FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

**TigerKnee** · 10-10-2003, 05:15 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
MuffinMcFluffin said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Fatpitcher. PLEASE answer this. There was a limit to your stats when you get too many home runs and RBIs. Once you hit that limit, it starts flipping backwards. PLEASE tell me that the new version doesn't have a limit. If it does, then that's two copies that aren't getting bought.

Thanks in advanced!

<hr /></blockquote>

Advance*.

Also, I'm not sure what you're talking about with RBI's, but I have a feeling you shouldn't be hitting 127 homers in a season anyways. You should tone down your hitting stuff so you don't hit so many anyways.

<hr /></blockquote>

Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:25 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:25 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:25 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

**TigerKnee** · 10-10-2003, 08:36 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

**TigerKnee** · 10-10-2003, 08:36 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

**TigerKnee** · 10-10-2003, 08:36 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:43 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

<hr /></blockquote>

Sure. But where's the balance. Do they give up graphics memory in order to deal with the size of numbers you generate?

What about the guy who then complains that he hit 257 homers in a season, and had problems? Or the guy that hit 17 homers with Bonds in a game? Or whatever.

They need to make a cutoff somewhere to balance it - and you might just be on the wrong side of that cutoff. I think that's cool if you want to destroy the CPU like that - it can be fun. But you've got to realize that you're playing the game in a way the programmers didn't design for, and you might see some strange behavior.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:43 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

<hr /></blockquote>

Sure. But where's the balance. Do they give up graphics memory in order to deal with the size of numbers you generate?

What about the guy who then complains that he hit 257 homers in a season, and had problems? Or the guy that hit 17 homers with Bonds in a game? Or whatever.

They need to make a cutoff somewhere to balance it - and you might just be on the wrong side of that cutoff. I think that's cool if you want to destroy the CPU like that - it can be fun. But you've got to realize that you're playing the game in a way the programmers didn't design for, and you might see some strange behavior.

**fossen** · 10-10-2003, 08:43 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
TigerKnee said:
Oh come on. Some of us are looking for a sim and some of us are downright scoreboard killers (myself). I hope they don't put reverse limits like they did last year.

<hr /></blockquote>
It's probably not a "reverse limit" ... it's a bug - when a variable is declared, it can only hold up to a certain integer. However, the ability to hold a larger number takes more memory - so you have to define variables in a way that makes sense, and will allow expected values.

Basically, they didn't anticipate someone killing the scoreboard like that, and that's what causes the error. But I can't say I blame them. You need to keep a balance - they can't define the a variable that will hold an infinite number.

<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah yeah. I know there needs to be a balance. But when my bro and I play, we just love to DESTROY the computer. It brings happiness to us.

<hr /></blockquote>

Sure. But where's the balance. Do they give up graphics memory in order to deal with the size of numbers you generate?

What about the guy who then complains that he hit 257 homers in a season, and had problems? Or the guy that hit 17 homers with Bonds in a game? Or whatever.

They need to make a cutoff somewhere to balance it - and you might just be on the wrong side of that cutoff. I think that's cool if you want to destroy the CPU like that - it can be fun. But you've got to realize that you're playing the game in a way the programmers didn't design for, and you might see some strange behavior.

**TigerKnee** · 10-10-2003, 09:02 AM

Re: FatPitcher, a couple of WSB questions

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
fossen said:But you've got to realize that you're playing the game in a way the programmers didn't design for, and you might see some strange behavior.

<hr /></blockquote>

Bingo!