OOTP5 Screen Shot Updates - Page 2

Joe Stallings · 01-30-2003, 07:43 AM

Ksyrup, excellent post as usual. I think you are absolutely correct in your sentiment (at least what I think it is) that it is difficult to offer both absolute engine realism and yet have the flexibility to be both a historical and/or fantasy sim, and offer users complete customization of the engine.

I will say, though, that most of the work done on version 5 was more of the under-the-hood stuff than you would be lead to believe by .400's marketing chief.

JMS

CentralMassHokie · 01-30-2003, 08:08 AM

Joe,

I appreciate the pointer to the newsletter.

Unfortunately, at least for me, it looks like OOTP might be moving away from what I think should be the "sweet spot" for a baseball sim: actually simulating baseball.

The sim features for having a family and all that jazz (granted, only a couple of bullet points on the list) are, to me, wasted development time.

Coming from a product management background (that's actually what I'm supposed to be doing right now ... shhh

), I understand the marketing reasons behind adding features like that.

What I don't understand is how that appeals to the core market segment that a baseball sim is aimed at. For the X # of weeks that Markus spent on that aspect of the game, I think (I could be wrong) a majority of the fans would rather of seen him:

-further address the statistical and financial issues
-improve the player creation algorithm (create logical players - not random attributes)
-add a management layer (hiring managers with certain personalities, traits, making that an actual portion of the GM experience)
-options, Rule V draftees, draft pick compensation for free agents lost, arbitration
-more interaction with players in regards to financial demands

That's just off the top of my head.

From a marketing perspective, this is how I would look at it:

-You own the multi-player baseball market.
-No one owns the single-player market.

Why not spend resources on features that will potentially give you an avenue into those users, while allowing you to continue to sell into the users you've already captured?

Maybe a bunch of the stuff I've mentioned is the sort of thing that's gone on "under the hood" and we won't know about until closer to the release. If so, I'll be buying a copy of OOTP5. If not, I'll probably be saving my money this year - and hoping that Craig, Markus, Shawn, or Jim can come up with a better fit (for me)the next time around.

Bee · 01-30-2003, 08:46 AM

I believe Markus has made the point that the family thing was added in with almost no development time and actually was originally used as something of a distraction for him during the development (kinda like all of us coming to this board when we should be using that time doing our work

). He just included it as an option since he had it available.

I think he's taken way too much heat for this. Anyone who works on long term projects understand the important of sometimes doing something "fun" to take your mind off the development. The fact that Markus is actually including something like this in the game should be applauded IMO.

I'm not a huge fan of OOTP, mostly because I don't really like baseball. I also don't like multiplayer games. I think the game is too easy to dominate as a single player game. That being said, I also think it's got a lot of positives that make the game as popular as it is.

Ksyrup · 01-30-2003, 09:46 AM

I agree. Markus has indicated that he coded the family thing in no time at all. I don't care one way or another, although for a casual/first-time observer of the series, one might get the impression that he is concentrating on the wrong things at the expense of more important ones.

But I don't think that was the case here. I think it was simply a mechanism by which he could bring a bunch of "Jr.'s" into the game. I think this will help with the immersion factor in Manager Mode, if 20 years into the game, you see your son in the amateur draft. I like the idea of that, personally, and since it took no time at all, what the hell?

FBPro · 01-30-2003, 10:24 AM

From what I have gathered these areas:
-further address the statistical and financial issues
-improve the player creation algorithm (create logical players - not random attributes)
-add a management layer (hiring managers with certain personalities, traits, making that an actual portion of the GM experience)
-options, Rule V draftees, draft pick compensation for free agents lost, arbitration
-more interaction with players in regards to financial demands

are being worked on quite a bit. Not sure if all of the above will be in v5 but I know that some are.

PantherFan · 01-30-2003, 01:28 PM

The immersion factor is one thing that has me putting OOTP away every few months and coming back to it later. I posted this to the OOTP board and it got buried pretty quickly. I'm interested in getting some other thoughts on this.

I wonder if it would be possible in v.5 to add more descriptions into the scouting reports. Things such as "quick wrists", "big swing", "streak hitter", and "slider speed bat" among others could add more individual flavor to the hitters. "Moving fastball", "sweeping curve," "tight slider," and "wild inside the strike zone" could be used for pitchers. I feel like now after you read 3-4 scouting reports you pretty much have an idea of what they are going to say. Maybe these more detailed reports could be available in the "Talent only" mode since the ratings would be hidden. Minor, aesthetic suggestion more than anything. The hardest thing for me is feeling connected to my players. I think something like this might help.

- One of my favorite baseball magazines is Lindy's Baseball Scouting Reports. It features players with MLB like scouting repors. Players are graded on a 20-80 scale (20=poor, 80=outstanding, 50=average). Hitters are scouted on Hitting for average, hitting for power, running the bases, fielding, and throwing. Pitchers are rated on stuff, control, changing speeds, mound presence, and competitiveness. Two sample reports from the Braves.

Greg Maddux
50/80/80/80/80 (stuff/control/change speed/mound/competitive)
"He's 86-89 mph. He sinks his fastball, cuts it, four seams it. He shows an occasional breaking ball; he throws his change up anywhere in the count. His stuff isn't overwhelming by any stretch. But he knows how to use it and he throws it where he wants."

- The velocity information could be extracted from the ratings easily to add into the reports.

Chipper Jones
70/80/50/45/60
"He's a tough out from either side. He's aggressive. He hits the fastball up or down. Plus, he's become a better thinker at the plate. He used to outhink himself. He'd look for something or expect something, then take a pitch he could have hammered. Now he has a better idea of how he's being pitched and responds accordingly."

- For flavor, it might be better if bad contact hitters had reports that read something like "has trouble with offspeed pitches" or "can't get around on a good fastball" instead of "needs to improve in this area."

- I think what we are all looking for is something that will give us a better idea of what type of player we have. Is the guy a speedster with gap power or a free-swinging slugger who can hit it out of any part of the park OR air condition the Astrodome?

If these reports represented material changes in the player creation developement process, then I think Markus would be on to something.

Markus Heinsohn · 02-08-2003, 06:14 AM

Well, good discussion

First, I actually do know a bit about Baseball. I am really interested in sabermetrics (owning/reading a lot of BP and Bill James publications) and I do play baseball for almost ten years now. Granted, our league allstar team would lose against a good US little-league team, but it's still fun

To be honest, the player creation algorythms in all OOTP versions prior to V5 are all crap. Period. Like Craig pointed out it was really not much more than randomly assigning ratings so that the league average would be realistic and then adjusting things a little, like eliminating most E-speed, 12-rated triples guys.
In the past versions I tried to get the macro-management and total results right, combining with better interfaces and some nice features like the online league stuff.

Currently I am working on the player creating of OOTP 5, totally recoding the whole thing, incoporating the things I learned in the past years. So stay tuned.

By the way, the minor league game engine is the same as the "big one". So the stats DO correlate to the ratings.

Another thing... if you complain about the triples rating in V4, why don't you just switch to the reduced ratings set? This is indeed an artefact of the replay mode of the game. For career mode the intended mode in the reduced ratings set!

CraigSca · 02-08-2003, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Markus Heinsohn
To be honest, the player creation algorythms in all OOTP versions prior to V5 are all crap. Period.

Currently I am working on the player creating of OOTP 5, totally recoding the whole thing, incoporating the things I learned in the past years. So stay tuned.

Another thing... if you complain about the triples rating in V4, why don't you just switch to the reduced ratings set? This is indeed an artefact of the replay mode of the game. For career mode the intended mode in the reduced ratings set!

Hey Markus! I think that's great! As I've said, I've been a customer for OOTP 1, 2 & 4 (forget if i bought 3), and the one thing that soured me has always been the player creation algorithms. It always seems like you added more and more features, while forgetting the foundation. It sounds like you admit that in your post. Anyway, I'll probably be purchasing V5 the day it comes out (again) -- I hope that strides you've made make OOTP what it CAN be.

Also, reducing the ratings viewed doesn't change the fact that players are rated on their "ability" to hit triples. Just because I choose to look or not look at certain ratings doesn't hide the fact that player attributes are broken (or "crap", like you mentioned) in OOTP4 and below.

Good luck, Markus.

-Craig

Ben E Lou · 02-08-2003, 06:31 AM

Yes, the player development information is good news indeed.

Markus Heinsohn · 02-08-2003, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CraigSca

Also, reducing the ratings viewed doesn't change the fact that players are rated on their "ability" to hit triples. Just because I choose to look or not look at certain ratings doesn't hide the fact that player attributes are broken (or "crap", like you mentioned) in OOTP4 and below.

In OOTP 5 the triples rating is only used in replay leagues. In career leagues the triples depend on the park and the player's speed rating.

Thanks for all the constructive criticism!

Ben E Lou · 02-08-2003, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Markus Heinsohn
In career leagues the triples depend on the park and the player's speed rating.

That's the best news I'll hear all day. Excellent! OOTP may be finally moving to elite status for solo career play finally.

Qwikshot · 02-08-2003, 08:43 AM

The is impressive, for once, a true real discussion...looks I'll be saving up for OOTP5 to go with CM4.

McSweeny · 02-08-2003, 11:04 AM

woohoo! this is indeed good news

lynchjm24 · 02-08-2003, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Markus Heinsohn

To be honest, the player creation algorythms in all OOTP versions prior to V5 are all crap. Period. Like Craig pointed out it was really not much more than randomly assigning ratings so that the league average would be realistic and then adjusting things a little, like eliminating most E-speed, 12-rated triples guys.
In the past versions I tried to get the macro-management and total results right, combining with better interfaces and some nice features like the online league stuff.

Currently I am working on the player creating of OOTP 5, totally recoding the whole thing, incoporating the things I learned in the past years. So stay tuned.

By the way, the minor league game engine is the same as the "big one". So the stats DO correlate to the ratings.

Another thing... if you complain about the triples rating in V4, why don't you just switch to the reduced ratings set? This is indeed an artefact of the replay mode of the game. For career mode the intended mode in the reduced ratings set!

All of this is great news - but in V4 just using the reduced ratings set doesn't change the fact that those ratings are still driving the game, even if I don't look at the ratings

.

Buddy Grant · 02-08-2003, 04:00 PM

Quote:

All of this is great news - but in V4 just using the reduced ratings set doesn't change the fact that those ratings are still driving the game, even if I don't look at the ratings .

Those ratings won't even be viewable if you use reduced ratings, but you are right they are still under the hood. To code any game some sort of numeric values would be needed for different aspects of player ability, so I'm not sure why this is a serious concern as long as ratings for triples and SB's etc have a relation to the player speed. The original ratings choice of getting hits & getting doubles etc. is most likely related to the historical statistic information available. This is a limitation of enabling historic play for a fraction of the price of replay-sims like DMB/APBA/SOM via the Lahman DB.

Blackadar · 02-08-2003, 06:57 PM

I like OOTP4 and spent quite a bit of time with it. Both the pro and the con OOTP folks have good, valid points.

But with Markus's revelation on the rewriting of the player code, I'm getting jazzed up for the next version. I was hoping to just buy CM, but it appears that OOTP is in my near future as well.

Anrhydeddu · 02-08-2003, 08:26 PM

Quote:

This is a limitation of enabling historic play for a fraction of the price of replay-sims like DMB/APBA/SOM via the Lahman DB.

To me, any limitations that using Lahman might have, is worth it. I have said before that if it wasn't for OOTP's ability to import the Lahman database, I would not be playing it solo.

astralhaze · 02-08-2003, 09:11 PM

Not to be a fanboy, but has anyone loaded up Baseball Mogul 2 recently? Compare that with OOTP4.

Ksyrup · 02-08-2003, 09:25 PM

This is all great news. And I like the weekly newsletter about the new features, leading up to the release date, presumably. That must be a Joe idea. I can definitely say that my anticipation will be building week after week.

wbonnell · 02-08-2003, 09:34 PM

One thing you can definitely say about Markus: he listens to his customers. I'm actually excited about OOTP5 now!

daedalus · 02-09-2003, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
To me, any limitations that using Lahman might have, is worth it. I have said before that if it wasn't for OOTP's ability to import the Lahman database, I would not be playing it solo.

Uhhh, please feel free to unbunched the panties. I haven't seen anyone say ANYTHING about the Lahman database being bad or terrible. At least not in this thread so far. All I saw was a couple of people attempting to explain why the triple ratings were previously present.

It will be okay. No one is attempting to take away your historical league.

daedalus · 02-09-2003, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Markus Heinsohn
In OOTP 5 the triples rating is only used in replay leagues. In career leagues the triples depend on the park and the player's speed rating.

Outstanding news.

And thank you for joining us.

Dargone · 02-09-2003, 06:13 AM

I, for one, am looking forward to OOTP5. Especially now that I know the layer creation algorythms are being recoded.

Anrhydeddu · 02-09-2003, 06:51 PM

daed: I think your rant was out of place, I think you misread. Some folks accurately called out the irrationality of having triples ratings but since it apparantly comes from the Lahman database, it was included because of such and therefore, considered in the code. At least that was my conclusion. My only point was that whatever limitations of using the database for ratings, player development, etc., is worth it, imo.

To others: Beware of high expectations.

lynchjm24 · 02-09-2003, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
daed: I think your rant was out of place, I think you misread. Some folks accurately called out the irrationality of having triples ratings but since it apparantly comes from the Lahman database, it was included because of such and therefore, considered in the code. At least that was my conclusion. My only point was that whatever limitations of using the database for ratings, player development, etc., is worth it, imo.

To others: Beware of high expectations.

You are right about that rant - didn't understand that.

The perfect way to handle it is - to have those types of ratings for the replay leagues - and a different set for career leagues. A simple brilliant solution - might make everyone happy.

Anrhydeddu · 02-09-2003, 09:17 PM

Jim Lynch, at first glance, I agree that it is a brilliant solution.

daedalus · 02-09-2003, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
daed: I think your rant was out of place, I think you misread. Some folks accurately called out the irrationality of having triples ratings but since it apparantly comes from the Lahman database, it was included because of such and therefore, considered in the code. At least that was my conclusion. My only point was that whatever limitations of using the database for ratings, player development, etc., is worth it, imo.

Perhaps. On the other hand, I see no one saying anything bad about the Lahmans Database. Or that it isn't worth it. Or that support for it should be dropped. Only thing I see was an explanation of why the doubles/triples ratings was in the game.

daedalus · 02-09-2003, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lynchjm24
The perfect way to handle it is - to have those types of ratings for the replay leagues - and a different set for career leagues. A simple brilliant solution - might make everyone happy.

You'd think Markus would listen to a suggestion like that. Or something.

Quote:

Originally posted by Markus Heinsohn
In OOTP 5 the triples rating is only used in replay leagues. In career leagues the triples depend on the park and the player's speed rating.

korme · 02-09-2003, 09:47 PM

The guys at .400 rule.

Listening to customers in such a way that is moving them away from the competition.

Shorty
-fanboy

Easy Mac · 02-09-2003, 09:49 PM

And it only took them 5 tries, I guess Jim should have the game everyone wants next time then.

Easy
-fanboy.

korme · 02-09-2003, 09:54 PM

Jim doesn't care what the fans want. He said it himself many times that he builds a game he would like to play.

You don't agree about Markus? SkyDog offers a suggestion, 5 minutes later it gets implemented. Yowza.

Easy Mac · 02-09-2003, 09:57 PM

or it takes 2 incarnations of the game after SD mentions it doesn't work right. All depends on how you look at it.

daedalus · 02-09-2003, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shorty3281
Jim doesn't care what the fans want. He said it himself many times that he builds a game he would like to play.

You can interpret his statement in that manner. Or you can accept that some people follow the philosophy that the only way to build the best game they can is to build the game they want to play.

Anrhydeddu · 02-10-2003, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by daedalus
You can interpret his statement in that manner. Or you can accept that some people follow the philosophy that the only way to build the best game they can is to build the game they want to play.

Then why even bother with customers????

I remember the CD analogy that SkyDog came up with and I agree with that to some extent. But if he was so close-minded about that whole process, he would not have taken and responded to constructive criticisms from the producer, et al or even asked us for our opinions regarding the CD artwork.

HornedFrog Purple · 02-10-2003, 09:56 AM

This noise about revamping the player algorhythms, I'll believe it when I see it. I am just curious why it was discovered that it was "junk" three incarnations later, when there were people who developed test sets with data to show its lack of consistancy since.... oh say OOTP 2.

This also confirms that just about all that has been added is fluff over a suspect engine.

But I will put my money where my mouth is and purchase this latest version like I have done the last 3. Maybe it will surprise me.

-HFP
consistancy realist

lynchjm24 · 02-10-2003, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Then why even bother with customers????

I remember the CD analogy that SkyDog came up with and I agree with that to some extent. But if he was so close-minded about that whole process, he would not have taken and responded to constructive criticisms from the producer, et al or even asked us for our opinions regarding the CD artwork.

Why are bands that only produce 'commercial' music so their sales would be higher such a joke?

It's not like SD was asking for changes in the lyrics.

CentralMassHokie · 02-11-2003, 03:52 PM

I'm very happy to see that there's work going into revamping the engine.

I've just got some worries.

Changes of this magnitude, at this stage of a product's lifecycle, often cause some problems.

For one, it's almost impossible to get changes like this 100% right the first time, which is going to potentially lead to some issues like TDCB and FOF4 had.

And also because the changes will likely break some strategies that people have developed over the course of 4 versions.

So, when some of the less-baseball inclined fans (those who didn't mind the micro-simulation flaws that are now being worked on) start to complain, are those complaints going to outweight the fact that the engine will be "closer to real life" (if indeed it turns out that way). Is there going to be some effort to split the difference between the groups, hedging the bets and fixing the algorithms to rely less on sabremetrics and more on "convential baseball wisdom?"

For example - right now, I'm willing to believe there's a whole batch of OOTP players who slot their fastest player into the leadoff spot, even if he doesn't have a high OBP. If the sim engine is closer to "real life", leadoff really the optimal slot for a low OBP guy. I'm hoping that when these OOTPers start to yell, the response is "a fast leadoff guy with an OBP of .280, a la Tom Goodwin, is not more valuable than a Jeremy Giambi-type with an OBP of .400 but no speed at all."

I'm quite happy to hear that Markus is addressing some of the issues we've talked about. I'm not sure I'll be willing to dump money (and I reserve that decision until I see the game obviously) until there's some better minor league management. The addition of 3 things:

-options
-free agent compensation
-minor league FAs

will be enough to drive me to buy any baseball sim. It's also the reason I'm holding off on Puresim - I want real player development, not the ability to draft and hold a guy in AAA infinitely.

On a lighter, related note: the Red Sox equipment truck is en route to Fort Myers

Raven · 02-12-2003, 12:12 AM

Markus,

I already posted this on the JBL boards, so you may be hearing it from Scott, but I'll post it here as well.

I really wish setting lineups wasn't such a pain in the ass. I think 2 things need/could be added.

1. OBP splits. On the batting stats 2 button, we have avg splits, slug % splits, but no OBP splits. I really wish OBP splits were on there so I wouldn't have to manually look at every player when trying to maximize my lineup. A very tedious process without OBP splits. Hopefully it is in v.5, but if it's not already, is it too late?

2. Since colors are already used when setting lineups, is there any way to indicate who is already in whichever lineup you are currently setting? Maybe you could use indents, bold, italics, or whatever...but when I am setting my lineup, I hate looking over everyone to see who is on the bench and who is already in there.

One more thing.........make the job easier on the online Commishes by creating a back and forward buttons for scrolling through teams (just like you do for players).

01-30-2003, 09:46 AM	#54
Ksyrup This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off. Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: In Absentia	I agree. Markus has indicated that he coded the family thing in no time at all. I don't care one way or another, although for a casual/first-time observer of the series, one might get the impression that he is concentrating on the wrong things at the expense of more important ones. But I don't think that was the case here. I think it was simply a mechanism by which he could bring a bunch of "Jr.'s" into the game. I think this will help with the immersion factor in Manager Mode, if 20 years into the game, you see your son in the amateur draft. I like the idea of that, personally, and since it took no time at all, what the hell? __________________ M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete."

01-30-2003, 10:24 AM	#55
FBPro College Starter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: SE	From what I have gathered these areas: -further address the statistical and financial issues -improve the player creation algorithm (create logical players - not random attributes) -add a management layer (hiring managers with certain personalities, traits, making that an actual portion of the GM experience) -options, Rule V draftees, draft pick compensation for free agents lost, arbitration -more interaction with players in regards to financial demands are being worked on quite a bit. Not sure if all of the above will be in v5 but I know that some are. Last edited by FBPro : 01-30-2003 at 10:24 AM.

02-08-2003, 06:31 AM	#59
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Yes, the player development information is good news indeed. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

02-08-2003, 08:43 AM	#62
Qwikshot Pro Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: ...down the gravity well	The is impressive, for once, a true real discussion...looks I'll be saving up for OOTP5 to go with CM4. __________________ "General Woundwort's body was never found. It could be that he still lives his fierce life somewhere else, but from that day on, mother rabbits would tell their kittens that if they did not do as they were told, the General would get them. Such was Woundwort's monument, and perhaps it would not have displeased him." Watership Down, Richard Adams

02-08-2003, 09:11 PM	#68
astralhaze College Prospect Join Date: Dec 2002	Not to be a fanboy, but has anyone loaded up Baseball Mogul 2 recently? Compare that with OOTP4. __________________ I can understand Brutus at every meaning, but that parahraphy threw me for a loop.

01-30-2003, 08:08 AM	#52
CentralMassHokie High School JV Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Massachusetts	Joe, I appreciate the pointer to the newsletter. Unfortunately, at least for me, it looks like OOTP might be moving away from what I think should be the "sweet spot" for a baseball sim: actually simulating baseball. The sim features for having a family and all that jazz (granted, only a couple of bullet points on the list) are, to me, wasted development time. Coming from a product management background (that's actually what I'm supposed to be doing right now ... shhh ), I understand the marketing reasons behind adding features like that. What I don't understand is how that appeals to the core market segment that a baseball sim is aimed at. For the X # of weeks that Markus spent on that aspect of the game, I think (I could be wrong) a majority of the fans would rather of seen him: -further address the statistical and financial issues -improve the player creation algorithm (create logical players - not random attributes) -add a management layer (hiring managers with certain personalities, traits, making that an actual portion of the GM experience) -options, Rule V draftees, draft pick compensation for free agents lost, arbitration -more interaction with players in regards to financial demands That's just off the top of my head. From a marketing perspective, this is how I would look at it: -You own the multi-player baseball market. -No one owns the single-player market. Why not spend resources on features that will potentially give you an avenue into those users, while allowing you to continue to sell into the users you've already captured? Maybe a bunch of the stuff I've mentioned is the sort of thing that's gone on "under the hood" and we won't know about until closer to the release. If so, I'll be buying a copy of OOTP5. If not, I'll probably be saving my money this year - and hoping that Craig, Markus, Shawn, or Jim can come up with a better fit (for me)the next time around.

01-30-2003, 08:46 AM	#53
Bee Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fairfax, VA	I believe Markus has made the point that the family thing was added in with almost no development time and actually was originally used as something of a distraction for him during the development (kinda like all of us coming to this board when we should be using that time doing our work ). He just included it as an option since he had it available. I think he's taken way too much heat for this. Anyone who works on long term projects understand the important of sometimes doing something "fun" to take your mind off the development. The fact that Markus is actually including something like this in the game should be applauded IMO. I'm not a huge fan of OOTP, mostly because I don't really like baseball. I also don't like multiplayer games. I think the game is too easy to dominate as a single player game. That being said, I also think it's got a lot of positives that make the game as popular as it is.

01-30-2003, 01:28 PM	#56
PantherFan n00b Join Date: May 2001 Location: NC	The immersion factor is one thing that has me putting OOTP away every few months and coming back to it later. I posted this to the OOTP board and it got buried pretty quickly. I'm interested in getting some other thoughts on this. I wonder if it would be possible in v.5 to add more descriptions into the scouting reports. Things such as "quick wrists", "big swing", "streak hitter", and "slider speed bat" among others could add more individual flavor to the hitters. "Moving fastball", "sweeping curve," "tight slider," and "wild inside the strike zone" could be used for pitchers. I feel like now after you read 3-4 scouting reports you pretty much have an idea of what they are going to say. Maybe these more detailed reports could be available in the "Talent only" mode since the ratings would be hidden. Minor, aesthetic suggestion more than anything. The hardest thing for me is feeling connected to my players. I think something like this might help. - One of my favorite baseball magazines is Lindy's Baseball Scouting Reports. It features players with MLB like scouting repors. Players are graded on a 20-80 scale (20=poor, 80=outstanding, 50=average). Hitters are scouted on Hitting for average, hitting for power, running the bases, fielding, and throwing. Pitchers are rated on stuff, control, changing speeds, mound presence, and competitiveness. Two sample reports from the Braves. Greg Maddux 50/80/80/80/80 (stuff/control/change speed/mound/competitive) "He's 86-89 mph. He sinks his fastball, cuts it, four seams it. He shows an occasional breaking ball; he throws his change up anywhere in the count. His stuff isn't overwhelming by any stretch. But he knows how to use it and he throws it where he wants." - The velocity information could be extracted from the ratings easily to add into the reports. Chipper Jones 70/80/50/45/60 "He's a tough out from either side. He's aggressive. He hits the fastball up or down. Plus, he's become a better thinker at the plate. He used to outhink himself. He'd look for something or expect something, then take a pitch he could have hammered. Now he has a better idea of how he's being pitched and responds accordingly." - For flavor, it might be better if bad contact hitters had reports that read something like "has trouble with offspeed pitches" or "can't get around on a good fastball" instead of "needs to improve in this area." - I think what we are all looking for is something that will give us a better idea of what type of player we have. Is the guy a speedster with gap power or a free-swinging slugger who can hit it out of any part of the park OR air condition the Astrodome? If these reports represented material changes in the player creation developement process, then I think Markus would be on to something.

02-08-2003, 06:14 AM	#57
Markus Heinsohn OOTP Developments Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Germany	Well, good discussion First, I actually do know a bit about Baseball. I am really interested in sabermetrics (owning/reading a lot of BP and Bill James publications) and I do play baseball for almost ten years now. Granted, our league allstar team would lose against a good US little-league team, but it's still fun To be honest, the player creation algorythms in all OOTP versions prior to V5 are all crap. Period. Like Craig pointed out it was really not much more than randomly assigning ratings so that the league average would be realistic and then adjusting things a little, like eliminating most E-speed, 12-rated triples guys. In the past versions I tried to get the macro-management and total results right, combining with better interfaces and some nice features like the online league stuff. Currently I am working on the player creating of OOTP 5, totally recoding the whole thing, incoporating the things I learned in the past years. So stay tuned. By the way, the minor league game engine is the same as the "big one". So the stats DO correlate to the ratings. Another thing... if you complain about the triples rating in V4, why don't you just switch to the reduced ratings set? This is indeed an artefact of the replay mode of the game. For career mode the intended mode in the reduced ratings set!

02-08-2003, 11:04 AM	#63
McSweeny College Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Somerville, MA	woohoo! this is indeed good news

02-08-2003, 06:57 PM	#66
Blackadar Retired Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Fantasyland	I like OOTP4 and spent quite a bit of time with it. Both the pro and the con OOTP folks have good, valid points. But with Markus's revelation on the rewriting of the player code, I'm getting jazzed up for the next version. I was hoping to just buy CM, but it appears that OOTP is in my near future as well.

02-08-2003, 09:25 PM	#69
Ksyrup This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off. Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: In Absentia	This is all great news. And I like the weekly newsletter about the new features, leading up to the release date, presumably. That must be a Joe idea. I can definitely say that my anticipation will be building week after week. __________________ M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete."

02-08-2003, 09:34 PM	#70
wbonnell College Prospect Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Round Rock TX	One thing you can definitely say about Markus: he listens to his customers. I'm actually excited about OOTP5 now!

02-09-2003, 06:13 AM	#73
Dargone n00b Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV	I, for one, am looking forward to OOTP5. Especially now that I know the layer creation algorythms are being recoded.

02-09-2003, 06:51 PM	#74
Anrhydeddu Resident Curmudgeon Join Date: Oct 2002	daed: I think your rant was out of place, I think you misread. Some folks accurately called out the irrationality of having triples ratings but since it apparantly comes from the Lahman database, it was included because of such and therefore, considered in the code. At least that was my conclusion. My only point was that whatever limitations of using the database for ratings, player development, etc., is worth it, imo. To others: Beware of high expectations.

02-09-2003, 09:17 PM	#76
Anrhydeddu Resident Curmudgeon Join Date: Oct 2002	Jim Lynch, at first glance, I agree that it is a brilliant solution.

02-09-2003, 09:47 PM	#79
korme Go Reds Join Date: May 2001 Location: Bloodbuzz Ohio	The guys at .400 rule. Listening to customers in such a way that is moving them away from the competition. Shorty -fanboy

02-09-2003, 09:49 PM	#80
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	And it only took them 5 tries, I guess Jim should have the game everyone wants next time then. Easy -fanboy.

02-09-2003, 09:54 PM	#81
korme Go Reds Join Date: May 2001 Location: Bloodbuzz Ohio	Jim doesn't care what the fans want. He said it himself many times that he builds a game he would like to play. You don't agree about Markus? SkyDog offers a suggestion, 5 minutes later it gets implemented. Yowza.

02-09-2003, 09:57 PM	#82
Easy Mac Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Here	or it takes 2 incarnations of the game after SD mentions it doesn't work right. All depends on how you look at it.

02-10-2003, 09:56 AM	#85
HornedFrog Purple Hattrick Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Fort Worthless, Tx	This noise about revamping the player algorhythms, I'll believe it when I see it. I am just curious why it was discovered that it was "junk" three incarnations later, when there were people who developed test sets with data to show its lack of consistancy since.... oh say OOTP 2. This also confirms that just about all that has been added is fluff over a suspect engine. But I will put my money where my mouth is and purchase this latest version like I have done the last 3. Maybe it will surprise me. -HFP consistancy realist __________________ King of All FOFC Media!!! IHOF: Fort Worthless Fury- 2004 AOC Deep South Champions (not acknowledged via conspiracy)

02-11-2003, 03:52 PM	#87
CentralMassHokie High School JV Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Massachusetts	I'm very happy to see that there's work going into revamping the engine. I've just got some worries. Changes of this magnitude, at this stage of a product's lifecycle, often cause some problems. For one, it's almost impossible to get changes like this 100% right the first time, which is going to potentially lead to some issues like TDCB and FOF4 had. And also because the changes will likely break some strategies that people have developed over the course of 4 versions. So, when some of the less-baseball inclined fans (those who didn't mind the micro-simulation flaws that are now being worked on) start to complain, are those complaints going to outweight the fact that the engine will be "closer to real life" (if indeed it turns out that way). Is there going to be some effort to split the difference between the groups, hedging the bets and fixing the algorithms to rely less on sabremetrics and more on "convential baseball wisdom?" For example - right now, I'm willing to believe there's a whole batch of OOTP players who slot their fastest player into the leadoff spot, even if he doesn't have a high OBP. If the sim engine is closer to "real life", leadoff really the optimal slot for a low OBP guy. I'm hoping that when these OOTPers start to yell, the response is "a fast leadoff guy with an OBP of .280, a la Tom Goodwin, is not more valuable than a Jeremy Giambi-type with an OBP of .400 but no speed at all." I'm quite happy to hear that Markus is addressing some of the issues we've talked about. I'm not sure I'll be willing to dump money (and I reserve that decision until I see the game obviously) until there's some better minor league management. The addition of 3 things: -options -free agent compensation -minor league FAs will be enough to drive me to buy any baseball sim. It's also the reason I'm holding off on Puresim - I want real player development, not the ability to draft and hold a guy in AAA infinitely. On a lighter, related note: the Red Sox equipment truck is en route to Fort Myers

02-12-2003, 12:12 AM	#88
Raven College Prospect Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Baltimore, MD	Markus, I already posted this on the JBL boards, so you may be hearing it from Scott, but I'll post it here as well. I really wish setting lineups wasn't such a pain in the ass. I think 2 things need/could be added. 1. OBP splits. On the batting stats 2 button, we have avg splits, slug % splits, but no OBP splits. I really wish OBP splits were on there so I wouldn't have to manually look at every player when trying to maximize my lineup. A very tedious process without OBP splits. Hopefully it is in v.5, but if it's not already, is it too late? 2. Since colors are already used when setting lineups, is there any way to indicate who is already in whichever lineup you are currently setting? Maybe you could use indents, bold, italics, or whatever...but when I am setting my lineup, I hate looking over everyone to see who is on the bench and who is already in there. One more thing.........make the job easier on the online Commishes by creating a back and forward buttons for scrolling through teams (just like you do for players).

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)