the other still achieve the effect you originally going for but also help with the batting average issue you see or do they need to remain synced up.

It's a fair question, but I'm going to be honest, I'm really not all that interested in exploring it...I'm basically at the point with MLB 20 that I just want to roll with things. I tend to get myself into trouble with my personal "slider OCD" when I start diving into things too much. Instead of dithering around, I really wanted to dive back into something that was known and "validated".

I WILL say this though...I DO suspect that they are a 'pair'. I think if one is slower than the other, you might get more 'odd' animations. Now, depending on how you interpret this, you can view that as "more variety"; but it can also be interpreted as "out-of-sync". End of the day, it's going to boil down to what looks 'right' to you.

That said, and this goes a bit into what TheWarmWind was talking about (and his observations were what pushed me back into default for fielding reaction/speed), the 'perceived' hit velocities 'looked right' to me with them back at default. They were a bit slower and seemed to 'marry up' better with our default contact slider. I have a few other potential "take homes" but nothing I can suss-out from sample size noise.

One thing that happened in a game I played last night. Runner at 1st, less than 2 outs. Hard hit ball up the middle. My shortstop (who has 99 reaction/fielding) runs to his left to field the ball. BUT...you could see his running to grab the ball was carrying his momentum forward as he threw the ball to second; that momentum caused the throw to go high for an error. Why do I bring this up? Because I have not seen a play like that in ages (I'd posit that I haven't seen one since we lowered the reaction/speed sliders to 4/4). Intuitively, it makes sense, you're slowing things down and thus momentum becomes less of an issue. That momentum can sometimes be a root for the 'ugly' overun-the-ball animations; but even that one play signals to me that we can also 'lose' some stuff too.

I'm just rambling at this point...but ultimately, I just feel like the more you stretch things off of default, the more convoluted things get. Yes, it CAN be re-balanced (to a degree) - but for my personal tastes, I don't feel like it's all that necessary.

[jrnlgrn]

Re: JoshC1977's "Maximize Player Ratings" MLB 20 Sliders

It's a fair question, but I'm going to be honest, I'm really not all that interested in exploring it...I'm basically at the point with MLB 20 that I just want to roll with things. I tend to get myself into trouble with my personal "slider OCD" when I start diving into things too much. Instead of dithering around, I really wanted to dive back into something that was known and "validated".

I WILL say this though...I DO suspect that they are a 'pair'. I think if one is slower than the other, you might get more 'odd' animations. Now, depending on how you interpret this, you can view that as "more variety"; but it can also be interpreted as "out-of-sync". End of the day, it's going to boil down to what looks 'right' to you.

No worries I was more interested in if there was a relationship between the two values more than anything else. I've had no issues with 5/5 or 4/4 so it's all good.