Smart Counts

[Cardot]

Re: Smart Counts

Yeah, I wish there would have been something in between random and smart....perhaps "Mildly Intelligent" counts. Where the situation would sku the count in favor of the batter or pitcher, but not to the extent where good pitchers always begin with an 0-2 count.

I still think the generated counts are a great idea. I really enjoy the pace of play. I thought WSB2k3 was great last year, but even while having fun, I would often look up and ask "how many innings left?". With the generated counts in ASB, things zip along, and all of a sudden we are in crunch time in the 8th inning.

[Hooligan]

Re: Smart Counts

The smart counts are supposed to be constantly evolving, so to speak. So if you are facing a good pitcher, but you start to get hits off of him (or avoid strikeouts) the smart counts will begin to be 2-1, 1-1, but not 0-2. I don't remember where I read that, but I thought that they were supposed to work that way.

I just played two games in my franchise with Smart counts, and got rocked both games. 8-3 and 11-3. It's hard. With the smart counts, you really feel the pressure, and begin hoping for the pop fly foul balls. The pressure is definitely on!

[Hooligan]

Re: Smart Counts

The smart counts are supposed to be constantly evolving, so to speak. So if you are facing a good pitcher, but you start to get hits off of him (or avoid strikeouts) the smart counts will begin to be 2-1, 1-1, but not 0-2. I don't remember where I read that, but I thought that they were supposed to work that way.

I just played two games in my franchise with Smart counts, and got rocked both games. 8-3 and 11-3. It's hard. With the smart counts, you really feel the pressure, and begin hoping for the pop fly foul balls. The pressure is definitely on!

[Hooligan]

Re: Smart Counts

The smart counts are supposed to be constantly evolving, so to speak. So if you are facing a good pitcher, but you start to get hits off of him (or avoid strikeouts) the smart counts will begin to be 2-1, 1-1, but not 0-2. I don't remember where I read that, but I thought that they were supposed to work that way.

I just played two games in my franchise with Smart counts, and got rocked both games. 8-3 and 11-3. It's hard. With the smart counts, you really feel the pressure, and begin hoping for the pop fly foul balls. The pressure is definitely on!

[slthree]

Re: Smart Counts

So far I like the smart counts best but it does present problems.

First, it comletely eliminates the running game, both for the user and CPU. The counts are so deep there is no longer the cat and mouse game of throwing a pitchout. Those were great battles. You guys know it, where you pitchout once or even twice and the CPU doesn't steal and then just when you have forgotten him, he's gone like a flash and you can't believe it. Well, that can't happen with smart counts since they are usually 1 pitch at bats.

Also gone are the days of trying to pull your infield in to protect against a pitcher from bunting.

The other problem is that you often have only 1 pitch to play with as far as getting the CPU to swing at a ball.

I like the fact that smart counts speed things up and that I can draw more walks but if there was a way to draw more walks without the smart count I would go that way because I miss the other things.

Please keep this thread alive. I want to hear what others are experimenting with and how its working.

[slthree]

Re: Smart Counts

So far I like the smart counts best but it does present problems.

First, it comletely eliminates the running game, both for the user and CPU. The counts are so deep there is no longer the cat and mouse game of throwing a pitchout. Those were great battles. You guys know it, where you pitchout once or even twice and the CPU doesn't steal and then just when you have forgotten him, he's gone like a flash and you can't believe it. Well, that can't happen with smart counts since they are usually 1 pitch at bats.

Also gone are the days of trying to pull your infield in to protect against a pitcher from bunting.

The other problem is that you often have only 1 pitch to play with as far as getting the CPU to swing at a ball.

I like the fact that smart counts speed things up and that I can draw more walks but if there was a way to draw more walks without the smart count I would go that way because I miss the other things.

Please keep this thread alive. I want to hear what others are experimenting with and how its working.

[slthree]

Re: Smart Counts

So far I like the smart counts best but it does present problems.

First, it comletely eliminates the running game, both for the user and CPU. The counts are so deep there is no longer the cat and mouse game of throwing a pitchout. Those were great battles. You guys know it, where you pitchout once or even twice and the CPU doesn't steal and then just when you have forgotten him, he's gone like a flash and you can't believe it. Well, that can't happen with smart counts since they are usually 1 pitch at bats.

Also gone are the days of trying to pull your infield in to protect against a pitcher from bunting.

The other problem is that you often have only 1 pitch to play with as far as getting the CPU to swing at a ball.

I like the fact that smart counts speed things up and that I can draw more walks but if there was a way to draw more walks without the smart count I would go that way because I miss the other things.

Please keep this thread alive. I want to hear what others are experimenting with and how its working.

[Cardot]

Re: Smart Counts

I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random & smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

[Cardot]

Re: Smart Counts

I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random & smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

[Cardot]

Re: Smart Counts

I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random & smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

[wawasman]

Re: Smart Counts

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Cardot said:
I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random &amp; smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

yeah, after using smart counts for several games now, im agreeing with the two posts above....the seeming randomness of the counts will, imo, have to be sacrificed in order to re-introduce the running game as well as giving the pitcher and batter a little more leeway....batting should be tough, but it doesnt need to be so hard that you come up with two strikes 90% of the time.....im going to try 2-1 counts next, although i did like my results from 1-1 counts as well

[wawasman]

Re: Smart Counts

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Cardot said:
I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random &amp; smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

yeah, after using smart counts for several games now, im agreeing with the two posts above....the seeming randomness of the counts will, imo, have to be sacrificed in order to re-introduce the running game as well as giving the pitcher and batter a little more leeway....batting should be tough, but it doesnt need to be so hard that you come up with two strikes 90% of the time.....im going to try 2-1 counts next, although i did like my results from 1-1 counts as well

[wawasman]

Re: Smart Counts

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Cardot said:
I have played a couple games with 2-1 counts, and so far I like it. It speeds up games, but still gives the pitcher and batter a pitch to work with. So there is a little more room for bunts, steals, pitchouts or trying to get the batter to chase.

I do miss the "luck of the draw" aspect with random &amp; smart counts, but otherwise 2-1 has been working well so far.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

yeah, after using smart counts for several games now, im agreeing with the two posts above....the seeming randomness of the counts will, imo, have to be sacrificed in order to re-introduce the running game as well as giving the pitcher and batter a little more leeway....batting should be tough, but it doesnt need to be so hard that you come up with two strikes 90% of the time.....im going to try 2-1 counts next, although i did like my results from 1-1 counts as well

[Comp625]

Re: Smart Counts

I honestly found the most realism in using 1-0 counts. I can still draw walks while pitching and batting. The pitch counts still seem realistic (anywhere between 75 - 100 pitches through 6 innings -- it depends on how good or bad the pitcher is doing). It also gives me 3 strikes which allows me to better work the pitcher. With any count that has a strike or two on it already, it gives me less of an opportunity to find the right pitch that I want to hit.

[Comp625]

Re: Smart Counts

I honestly found the most realism in using 1-0 counts. I can still draw walks while pitching and batting. The pitch counts still seem realistic (anywhere between 75 - 100 pitches through 6 innings -- it depends on how good or bad the pitcher is doing). It also gives me 3 strikes which allows me to better work the pitcher. With any count that has a strike or two on it already, it gives me less of an opportunity to find the right pitch that I want to hit.