 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Baseball Enhancements » Reasons Why I Am Quitting This Game
Azizal
By explaining my reasons, I feel there is a decent chance others will chime in with some agreement, and bring up other issues that I didn't touch on. That in turn, may lead to some good changes made to the game that will make it fun again. No one should take this personally, these criticisms are entirely constructive in spirit.
Tyson has always said that he appreciates constructive criticism, so none of you should feel the need to defend him or his excellent game. That would simply get in the way of what could be a useful thread.
Basic info on my experience: I ran a league for 29 seasons. I'm in 2 leagues that will end following their terms (I have about 4-5 months left). One will have run 42 seasons, the other 28. I've also completed another league that ran for 26 seasons. These have all been private leagues, and they were all extremely competitive. 3 of those 4 leagues had money on them. To give you an idea, a few owners have lost ~3 grand and a one or two will have made over 5 grand (throughout the leagues combined). I will be a net winner after the leagues finish. The owners are stock brokers/options traders, professional investors, professional poker players, lawyers etc. Very smart people. This is not bragging, just evidence of how competitive the leagues are. In other words, I'm not quitting because the game is too easy or the like.
The vast majority of of my complaints with this game are associated with the significant flaws in the player pool and the way the player engine is designed.
I made a separate post about how LHP are worse than RHP. I won't repeat myself much, except to say that it's extremely easy to have a lefty killing lineup. That's not realistic, nor is it interesting.
The biggest problem with the player pool is that it is bland. It's not bland at the beginning, but inevitably, all leagues wind up homogeneous.
- There are no slow players (other than at the outset of a new league). Speed should increase a little if at all, and drop off earlier than other stats. The fastest people on this planet are all men under 27, if not under 25. I realize base-stealing is a skill, as evidenced by the fact that Deion Sanders wasn't half the base-stealer Otis Nixon was, despite the fact that in a footrace it wouldn't be close. However, it's silly that a 17 yo can go from 30 speed to 85 speed by the time he's 28.
- There are too many "archetype" players in real life that are not represented in sim. Rather than listing the archetypes specifically, I will list examples of real life players who could never happen in this game. This list contains truly exceptional players as well as not-so exceptional, but interesting, ones.
Pitchers: Billy Wagner/Brad Lidge (lights out-closer), Randy Johnson/Curt Schilling (ultra dominant starter), Tim Wakefield/Mitch Stetter (knuckleballers), Greg Maddux/Bob Tewksbury (super control). Lefty specialists.
Hitters: Tony Gwynn/Placido Polanco (high average, not great speed or power), Ichiro/Juan Pierre (high average, low walks, insane speed), Vlad Guerrero/Matt Holliday (no patience, huge power and average. In this game to approach that you have to be fast, which is not realistic. Vlad used to be fast, I know, but anyway..) Nomar is a decent example there too.
Don't get hung up on how I chose to make these examples, we can all agree that those players are not possible in this game, and that is the point.
- Strikeouts and Walks are terribly misrepresented, both for pitchers and hitters.
- Pitchers being reduced to essentially 3 stats (4 in high injury leagues) gets boring. In real life, velocity doesn't increase much.
- Contact and Patience being rolled into one stat (thus, patience being split between patience vs. lefties and patience vs. righties) frankly, is a huge design flaw. There are unlimited examples of players irl who swing at everything and rarely miss.
I have seen no attention given to any of these issues, despite repeated mention by myself and others over the past few years.
*these have always been the biggest problems* None of this is news to the admins, in other words. It's simply that they've never been addressed, or that there is an unwillingness to do so. I understand that some of these changes would involve a complete overhaul, but if that's the case.. that's the case!
Instead, what we've gotten are additional features, a better interface, and lots of other, admittedly, very cool stuff. That said, no amount of new features will ever make up for these systemic flaws.
Reasons Why I Am Quitting This Game
July 20, 2010 at 09:46PM View BBCode
It's possible I will come back, but for now this game has lost me.By explaining my reasons, I feel there is a decent chance others will chime in with some agreement, and bring up other issues that I didn't touch on. That in turn, may lead to some good changes made to the game that will make it fun again. No one should take this personally, these criticisms are entirely constructive in spirit.
Tyson has always said that he appreciates constructive criticism, so none of you should feel the need to defend him or his excellent game. That would simply get in the way of what could be a useful thread.
Basic info on my experience: I ran a league for 29 seasons. I'm in 2 leagues that will end following their terms (I have about 4-5 months left). One will have run 42 seasons, the other 28. I've also completed another league that ran for 26 seasons. These have all been private leagues, and they were all extremely competitive. 3 of those 4 leagues had money on them. To give you an idea, a few owners have lost ~3 grand and a one or two will have made over 5 grand (throughout the leagues combined). I will be a net winner after the leagues finish. The owners are stock brokers/options traders, professional investors, professional poker players, lawyers etc. Very smart people. This is not bragging, just evidence of how competitive the leagues are. In other words, I'm not quitting because the game is too easy or the like.
The vast majority of of my complaints with this game are associated with the significant flaws in the player pool and the way the player engine is designed.
I made a separate post about how LHP are worse than RHP. I won't repeat myself much, except to say that it's extremely easy to have a lefty killing lineup. That's not realistic, nor is it interesting.
The biggest problem with the player pool is that it is bland. It's not bland at the beginning, but inevitably, all leagues wind up homogeneous.
- There are no slow players (other than at the outset of a new league). Speed should increase a little if at all, and drop off earlier than other stats. The fastest people on this planet are all men under 27, if not under 25. I realize base-stealing is a skill, as evidenced by the fact that Deion Sanders wasn't half the base-stealer Otis Nixon was, despite the fact that in a footrace it wouldn't be close. However, it's silly that a 17 yo can go from 30 speed to 85 speed by the time he's 28.
- There are too many "archetype" players in real life that are not represented in sim. Rather than listing the archetypes specifically, I will list examples of real life players who could never happen in this game. This list contains truly exceptional players as well as not-so exceptional, but interesting, ones.
Pitchers: Billy Wagner/Brad Lidge (lights out-closer), Randy Johnson/Curt Schilling (ultra dominant starter), Tim Wakefield/Mitch Stetter (knuckleballers), Greg Maddux/Bob Tewksbury (super control). Lefty specialists.
Hitters: Tony Gwynn/Placido Polanco (high average, not great speed or power), Ichiro/Juan Pierre (high average, low walks, insane speed), Vlad Guerrero/Matt Holliday (no patience, huge power and average. In this game to approach that you have to be fast, which is not realistic. Vlad used to be fast, I know, but anyway..) Nomar is a decent example there too.
Don't get hung up on how I chose to make these examples, we can all agree that those players are not possible in this game, and that is the point.
- Strikeouts and Walks are terribly misrepresented, both for pitchers and hitters.
- Pitchers being reduced to essentially 3 stats (4 in high injury leagues) gets boring. In real life, velocity doesn't increase much.
- Contact and Patience being rolled into one stat (thus, patience being split between patience vs. lefties and patience vs. righties) frankly, is a huge design flaw. There are unlimited examples of players irl who swing at everything and rarely miss.
I have seen no attention given to any of these issues, despite repeated mention by myself and others over the past few years.
*these have always been the biggest problems* None of this is news to the admins, in other words. It's simply that they've never been addressed, or that there is an unwillingness to do so. I understand that some of these changes would involve a complete overhaul, but if that's the case.. that's the case!
Instead, what we've gotten are additional features, a better interface, and lots of other, admittedly, very cool stuff. That said, no amount of new features will ever make up for these systemic flaws.
Hamilton2
I will say this: "constructive criticism" is that which is well thought out (as yours is) and supported with tangible evidence and data which I have yet to see from you.
The simple fact of the matter is, there is no other baseball simulation engine on the internet that provides consistent statistical outcomes within the realm of "normal" given baseball's long history. We don't have players hit 70+ HR's in a season. We don't have players hit .450 on a regular basis. There are no players with 400 strikeouts in a season. There is no pitcher who is completely unhittable under all circumstances and conditions. The "norming" effect of the construction of the core baseball engine is such that it eliminates these negative outliers. Unfortunately, there are some other outliers that it also eliminates in the process (i.e. Tony Gwynn, and some of your other examples). IMO, the benefit from eliminating the inane silly outrages is worth the disappointment at never finding Nolan Ryan in simD.
I'm sorry that you do not feel the same way and I hope that you can find a simulator or something that will satisfy your desire for those types of players. Good luck to you.
July 20, 2010 at 09:58PM View BBCode
Azizal, I can address a number of these concerns from a statistical standpoint if you are really interested in hearing what I have to say.I will say this: "constructive criticism" is that which is well thought out (as yours is) and supported with tangible evidence and data which I have yet to see from you.
The simple fact of the matter is, there is no other baseball simulation engine on the internet that provides consistent statistical outcomes within the realm of "normal" given baseball's long history. We don't have players hit 70+ HR's in a season. We don't have players hit .450 on a regular basis. There are no players with 400 strikeouts in a season. There is no pitcher who is completely unhittable under all circumstances and conditions. The "norming" effect of the construction of the core baseball engine is such that it eliminates these negative outliers. Unfortunately, there are some other outliers that it also eliminates in the process (i.e. Tony Gwynn, and some of your other examples). IMO, the benefit from eliminating the inane silly outrages is worth the disappointment at never finding Nolan Ryan in simD.
I'm sorry that you do not feel the same way and I hope that you can find a simulator or something that will satisfy your desire for those types of players. Good luck to you.
barterer2002
In general, on a league wide scale, SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats. In general on a player vs player scale SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats. What SD doesn't do well is create the variety of player that MLB has which, I think, is the point you're trying to make and I'll agree with you there.
Part of the issue is that we look at once in a generation types of players and wonder why they can't exist in SD. Nolan Ryan, for instance, would require a totally different type of attribute (hitability) where he can have C+ control A+ Velocity and A hitability and be a HOF type of pitcher (or one where Bob Twekesbury can have A+ control, C+ velocity and B- hitability and be good sometimes and bad sometimes).
I'm not convinced, however, that it is in Tyson's best interest to rework the entire code to add the attributes that we'd like to see. It might make the game better but on the other hand it might not and its possible that it could drive away the customer base that he's worked at building up.
That isn't to say I disagree with you at all here, merely pointing out why it might not be in Tyson's best interest to do so.
July 20, 2010 at 10:14PM View BBCode
I won't argue with your general point, which is that there is a developmental trend towards the middle. I think that's accurate. That isn't to say that SD doesn't have outliers as well but they tend to be different outliers than exist in real life. I could argue with your choice of examples but that would miss the point you're trying to make and devolve the conversation which isn't what I'd like to do.In general, on a league wide scale, SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats. In general on a player vs player scale SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats. What SD doesn't do well is create the variety of player that MLB has which, I think, is the point you're trying to make and I'll agree with you there.
Part of the issue is that we look at once in a generation types of players and wonder why they can't exist in SD. Nolan Ryan, for instance, would require a totally different type of attribute (hitability) where he can have C+ control A+ Velocity and A hitability and be a HOF type of pitcher (or one where Bob Twekesbury can have A+ control, C+ velocity and B- hitability and be good sometimes and bad sometimes).
I'm not convinced, however, that it is in Tyson's best interest to rework the entire code to add the attributes that we'd like to see. It might make the game better but on the other hand it might not and its possible that it could drive away the customer base that he's worked at building up.
That isn't to say I disagree with you at all here, merely pointing out why it might not be in Tyson's best interest to do so.
Azizal
Furthermore, I really don't need to post examples about how off strikeouts and walks are. We know this to be true. It needs no proving.
Barterer, I agree. It's not necessarily in his best interest to do so. From my limited knowledge, it does appear that very few private leagues have been created in the last year and a half or so. I've always assumed that the private leagues have the most dedicated players (I could easily be wrong), and while it's very important to cater to the casual player, the "repeat leaguers" are likely a sizable portion of the income. Once again, I could be wrong about that.
I also agree that this is by far the best game available. I'm not looking for something better, I already know it doesn't exist.
July 20, 2010 at 10:37PM View BBCode
Hamilton, that's not fair. I just posted some stats to the other thread re: LHP.Furthermore, I really don't need to post examples about how off strikeouts and walks are. We know this to be true. It needs no proving.
Barterer, I agree. It's not necessarily in his best interest to do so. From my limited knowledge, it does appear that very few private leagues have been created in the last year and a half or so. I've always assumed that the private leagues have the most dedicated players (I could easily be wrong), and while it's very important to cater to the casual player, the "repeat leaguers" are likely a sizable portion of the income. Once again, I could be wrong about that.
I also agree that this is by far the best game available. I'm not looking for something better, I already know it doesn't exist.
barterer2002
1). Tyson came to the decision that it made more sense to keep existing leagues running rather than creating a new league every month and having another league die out which is what was happening before. I can't argue with his idea there but I know that he has intentionally limited the number of new leagues out there, only allowing new leagues when the waiting teams were cleared.
2). The downturn in the economy has made it so that places like SD are cut first. Lets face it, while its not that expensive overall, having 10 teams as some did can become more of a hardship so they cut down to 5, others cut from 4 to 2 and so there are more openings in existing leagues as well.
July 20, 2010 at 10:44PM View BBCode
I believe the reason that new leagues aren't being created are two fold.1). Tyson came to the decision that it made more sense to keep existing leagues running rather than creating a new league every month and having another league die out which is what was happening before. I can't argue with his idea there but I know that he has intentionally limited the number of new leagues out there, only allowing new leagues when the waiting teams were cleared.
2). The downturn in the economy has made it so that places like SD are cut first. Lets face it, while its not that expensive overall, having 10 teams as some did can become more of a hardship so they cut down to 5, others cut from 4 to 2 and so there are more openings in existing leagues as well.
tworoosters
I also agree that speed improves too dramatically and for too long and that pitchers essentially only having 3 effective skills is too limiting.
I think all your points are well made but I also agree that the model is the best one I've found.
I too have wondered about my continued participation but with no viable alternative out there I'm willing to stay. The game has improved a lot since I first joined and I hope it will continue to improve.
July 20, 2010 at 10:58PM View BBCode
I agree that the players are homogeneous, I think this is a major flaw with the game and I think we all agree on that.I also agree that speed improves too dramatically and for too long and that pitchers essentially only having 3 effective skills is too limiting.
I think all your points are well made but I also agree that the model is the best one I've found.
I too have wondered about my continued participation but with no viable alternative out there I'm willing to stay. The game has improved a lot since I first joined and I hope it will continue to improve.
Hamilton2
In my defense, I posted my response here well before you posted your response there. I read your response there and I am looking forward to seeing the hitter data whenever you get around to it. Thank you, it was quite interesting to see the historical top ERA stats for MLB.
Oh really? It would surprise you to learn that when I did some actual data comparisons recently I discovered that the K/9 ratios for simD were actually just a little bit higher than those of MLB for the past 50 years, but that we do not have any individual performers who show a significant gap between their personal K/9 and the league average. (That is, simD tends to eliminate outliers while still maintaining a very accurate statistical mean.)
Alright then, let's put some actually practical suggestions out there then. "Fix this" doesn't qualify as a suggestion. "Alter the situation by doing X, Y and Z" qualifies as a suggestion.
July 20, 2010 at 11:21PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Azizal
Hamilton, that's not fair. I just posted some stats to the other thread re: LHP.
In my defense, I posted my response here well before you posted your response there. I read your response there and I am looking forward to seeing the hitter data whenever you get around to it. Thank you, it was quite interesting to see the historical top ERA stats for MLB.
Furthermore, I really don't need to post examples about how off strikeouts and walks are. We know this to be true. It needs no proving.
Oh really? It would surprise you to learn that when I did some actual data comparisons recently I discovered that the K/9 ratios for simD were actually just a little bit higher than those of MLB for the past 50 years, but that we do not have any individual performers who show a significant gap between their personal K/9 and the league average. (That is, simD tends to eliminate outliers while still maintaining a very accurate statistical mean.)
I also agree that this is by far the best game available. I'm not looking for something better, I already know it doesn't exist.
Alright then, let's put some actually practical suggestions out there then. "Fix this" doesn't qualify as a suggestion. "Alter the situation by doing X, Y and Z" qualifies as a suggestion.
Azizal
Not only that, some of those examples I made aren't really outliers. The dominant closer archetype isn't terribly rare. Nor is an SP who can maintain a strikeout per inning, yet this doesn't happen *at all* in this game.
Show me 5 seasons, (not players) where a pitcher had more strikeouts than innings pitched in a Sim league. I'm pretty sure I've never seen that once. Yet, last year MORE THAN FORTY pitchers with 60+ IP had a better than 9 k/9 IP (in 2000, it was 27). That is a gigantic departure from reality.
So Barterer, in response to "In general on a player vs player scale SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats." I disagree. Walks and strikeouts are a huge fundamental, and they are not replicated well. Nor are steals.. I've never seen 60+ steals. 60+ steals has happened 235 times in mlb. If you consider 60 an outlier, then try 50. Only one season this decade was there no 50+ basestealer in the majors... so it's not reasonable to call 50 steals an outlier. In the DOL and JCL (my two active leagues), which have combined for almost 50 seasons, there has been exactly one season where someone stole 50 bases. And that was a 1951 season, where we all know crazier things tend to happen because the player pool is so undeveloped (meaning there are catchers with stinky arms). After around 1960 or so, nearly every starting catcher has an A+ arm.
**Compared to other simulations out there, I agree 100%, this is the best game.**
Compared to reality, not so sure. My disappointment has more to do with the near-complete lack of attention to what I consider core problems than my expectations that this game mirror reality. If those changes were coming, great! But mostly calls for this have been ignored in favor of other things. I realize the coding for steals has changed recently, and it was a good change, but it doesn't seem to have made a big difference as far as comparisons to reality.
I also needn't back up my claims statistically re: the development of speed and velocity. It's obvious.
July 20, 2010 at 11:26PM View BBCode
Not having the outliers is not the main issue. It's the extreme homogeneity that is the problem. You guys seem to agree..?Not only that, some of those examples I made aren't really outliers. The dominant closer archetype isn't terribly rare. Nor is an SP who can maintain a strikeout per inning, yet this doesn't happen *at all* in this game.
Show me 5 seasons, (not players) where a pitcher had more strikeouts than innings pitched in a Sim league. I'm pretty sure I've never seen that once. Yet, last year MORE THAN FORTY pitchers with 60+ IP had a better than 9 k/9 IP (in 2000, it was 27). That is a gigantic departure from reality.
So Barterer, in response to "In general on a player vs player scale SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats." I disagree. Walks and strikeouts are a huge fundamental, and they are not replicated well. Nor are steals.. I've never seen 60+ steals. 60+ steals has happened 235 times in mlb. If you consider 60 an outlier, then try 50. Only one season this decade was there no 50+ basestealer in the majors... so it's not reasonable to call 50 steals an outlier. In the DOL and JCL (my two active leagues), which have combined for almost 50 seasons, there has been exactly one season where someone stole 50 bases. And that was a 1951 season, where we all know crazier things tend to happen because the player pool is so undeveloped (meaning there are catchers with stinky arms). After around 1960 or so, nearly every starting catcher has an A+ arm.
**Compared to other simulations out there, I agree 100%, this is the best game.**
Compared to reality, not so sure. My disappointment has more to do with the near-complete lack of attention to what I consider core problems than my expectations that this game mirror reality. If those changes were coming, great! But mostly calls for this have been ignored in favor of other things. I realize the coding for steals has changed recently, and it was a good change, but it doesn't seem to have made a big difference as far as comparisons to reality.
I also needn't back up my claims statistically re: the development of speed and velocity. It's obvious.
Hamilton2
The strikeouts thing is really strange to me. I have the data that I did these calculations with somewhere, but it is a huge spreadsheet and lots of info gets buried. Using the Lahman database from 1960 to 2004, the expected K/1000 plate appearances is 128.67. Taking the simD stats and comparing them across multiple leagues through multiple seasons, we get 152 K/1000 plate appearances. Which means that even though the individual strikeout kings are not present in the sim, the actual K/9 inning rates for leagues as a whole are actually too high.
I worked for a while trying to come up with a legitimate scaled algorithm to both reduce the total k/9 rates and increase the k/9 among the top 5% of the league's pitchers, but was not able to accomplish both. This would be really fun to work on within the parameters of the current sim if we could figure out a way to make it work.
In my opinion, it is a little bit self-defeating to argue that "speed is too high" and "there aren't enough steals." But, whatever.
I'll point out one more time that an observation that things are not the way that they perhaps should be is not a suggestion. A suggestion is an offered solution to a known (or proven) problem.
How would you suggest going about "fixing" some of these issues?
Part of the problem here is that the terms "speed" and "velocity" have vastly different meanings inside of ABE than outside. I'm not really sure what can be done about that.
July 20, 2010 at 11:47PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Azizal
Not having the outliers is not the main issue. It's the extreme homogeneity that is the problem. You guys seem to agree..?Not only that, some of those examples I made aren't really outliers. The dominant closer archetype isn't terribly rare. Nor is an SP who can maintain a strikeout per inning, yet this doesn't happen *at all* in this game.
Yes, I do agree with this, but as I see no other possible solution which results in a statistically valid simulation, I'm fine with things the way they are.
Show me 5 seasons, (not players) where a pitcher had more strikeouts than innings pitched in a Sim league. I'm pretty sure I've never seen that once. Yet, last year MORE THAN FORTY pitchers with 60+ IP had a better than 9 k/9 IP (in 2000, it was 27). That is a gigantic departure from reality.
The strikeouts thing is really strange to me. I have the data that I did these calculations with somewhere, but it is a huge spreadsheet and lots of info gets buried. Using the Lahman database from 1960 to 2004, the expected K/1000 plate appearances is 128.67. Taking the simD stats and comparing them across multiple leagues through multiple seasons, we get 152 K/1000 plate appearances. Which means that even though the individual strikeout kings are not present in the sim, the actual K/9 inning rates for leagues as a whole are actually too high.
I worked for a while trying to come up with a legitimate scaled algorithm to both reduce the total k/9 rates and increase the k/9 among the top 5% of the league's pitchers, but was not able to accomplish both. This would be really fun to work on within the parameters of the current sim if we could figure out a way to make it work.
So Barterer, in response to "In general on a player vs player scale SD does a good job at replicating MLB stats." I disagree. Walks and strikeouts are a huge fundamental, and they are not replicated well. Nor are steals.. I've never seen 60+ steals. 60+ steals has happened 235 times in mlb. If you consider 60 an outlier, then try 50. Only one season this decade was there no 50+ basestealer in the majors... so it's not reasonable to call 50 steals an outlier. In the DOL and JCL (my two active leagues), which have combined for almost 50 seasons, there has been exactly one season where someone stole 50 bases. And that was a 1951 season, where we all know crazier things tend to happen because the player pool is so undeveloped (meaning there are catchers with stinky arms). After around 1960 or so, nearly every starting catcher has an A+ arm.
In my opinion, it is a little bit self-defeating to argue that "speed is too high" and "there aren't enough steals." But, whatever.
**Compared to other simulations out there, I agree 100%, this is the best game.**
Compared to reality, not so sure. My disappointment has more to do with the near-complete lack of attention to what I consider core problems than my expectations that this game mirror reality. If those changes were coming, great! But mostly calls for this have been ignored in favor of other things. I realize the coding for steals has changed recently, and it was a good change, but it doesn't seem to have made a big difference as far as comparisons to reality.
I'll point out one more time that an observation that things are not the way that they perhaps should be is not a suggestion. A suggestion is an offered solution to a known (or proven) problem.
How would you suggest going about "fixing" some of these issues?
I also needn't back up my claims statistically re: the development of speed and velocity. It's obvious.
Part of the problem here is that the terms "speed" and "velocity" have vastly different meanings inside of ABE than outside. I'm not really sure what can be done about that.
Azizal
I'm aware that overall, the strikeout numbers are in line with MLB. But that speaks to the problem.. Those numbers match because there is so little variance between the top K guys and bottom K guys in Sim. Pointing to the averages dodges my point.
I'm probably not going to do the hitter comparison after all. I started to work on it and realized that I'm not sure what it would prove.
July 20, 2010 at 11:54PM View BBCode
Note that this recent reply was made before your most recent one, Hamilton.I'm aware that overall, the strikeout numbers are in line with MLB. But that speaks to the problem.. Those numbers match because there is so little variance between the top K guys and bottom K guys in Sim. Pointing to the averages dodges my point.
I'm probably not going to do the hitter comparison after all. I started to work on it and realized that I'm not sure what it would prove.
Hamilton2
My only point in emphasizing the averages is simply, how do we fix the problem regarding player variance while still maintaining the currently very good simulation? It is hard to do.
Oh, ok.
July 20, 2010 at 11:58PM View BBCode
Noted. Duly.My only point in emphasizing the averages is simply, how do we fix the problem regarding player variance while still maintaining the currently very good simulation? It is hard to do.
Oh, ok.
Azizal
"In my opinion, it is a little bit self-defeating to argue that "speed is too high" and "there aren't enough steals." But, whatever."
That misses my point. I said that in a developed league, there are almost no slow players. Yet there also aren't enough steals. It's not logical to say those two things cancel each other out, if that's what you mean. Besides that, I think the evidence I posted re: MLB steals vs. Sim steals is very compelling.
You see? This is the exact same problem re: strikeouts. The variance is flattened. The average numbers are there, but because there is too much similarity between the players, not because it is an accurate representation.
July 21, 2010 at 12:00AM View BBCode
You say:"In my opinion, it is a little bit self-defeating to argue that "speed is too high" and "there aren't enough steals." But, whatever."
That misses my point. I said that in a developed league, there are almost no slow players. Yet there also aren't enough steals. It's not logical to say those two things cancel each other out, if that's what you mean. Besides that, I think the evidence I posted re: MLB steals vs. Sim steals is very compelling.
You see? This is the exact same problem re: strikeouts. The variance is flattened. The average numbers are there, but because there is too much similarity between the players, not because it is an accurate representation.
Azizal
However, I was a software developer for 4 years and I do recognize that these are core issues. This is why I mentioned the possibility that the only solution may be a full to near full overhaul of the player engine.
Ask yourself this.. will a full overhaul of the player development engine *ever* be necessary? If so, better sooner than later. That's definitely speaking from my experience. It goes without saying that the sooner this process starts, the less duplicate effort will be made in the long run.
Do you have an opinion on the bundling of patience and contact? I think if I had to rank these "issues", that would probably be #1. Fixing that alone would automatically go a long way towards addressing player pool homogeneity. If not #1, #2, whereas #1 would be the flatness of pitchers.
That one I would address by having pitchers stats reflect types of pitches, rather than the relatively simple vel/con paradigm. Much more complex, but in the long run, a amazing game would be created. You don't need every pitch represented... Fastball, Slider, Curveball, Changeup might be enough. Or don't even go that route and just go with Pitch 1, Pitch 2, Pitch 3, Pitch 4. In game a pitcher would throw their best pitch x% of the time, 2nd best y% of the time.
If that is too complex, which I understand it might be, just adding one more stat to pitchers, say.. "Command" would go a looong way. The difference in 3 or 4 relevant stats vs 4 or 5 is a large leap %-wise.
July 21, 2010 at 12:10AM View BBCode
Without knowing the code, I'm not sure how I could possibly answer that.However, I was a software developer for 4 years and I do recognize that these are core issues. This is why I mentioned the possibility that the only solution may be a full to near full overhaul of the player engine.
Ask yourself this.. will a full overhaul of the player development engine *ever* be necessary? If so, better sooner than later. That's definitely speaking from my experience. It goes without saying that the sooner this process starts, the less duplicate effort will be made in the long run.
Do you have an opinion on the bundling of patience and contact? I think if I had to rank these "issues", that would probably be #1. Fixing that alone would automatically go a long way towards addressing player pool homogeneity. If not #1, #2, whereas #1 would be the flatness of pitchers.
That one I would address by having pitchers stats reflect types of pitches, rather than the relatively simple vel/con paradigm. Much more complex, but in the long run, a amazing game would be created. You don't need every pitch represented... Fastball, Slider, Curveball, Changeup might be enough. Or don't even go that route and just go with Pitch 1, Pitch 2, Pitch 3, Pitch 4. In game a pitcher would throw their best pitch x% of the time, 2nd best y% of the time.
If that is too complex, which I understand it might be, just adding one more stat to pitchers, say.. "Command" would go a looong way. The difference in 3 or 4 relevant stats vs 4 or 5 is a large leap %-wise.
Admin
I've been working behind the scenes with a Sim Dynasty owner that is also an economist. We're working on a possible new core engine for the sim. This may create more dominant players. Once I get that nailed down, I may try to add a 3rd attribute to both batters and pitchers - this I think may help create a more diverse player pool that can be successful as well.
Tyson
July 21, 2010 at 12:13AM View BBCode
Sorry to lose you. I will say a few things.I've been working behind the scenes with a Sim Dynasty owner that is also an economist. We're working on a possible new core engine for the sim. This may create more dominant players. Once I get that nailed down, I may try to add a 3rd attribute to both batters and pitchers - this I think may help create a more diverse player pool that can be successful as well.
Tyson
Azizal
July 21, 2010 at 01:06AM View BBCode
Tyson, that is awesome news! That very likely will get me back into the game, especially after I've had a break and get the urge to come back regardless. ;)
barterer2002
You're pointing to K/IP so lets look at that. I'm 41, born in 1969. On the day I was born a total of 4 pitchers had ever posted a season (qualifying with enough IP etc) with 9.5K/9IP. Those three were Sandy Koufax, Sam McDowell, Herb Score and Jim Maloney. In my 41 years, it has happened an additional 91 times-more than 2 times per season and that doesn't count the relief pitchers who do so in less than 162 innings. We often look at the world as it is today and ignore the first century of professional baseball. That's neither good nor bad-just the way of things.
When I was born only Walter Johnson had ever recorded 3000 strikeouts during a career. 14 more have joined him since.
For batters, Babe Ruth became the first hitter to ever strike out 1000 or more times in a career when he reached that mark in 1930. His career total of 1330 stood until Mickey Mantle broke it in 1964 (although Jimmie Foxx came close). Today Mantle ranks 21st on the all time list behind noted sluggers like Lou Brock and Craig Biggio. 5 of the top 20 are active.
I guess the point I'm trying to make with some of this is that while Strikeouts are certainly more abundant in MLB today it wasn't always that way. I would contend that the stats generated in SD can usually be easily reflected in a similar MLB player. We may not see every MLB player in SD but we can usually see SD players in MLB.
As for seeing 60 SB? I've seen it several times. Looking at my 3 current leagues, the MSL has seen 60+ 4 times, the AML has yet to see it while the HCL has seen 70 once and 60 twice more. It was more prevelant in the earlier days of SD. THe old EBL seemed to have at least one every year but those stats have been deleted in the intervening years.
I was trying to also find a list that Tyson had once done of the all time site leaders for all leagues but can't find it.
I can come up with a few who hit 60 multiple times
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1796210]Craig Stallard[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1460549]Jorge Ordonez[/url]
and of course
Turtle Lobos-who's stats have been lost to history at this point.
July 21, 2010 at 01:22AM View BBCode
I think part of the issue here is a modern vs historical MLB issue.You're pointing to K/IP so lets look at that. I'm 41, born in 1969. On the day I was born a total of 4 pitchers had ever posted a season (qualifying with enough IP etc) with 9.5K/9IP. Those three were Sandy Koufax, Sam McDowell, Herb Score and Jim Maloney. In my 41 years, it has happened an additional 91 times-more than 2 times per season and that doesn't count the relief pitchers who do so in less than 162 innings. We often look at the world as it is today and ignore the first century of professional baseball. That's neither good nor bad-just the way of things.
When I was born only Walter Johnson had ever recorded 3000 strikeouts during a career. 14 more have joined him since.
For batters, Babe Ruth became the first hitter to ever strike out 1000 or more times in a career when he reached that mark in 1930. His career total of 1330 stood until Mickey Mantle broke it in 1964 (although Jimmie Foxx came close). Today Mantle ranks 21st on the all time list behind noted sluggers like Lou Brock and Craig Biggio. 5 of the top 20 are active.
I guess the point I'm trying to make with some of this is that while Strikeouts are certainly more abundant in MLB today it wasn't always that way. I would contend that the stats generated in SD can usually be easily reflected in a similar MLB player. We may not see every MLB player in SD but we can usually see SD players in MLB.
As for seeing 60 SB? I've seen it several times. Looking at my 3 current leagues, the MSL has seen 60+ 4 times, the AML has yet to see it while the HCL has seen 70 once and 60 twice more. It was more prevelant in the earlier days of SD. THe old EBL seemed to have at least one every year but those stats have been deleted in the intervening years.
I was trying to also find a list that Tyson had once done of the all time site leaders for all leagues but can't find it.
I can come up with a few who hit 60 multiple times
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1796210]Craig Stallard[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=1460549]Jorge Ordonez[/url]
and of course
Turtle Lobos-who's stats have been lost to history at this point.
Azizal
That said, it's difficult to find a guy who can even manage 8k's per 9 in sim. I've only played in numbers leagues so I can easily take a look at guys with 100 velocity.
Here are a few examples.. I looked at single season champion strikeout leaders and used their careers, removing the seasons in which they were not fully developed, and the seasons post-decline. Pretty sure all these guys have/had 100 velocity.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6957651&statsorimps=stats]Baruch Spinoza[/url] = 6.94 k/9
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6478729]Jenny Rose Finkel[/url] = 7.12 k/9. This guy (girl) led the league in k's seven times and barely clears 7.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=5704023]Iskander Severisth[/url] = 6.81 k/9. Led the league in K's. I didn't include his first 4 or final 4 seasons, so it's pretty much just the best ones.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6799202]Zombie Jesus[/url] = 6.84 k/9. This guy is the all time leader in K's for the DOL. Once again, his early and late seasons were not included. He also pitched quite a bit in the early years, in which the talent is lower, thus strikeouts should be easier to come by.
**Even in the 50's, the best strikeout rates were better than these** and that was the lowest era for strikeouts going from the 50's until now. Well, actually it looks like the 60's were a little lower, but still not as low as these examples.
Here is the list of k/9 leaders by season: http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/strikeouts_per_nine_leagues.shtml
Furthermore, the game is stated to be a blend of different baseball eras, mostly not including pre-1950. On top of that, power is way more valuable than contact in this game, so things *should* be tilted towards more strikeouts because there is such an emphasis on power hitting, and I'd be surprised if anyone objected strongly to the statement that "power hitters don't strike out enough in this game." I suppose this relates strongly to contact and patience being rolled together (I sound like a broken record on that one :)
Speaking to the era in which you were born, contact hitting was emphasized (and wasn't the mound higher then?). If contact hitting is not emphasized in Sim, then we shouldn't have the strikeout rates that correspond to it.
Now lets look at the opposite. I'm not sure how to go about doing this, but I'm going to guess that there are not enough successful sim pitchers who have low strikeout rates. Wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong, but given how you describe how the engine flattens out the top of the variance, it probably flattens out the bottom too, no?
Now I feel like I'm nitpicking and that was not my intent. :) But I am enjoying the discussion, too.
July 21, 2010 at 04:33AM View BBCode
That's a very good point about the era wrt strikeouts. I knew other numbers varied from time period to time period, especially home runs.. but I was not fully aware of the differences in strikeouts.That said, it's difficult to find a guy who can even manage 8k's per 9 in sim. I've only played in numbers leagues so I can easily take a look at guys with 100 velocity.
Here are a few examples.. I looked at single season champion strikeout leaders and used their careers, removing the seasons in which they were not fully developed, and the seasons post-decline. Pretty sure all these guys have/had 100 velocity.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6957651&statsorimps=stats]Baruch Spinoza[/url] = 6.94 k/9
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6478729]Jenny Rose Finkel[/url] = 7.12 k/9. This guy (girl) led the league in k's seven times and barely clears 7.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=5704023]Iskander Severisth[/url] = 6.81 k/9. Led the league in K's. I didn't include his first 4 or final 4 seasons, so it's pretty much just the best ones.
[url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6799202]Zombie Jesus[/url] = 6.84 k/9. This guy is the all time leader in K's for the DOL. Once again, his early and late seasons were not included. He also pitched quite a bit in the early years, in which the talent is lower, thus strikeouts should be easier to come by.
**Even in the 50's, the best strikeout rates were better than these** and that was the lowest era for strikeouts going from the 50's until now. Well, actually it looks like the 60's were a little lower, but still not as low as these examples.
Here is the list of k/9 leaders by season: http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/strikeouts_per_nine_leagues.shtml
Furthermore, the game is stated to be a blend of different baseball eras, mostly not including pre-1950. On top of that, power is way more valuable than contact in this game, so things *should* be tilted towards more strikeouts because there is such an emphasis on power hitting, and I'd be surprised if anyone objected strongly to the statement that "power hitters don't strike out enough in this game." I suppose this relates strongly to contact and patience being rolled together (I sound like a broken record on that one :)
Speaking to the era in which you were born, contact hitting was emphasized (and wasn't the mound higher then?). If contact hitting is not emphasized in Sim, then we shouldn't have the strikeout rates that correspond to it.
Now lets look at the opposite. I'm not sure how to go about doing this, but I'm going to guess that there are not enough successful sim pitchers who have low strikeout rates. Wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong, but given how you describe how the engine flattens out the top of the variance, it probably flattens out the bottom too, no?
Now I feel like I'm nitpicking and that was not my intent. :) But I am enjoying the discussion, too.
tworoosters
If he's an economist won't he just "assume the existence of dominant players" ?
July 21, 2010 at 04:40AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
I've been working behind the scenes with a Sim Dynasty owner that is also an economist. We're working on a possible new core engine for the sim. This may create more dominant players.
Tyson
If he's an economist won't he just "assume the existence of dominant players" ?
Jughead
SD owners don't always steal as much as they could. In one league I am the only GM with 100 SBs in a season.
I don't want to derail the discussion with outlier examples, but well, honestly, I am just really proud of that guy, so I wanted to post a link to him here. And as a bonus he plays in the other JCL.
July 21, 2010 at 04:52AM View BBCode
I don't want to muddy the water, but stealing 50 bases is easy if you have bad settings or you have a guy [url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=6927956]like this one[/url].SD owners don't always steal as much as they could. In one league I am the only GM with 100 SBs in a season.
I don't want to derail the discussion with outlier examples, but well, honestly, I am just really proud of that guy, so I wanted to post a link to him here. And as a bonus he plays in the other JCL.
celamantia
I do agree here; I've always felt speed increases too much.
From the point of view of someone developing a game (Football), I can say that adding an attribute is a HUGE deal, even for a game that hasn't even been released yet. Adding one to a game that is in progress with hundreds of active leagues is a massive challenge, one that is likely to cause more problems than it solves in the short term. That's not to say that it wouldn't be done, but I can understand why it's not done yet.
That said, I agree with the sentiment. Plate patience is the obvious one for batters; for pitchers I can think of a few. Some rating indicating how many pitches a pitcher has at his command; I think this is effectively rolled into Endurance right now. Movement would be a good one too.
Attention is paid, it's just not always visible if it doesn't pan out and make it to beta.
Something I'd like to address here: For many years, Tyson often got requests for interface features or even cosmetic improvements, but it always came down to "Where do you really want me to spend my time, improving the engine or improving the interface?" This is of course where Ideascale comes from. But as most of you know, I have been doing some work for the site and I have made the majority of the interface/cosmetic improvements. I have no access to work on the inner core of the engine, so naturally interface enhancements are all I do. I pont this out to say that work on the interface is not at the expense of work on the core; on the contrary, now Tyson can just tell me what he wants on the interface (or I ask Ideascale) and Tyson is free to keep concentrating on the engine. So please don't feel like an interface improvement is at any other aspect of the sim's expense.
--Chris
July 21, 2010 at 05:03AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Azizal
- There are no slow players (other than at the outset of a new league). Speed should increase a little if at all, and drop off earlier than other stats. The fastest people on this planet are all men under 27, if not under 25. I realize base-stealing is a skill, as evidenced by the fact that Deion Sanders wasn't half the base-stealer Otis Nixon was, despite the fact that in a footrace it wouldn't be close. However, it's silly that a 17 yo can go from 30 speed to 85 speed by the time he's 28.
I do agree here; I've always felt speed increases too much.
- Pitchers being reduced to essentially 3 stats (4 in high injury leagues) gets boring. In real life, velocity doesn't increase much.
- Contact and Patience being rolled into one stat (thus, patience being split between patience vs. lefties and patience vs. righties) frankly, is a huge design flaw. There are unlimited examples of players irl who swing at everything and rarely miss.
From the point of view of someone developing a game (Football), I can say that adding an attribute is a HUGE deal, even for a game that hasn't even been released yet. Adding one to a game that is in progress with hundreds of active leagues is a massive challenge, one that is likely to cause more problems than it solves in the short term. That's not to say that it wouldn't be done, but I can understand why it's not done yet.
That said, I agree with the sentiment. Plate patience is the obvious one for batters; for pitchers I can think of a few. Some rating indicating how many pitches a pitcher has at his command; I think this is effectively rolled into Endurance right now. Movement would be a good one too.
I have seen no attention given to any of these issues, despite repeated mention by myself and others over the past few years.
Attention is paid, it's just not always visible if it doesn't pan out and make it to beta.
Instead, what we've gotten are additional features, a better interface, and lots of other, admittedly, very cool stuff. That said, no amount of new features will ever make up for these systemic flaws.
Something I'd like to address here: For many years, Tyson often got requests for interface features or even cosmetic improvements, but it always came down to "Where do you really want me to spend my time, improving the engine or improving the interface?" This is of course where Ideascale comes from. But as most of you know, I have been doing some work for the site and I have made the majority of the interface/cosmetic improvements. I have no access to work on the inner core of the engine, so naturally interface enhancements are all I do. I pont this out to say that work on the interface is not at the expense of work on the core; on the contrary, now Tyson can just tell me what he wants on the interface (or I ask Ideascale) and Tyson is free to keep concentrating on the engine. So please don't feel like an interface improvement is at any other aspect of the sim's expense.
--Chris
Azizal
Damn, nice player! Surprised his cs% is so low.
July 21, 2010 at 05:06AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Jughead
I don't want to muddy the water, but stealing 50 bases is easy if you have bad settings or you have a guy [url=http://simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=6927956]like this one[/url].
SD owners don't always steal as much as they could. In one league I am the only GM with 100 SBs in a season.
I don't want to derail the discussion with outlier examples, but well, honestly, I am just really proud of that guy, so I wanted to post a link to him here. And as a bonus he plays in the other JCL.
Damn, nice player! Surprised his cs% is so low.
Azizal
And fyi, my leagues have ~5 months left, so I'll still be around a while to nitpick. ;)
July 21, 2010 at 05:11AM View BBCode
Celemantia: thanks for the clarification. I hope I didn't come off as saying that nothing major has changed other than cosmetic stuff. I look forward to the changes every time they roll around!And fyi, my leagues have ~5 months left, so I'll still be around a while to nitpick. ;)
celamantia
I know, not saying that, but I wanted to clarify. I mean, in a choice betwen interface and engine, engine should always win... but the interface needs to improve sometime. :)
July 21, 2010 at 06:51AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Azizal
Celemantia: thanks for the clarification. I hope I didn't come off as saying that nothing major has changed other than cosmetic stuff. I look forward to the changes every time they roll around!
I know, not saying that, but I wanted to clarify. I mean, in a choice betwen interface and engine, engine should always win... but the interface needs to improve sometime. :)
Jdredd73
Some additional points:
I'm not opposed to realism, and I definitely appreciate that no one is hitting 70 homers or hitting .450. However, I FAR more care about playability. As we are all GM's here, a homogenous player pool destroys the game. Why make a trade if everyone is more or less the same? Worse, (and ive also made this point before) its so easy to move your similar guys around positionally. You don't even need to trade a generic OF for a generic SS, because you can teach him SS so easily. The more diverse types of players we have, the more interesting the game will be. Maybe it isn't realistic, but if you just stop guys from moving around the field so easily you instantly create a lot of diversity.
I agree this makes the game by far its most interesting in the 50's and 60's. If we can find a way to preserve that wide spread of player talent, and additionally allow the different types of players that are currently missing it would go a long way to attacking sim's remaining flaws.
Also agree 100% on the sentiment that I'm very happy about what has gone in, as well as some of the stuff that seems to be coming in, but that I am at risk of losing interest because of the homogenity of talent.
July 21, 2010 at 04:13PM View BBCode
Thought I'd chime in. I share a lot of Aziz's sentiment.Some additional points:
I'm not opposed to realism, and I definitely appreciate that no one is hitting 70 homers or hitting .450. However, I FAR more care about playability. As we are all GM's here, a homogenous player pool destroys the game. Why make a trade if everyone is more or less the same? Worse, (and ive also made this point before) its so easy to move your similar guys around positionally. You don't even need to trade a generic OF for a generic SS, because you can teach him SS so easily. The more diverse types of players we have, the more interesting the game will be. Maybe it isn't realistic, but if you just stop guys from moving around the field so easily you instantly create a lot of diversity.
I agree this makes the game by far its most interesting in the 50's and 60's. If we can find a way to preserve that wide spread of player talent, and additionally allow the different types of players that are currently missing it would go a long way to attacking sim's remaining flaws.
Also agree 100% on the sentiment that I'm very happy about what has gone in, as well as some of the stuff that seems to be coming in, but that I am at risk of losing interest because of the homogenity of talent.
tworoosters
He was traded and converted to SS where he committed only 33 errors in his first season while converting at age 30.
I submit that in MLB he would have committed somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 errors and cost his team a dozen wins .
July 21, 2010 at 04:24PM View BBCode
The relative ease of positional change, with little negative, is a good point . I had forgotten about it but here's an example. [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=5929267&statsorimps=stats]Cole[/url] was a RFer until his OS30 season .He was traded and converted to SS where he committed only 33 errors in his first season while converting at age 30.
I submit that in MLB he would have committed somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 errors and cost his team a dozen wins .