OOTP 11 Update!

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

How do you properly report issues? I've reported multiple issues in the Tech Support subforum and never get a response, but I'm thinking this might not be the proper mechanism to report issues. I even made a post asking "what is the proper mechanism" and that didn't get a response.

We had some issues with the support forum last year... this year we will change the entire support process to a professional ticket system, so that we won't miss anything. That system is not cheap, but I think it'll be worth it...

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

How do you properly report issues? I've reported multiple issues in the Tech Support subforum and never get a response.

I couldn't even get a simple explanation on how to get someone setup for a multiplayer league on a Macintosh. You would think it would be laid out in the manual.

Looking briefly through the online manual there is still no step by step instruction for new owners on how to install the initial league file for an online league. There is only information on how to load an online league file if you are already in a league. Also new owners have to manually configure the upload settings for them to work, since those settings are not included in the league file.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

We had some issues with the support forum last year... this year we will change the entire support process to a professional ticket system, so that we won't miss anything. That system is not cheap, but I think it'll be worth it...

Very good to hear. Not that it's not cheap, but that you will be using a ticketing system.

[DanGarion]

Markus, just so you know, for all I'm saying, I'm generally happy with the game, and as always I will end up buying OOTP11 most likely during the presale phase.

But is there a way you can make sure I finally win my league this next season? I have like the best team and for some reason the OOTP gods keep kicking me in the balls in the playoffs... Thanks.

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Markus, just so you know, for all I'm saying, I'm generally happy with the game, and as always I will end up buying OOTP11 most likely during the presale phase.

But is there a way you can make sure I finally win my league this next season? I have like the best team and for some reason the OOTP gods keep kicking me in the balls in the playoffs... Thanks.

You don't know the cheat codes??

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Rizon

You don't know the cheat codes??

It's all about the Gload code!

[miked]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

[rant]
We try to fix as many outstanding issues as possible each year. But also please keep in mind, your 'issue' might be a design decision and not an issue to 99% of the other customers. Whenever I read things like "fix what you have before adding new stuff", it makes me angry a bit, because it sounds as if OOTP is a buggy and unstable game. It is not! Considering its complexity and the number of rules + options it handles, it is an incredibly bug-free and stable product.
[/rant]

I understand, but I'm talking about some basic rules. Like FA Compensation. It's been around for 2-3 versions now. So why are teams being awarded picks based on when the player was signed and not true amounts? It was mentioned several times during the various patch threads but still doesn't work. Sometimes our waivers get screwed up and teams with the worse record don't get the player. We just had a case where a team cut a guy with 1 year + 1 option year remaining, and he's a type-A free agent.

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

It's all about the Gload code!

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right. Then B, A, B, A, Tab, Enter.

[johnnyshaka]

Originally Posted by Rizon

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right. Then B, A, B, A, Tab, Enter.

DG, quoted for truth...that's how I won the WS during my short stint in the RWBL!!!

[Pumpy Tudors]

For the life of me, I can't understand why Jim Gindin doesn't hype future products.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

We do this ever year, trust me. For example, this time the engine for handling earned/unearned runs was completely recoded so that it works perfectly now.

I know you won't listen to me, but saying anything "works perfectly" is just a recipe for disaster.

There are times when your communication skills are roughly on par with Jennifer Winters.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I know you won't listen to me, but saying anything "works perfectly" is just a recipe for disaster.

There are times when your communication skills are roughly on par with Jennifer Winters.

English is not my natural language, so pardon me when I make poor word choices

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by miked

I understand, but I'm talking about some basic rules. Like FA Compensation. It's been around for 2-3 versions now. So why are teams being awarded picks based on when the player was signed and not true amounts? It was mentioned several times during the various patch threads but still doesn't work. Sometimes our waivers get screwed up and teams with the worse record don't get the player.

Regarding FA comp, I'm pretty sure that was fixed in the last patch. And the waiver thing, IIRC then teams from the same league of the waiving team gets the benefit over a team from the other league even if its record is worse, that's MLB rules. (I might be wrong though, maybe that changes last year)

[molson]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

For the life of me, I can't understand why Jim Gindin doesn't hype future products.

I hate that he does that but he's clearly right.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

English is not my natural language, so pardon me when I make poor word choices

I just remember a year or two ago when you were posting screenshots and EF27 and I both pointed out what looked like an excessive number of fights. Your response was that the shots were from an older build, but you had tested fights and you were sure there were no problems.

The first official patch contained a fix for excessive fights.

[Young Drachma]

You know, I used to think PR people were overhyped. This thread changed my opinion on the need for them.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I just remember a year or two ago when you were posting screenshots and EF27 and I both pointed out what looked like an excessive number of fights. Your response was that the shots were from an older build, but you had tested fights and you were sure there were no problems.

The first official patch contained a fix for excessive fights.

Which shows that we re-evaluate test results and fix things if problems are indeed found. Sounds like a good thing to me.

[DanGarion]

No love from Markus asking for help in my league.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

No love from Markus asking for help in my league.

You can always email me... markus at ootpdevelopments.com

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

But is there a way you can make sure I finally win my league this next season? I have like the best team and for some reason the OOTP gods keep kicking me in the balls in the playoffs... Thanks.

Ping: HornsManiac

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Markus, just so you know, for all I'm saying, I'm generally happy with the game, and as always I will end up buying OOTP11 most likely during the presale phase.

But is there a way you can make sure I finally win my league this next season? I have like the best team and for some reason the OOTP gods keep kicking me in the balls in the playoffs... Thanks.

Hint: the game is all kinds of fucked up, yes, but if you had paid even the slightest bit of attention, it wouldn't have been able to kick you in the balls.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Hint: the game is all kinds of fucked up, yes, but if you had paid even the slightest bit of attention, it wouldn't have been able to kick you in the balls.

Um right, because I don't pay attention in the league, that's why I'm always adjusting my lineup...

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

There are times when your communication skills are roughly on par with Jennifer Winters.

Speaking of bad choice of words.. umm.. really?

[Drake]

I don't see OOTP's issues as significantly different than needing ten dozen house rules not to exploit the AI in FOF.

But then again, I shut off most of the features people seem to have problems with because I don't want to mess with those parts of real baseball anyway. Maybe that's why I keep buying it.

[RedKingGold]

Who said customer service was dead?

[Young Drachma]

The financial system in the game is still broken and is in need an economics class of the first order. Guys demands dictate their market rate. One could assume that their asking price is somehow determined by their performance, but we often figure out that it's not.

The player's perceived value shouldn't be the end all, be all. It ought to be dictated by the market. If everyone is only willing to offer a guy half of what he's worth, with one team offering 60% of his perceived value, he needs to sign with someone or else he gets nothing.

In OOTP, he'll wait until the absolute last minute and take a 1-year deal, but it'll still be an inflated rate or he'll willingly sit in FA for an entire year because no one met his asking price, while it'll eventually drop gradually. That just defies all common economic sense.

This wouldn't be a problem if it was only a solo league problem, because then you could just find ways to work around it if you're a tinkerer, but...for online leagues that use the in-game financial system (almost all?) it can turn out to be something of a disaster.

I know this isn't as sexy as saying "new features!" from the top of the Erzgebirge, but it's really one of many underlying problems that prevents a good game from being great.

[stevew]

I just got an awesome Email from Craig Hansen demanding that he be given the chance to start games. He has a 3 in endurance, and has never started a game in 4 years. I could understand if his endurance was more like a 4 or 5, but it's just silly that he's pissed off about something like this.

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by stevew

I just got an awesome Email from Craig Hansen demanding that he be given the chance to start games. He has a 3 in endurance, and has never started a game in 4 years. I could understand if his endurance was more like a 4 or 5, but it's just silly that he's pissed off about something like this.

Sir, I have some very good news for you. Bat boys have been added to the game.

[johnnyshaka]

Originally Posted by Drake

I don't see OOTP's issues as significantly different than needing ten dozen house rules not to exploit the AI in FOF.

How many versions of FOF have been released in the last 10 years? How many versions of OOTP have been released during the same time period?

My ROI with FOF is much better than it is with OOTP.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

The financial system in the game is still broken and is in need an economics class of the first order. Guys demands dictate their market rate. One could assume that their asking price is somehow determined by their performance, but we often figure out that it's not.

The player's perceived value shouldn't be the end all, be all. It ought to be dictated by the market. If everyone is only willing to offer a guy half of what he's worth, with one team offering 60% of his perceived value, he needs to sign with someone or else he gets nothing.

In OOTP, he'll wait until the absolute last minute and take a 1-year deal, but it'll still be an inflated rate or he'll willingly sit in FA for an entire year because no one met his asking price, while it'll eventually drop gradually. That just defies all common economic sense.

This wouldn't be a problem if it was only a solo league problem, because then you could just find ways to work around it if you're a tinkerer, but...for online leagues that use the in-game financial system (almost all?) it can turn out to be something of a disaster.

I know this isn't as sexy as saying "new features!" from the top of the Erzgebirge, but it's really one of many underlying problems that prevents a good game from being great.

Actually, I see a lot of contract demands tied heavily to popularity. They have these wonderful settings about salary levels for different tiers of players, and it's more or less ignored.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by miked

Actually, I see a lot of contract demands tied heavily to popularity. They have these wonderful settings about salary levels for different tiers of players, and it's more or less ignored.

I could see that, too.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by stevew

I just got an awesome Email from Craig Hansen demanding that he be given the chance to start games. He has a 3 in endurance, and has never started a game in 4 years. I could understand if his endurance was more like a 4 or 5, but it's just silly that he's pissed off about something like this.

Pitchers with an endurance of 3 are able to start, so why should he not ask for it if he thinks he could do a good job at it?

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by miked

Actually, I see a lot of contract demands tied heavily to popularity. They have these wonderful settings about salary levels for different tiers of players, and it's more or less ignored.

Popularity is not used in the equation at all. The whole 'how much do I ask?'-code starts with the settings you mention and then is adjusted based on performance, playing time and how much the player likes the team that does the offer. I think the resulting demands are pretty reasonable... but of course, I am sure the dark cloud will dig out an example somewhere which proves me wrong...

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Pitchers with an endurance of 3 are able to start, so why should he not ask for it if he thinks he could do a good job at it?

That is a 3 from a 1-10 rating... If 3s are typical starts in 1-10 maybe that's part of the problem Markus.

[Icy]

The pitcher endurance is my biggest problem in the last version.

In the RWBL, 1 season ago, i had some just low average pitchers, so the AI suggested all the time that my 5 stars closer should be the #1 ace... probably because he was very good (10/9/8) and knew 5 pitches, but but he had only 3 endurance so i never gave him the chance to start, as i don't start anybody with endurance<6 in the 1-10 scale.

The way i saw it, is that he had the arm and pitches to be an starter, but he wouldn't last more than 3 innings as starter, so what was the point on starting him for only 3 innings?

I'm still confused about it, as it seems that any pitcher that knows 3+ pitches could start but... for how many innings? would if really be a good choice?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Popularity is not used in the equation at all. The whole 'how much do I ask?'-code starts with the settings you mention and then is adjusted based on performance, playing time and how much the player likes the team that does the offer. I think the resulting demands are pretty reasonable... but of course, I am sure the dark cloud will dig out an example somewhere which proves me wrong...

Nope. I just wanted to cite my knowledge of German mountain ranges...

I don't expect any sports text game to conform to any sort of logic that would please someone with an econ background. It requires too much background and would probably be hard to code because it's too fluid.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

That is a 3 from a 1-10 rating... If 3s are typical starts in 1-10 maybe that's part of the problem Markus.

It's just a scale, so why should it be a problem? In real life most pitchers could give you 6+ innings on stamina alone, the reason they don't is that their stuff is not good enough. In fact, the majority of relievers in MLB were starters once (minors or college/high school)

The 'problem' might be that in the past OOTP used a different scale, anything below 5 on a 1-10 scale was considered a reliever and unable to start. That was pretty unrealistic, and we changed this in OOTP 10 with the introduction of the new pitching system.

Edit: Along with the change, we changed the name of the rating from 'endurance' to 'stamina', indicating that it's purely the physical stamina that is rated here. And anything above 2 (1-10) is considered physically able to give you 6+ innings.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Nope. I just wanted to cite my knowledge of German mountain ranges...

I don't expect any sports text game to conform to any sort of logic that would please someone with an econ background. It requires too much background and would probably be hard to code because it's too fluid.

Your sarcasm isn't especially constructive. If you provide me a league file with a few examples I could look into the issue in detail and see if there indeed is a problem. Or simply email me with an explanation how I can make the game work better in your opinion.

[Johnny93g]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Popularity is not used in the equation at all. The whole 'how much do I ask?'-code starts with the settings you mention and then is adjusted based on performance, playing time and how much the player likes the team that does the offer. I think the resulting demands are pretty reasonable... but of course, I am sure the dark cloud will dig out an example somewhere which proves me wrong...

In the RWBL, I was looking to keep a few guys in my minors, for depth, because they have ok ratings, and played ok at there levels. A 30 year old who has never played above AA, wants 3.5 million to resign. He's worth a minor league contract. A 27 year old in single A wanted 2.5 mil. These guys should be happy anyone want's to pay them to play baseball. That's a bit of an issue that wont affect anyone, sense they don't really affect anything in game, but if that doesn't work............

BTW, these are not isolated cases. I have seen them in every game in OOTP10.

I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I'm mentioning something in game that doesn't seem to work right.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Johnny93g

In the RWBL, I was looking to keep a few guys in my minors, for depth, because they have ok ratings, and played ok at there levels. A 30 year old who has never played above AA, wants 3.5 million to resign. He's worth a minor league contract. A 27 year old in single A wanted 2.5 mil. These guys should be happy anyone want's to pay them to play baseball. That's a bit of an issue that wont affect anyone, sense they don't really affect anything in game, but if that doesn't work............

BTW, these are not isolated cases. I have seen them in every game in OOTP10.

I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I'm mentioning something in game that doesn't seem to work right.

That should not happen of course. I have not seen something like this yet, though. Usually guys in the minors will ask for a minor league contract extension unless they played in the majors that year.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

It's just a scale, so why should it be a problem? In real life most pitchers could give you 6+ innings on stamina alone, the reason they don't is that their stuff is not good enough. In fact, the majority of relievers in MLB were starters once (minors or college/high school)

The 'problem' might be that in the past OOTP used a different scale, anything below 5 on a 1-10 scale was considered a reliever and unable to start. That was pretty unrealistic, and we changed this in OOTP 10 with the introduction of the new pitching system.

Edit: Along with the change, we changed the name of the rating from 'endurance' to 'stamina', indicating that it's purely the physical stamina that is rated here. And anything above 2 (1-10) is considered physically able to give you 6+ innings.

This is the first I've heard this. Is stamina related to a pitch count? What is the difference between a 3 and a 9 stamina?

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Edit: Along with the change, we changed the name of the rating from 'endurance' to 'stamina', indicating that it's purely the physical stamina that is rated here. And anything above 2 (1-10) is considered physically able to give you 6+ innings.

Maybe that's the problem, it doesn't make logical sense that a 2 in stamina on a 1-10 scale would be able to pitch more than half a game. There really needs to be a form of logic to the numbers.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Maybe that's the problem, it doesn't make logical sense that a 2 in stamina on a 1-10 scale would be able to pitch more than half a game. There really needs to be a form of logic to the numbers.

A 2 doesn't, a 3 does. 25/100 is the cutoff point, which makes logical sense as about 75% of all pitchers in real life should be physically able to pitch 5-6 innings at least before tiring.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This is the first I've heard this. Is stamina related to a pitch count? What is the difference between a 3 and a 9 stamina?

A 25/100 can throw 90 pitches without tiring, a 100/100 can throw 140 pitches before tiring IIRC.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

A 2 doesn't, a 3 does. 25/100 is the cutoff point, which makes logical sense as about 75% of all pitchers in real life should be physically able to pitch 5-6 innings at least before tiring.

But see this is the problem. You are basing a number that people tend to look at as exact on a scale. Let's just say for example.

1 = 15 pitches
2 = 60 pitches
3 = 70 pitches
4 = 80 pitches
5 = 90 pitches
6 = 100
7 = 110
8 = 120
9 = 130
10 = 140

When I think people understand and would look at it more like this.

1 = 14 pitches
2 = 28 pitches
3 = 42 pitches
4 = 56 pitches
5 = 70 pitches
6 = 84
7 = 98
8 = 112
9 = 126
10 = 140

I'm just trying to make an example, probably not a great one, but I don't understand how someone that is rated lower than 5 should be a starter, other than the fact that it is the way you made the game.

Also I realize there is a lot more into it than this.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Your sarcasm isn't especially constructive. If you provide me a league file with a few examples I could look into the issue in detail and see if there indeed is a problem. Or simply email me with an explanation how I can make the game work better in your opinion.

What I'm trying to explain is pretty abstract, truth be told. I've built an entire suite of tools in Excel (that I've been adapting for 3 years now) aimed at making the game work better on the financial side and have more stuff to add to it.

But my specific gripe in this post was about player demands. Right now, in-game, you set the price points for various "star, above average, etc." players and then their demands are conformed around their perceived value of how they fit into those categories. So if a guy considers himself a star, he'll make a demand in-line with a star player, but what if no one in the league views him as a star? He should still take the best available offer, but he usually won't, he'll wait until spring training and then sign with a team on a one-year deal that's still high and if no one meets his demand, he'll sit out a year.

That's not realistic behavior.

So I'm saying, that player demands should be shaped around what the market offers and they should go with the best available offer of the team they like the best, not just wait out for a particular price point, because players don't set their market value, the market does.

The negative thing that happens here, is the predictability that ends up occurring in the way people make contract offers and sign deals as a result. That is, folks do whatever they can to make an offer to a guy within very rigid confines and when things don't go the way they perceive they should, they get mad. This is an online league problem, but in solo play it's even worse, because the AI just meets those demands without inserting any sort of logic as to whether the player is worth it or not. Understandably, that's a stretch, but..still.

I realize it's a bit issue though and more than that, it's just one of a larger set of issues that I think are more design decisions, rather than fundamental flaws with the game, so while I was raising them, there isn't a whole lot I expect you to fix when you have other priorities (and rightfully so, it's your game after all.)

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

But see this is the problem. You are basing a number that people tend to look at as exact on a scale. Let's just say for example.

1 = 15 pitches
2 = 60 pitches
3 = 70 pitches
4 = 80 pitches
5 = 90 pitches
6 = 100
7 = 110
8 = 120
9 = 130
10 = 140

When I think people understand and would look at it more like this.

1 = 14 pitches
2 = 28 pitches
3 = 42 pitches
4 = 56 pitches
5 = 70 pitches
6 = 84
7 = 98
8 = 112
9 = 126
10 = 140

I'm just trying to make an example, probably not a great one, but I don't understand how someone that is rated lower than 5 should be a starter, other than the fact that it is the way you made the game.

Also I realize there is a lot more into it than this.

I see your point, and we discussed this while designing the feature together with our beta testers. The scale we came up with was the one that made the most sense considering that most pitchers indeed can start, so a 5/10 cutoff point would be wasting half of the scale to just a small number of the total pitchers.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

What I'm trying to explain is pretty abstract, truth be told. I've built an entire suite of tools in Excel (that I've been adapting for 3 years now) aimed at making the game work better on the financial side and have more stuff to add to it.

But my specific gripe in this post was about player demands. Right now, in-game, you set the price points for various "star, above average, etc." players and then their demands are conformed around their perceived value of how they fit into those categories. So if a guy considers himself a star, he'll make a demand in-line with a star player, but what if no one in the league views him as a star? He should still take the best available offer, but he usually won't, he'll wait until spring training and then sign with a team on a one-year deal that's still high and if no one meets his demand, he'll sit out a year.

That's not realistic behavior.

So I'm saying, that player demands should be shaped around what the market offers and they should go with the best available offer of the team they like the best, not just wait out for a particular price point, because players don't set their market value, the market does.

The negative thing that happens here, is the predictability that ends up occurring in the way people make contract offers and sign deals as a result. That is, folks do whatever they can to make an offer to a guy within very rigid confines and when things don't go the way they perceive they should, they get mad. This is an online league problem, but in solo play it's even worse, because the AI just meets those demands without inserting any sort of logic as to whether the player is worth it or not. Understandably, that's a stretch, but..still.

I realize it's a bit issue though and more than that, it's just one of a larger set of issues that I think are more design decisions, rather than fundamental flaws with the game, so while I was raising them, there isn't a whole lot I expect you to fix when you have other priorities (and rightfully so, it's your game after all.)

OK, that does make sense. I'll have to think about this. Thanks for taking the time to write this up

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

I see your point, and we discussed this while designing the feature together with our beta testers. The scale we came up with was the one that made the most sense considering that most pitchers indeed can start, so a 5/10 cutoff point would be wasting half of the scale to just a small number of the total pitchers.

Cool, I understand, and I shouldn't have assumed it worked the way I thought it would. Would love to help beta test someday...

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

It's just a scale, so why should it be a problem? In real life most pitchers could give you 6+ innings on stamina alone, the reason they don't is that their stuff is not good enough. In fact, the majority of relievers in MLB were starters once (minors or college/high school)

The 'problem' might be that in the past OOTP used a different scale, anything below 5 on a 1-10 scale was considered a reliever and unable to start. That was pretty unrealistic, and we changed this in OOTP 10 with the introduction of the new pitching system.

Edit: Along with the change, we changed the name of the rating from 'endurance' to 'stamina', indicating that it's purely the physical stamina that is rated here. And anything above 2 (1-10) is considered physically able to give you 6+ innings.

So where's the difference between a 2 and a 6, say, all other things being equal? If you have a guy with three above-average pitches - say, a fastball, change and curve rated at 6/10 each - a 2 rating in stamina and the same stuff/movement/control ratings as a guy with the same pitch/stuff/movement/control ratings as a '6' guy, if both are considered capable of going 6+, what's the realistic difference there?

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Popularity is not used in the equation at all. The whole 'how much do I ask?'-code starts with the settings you mention and then is adjusted based on performance, playing time and how much the player likes the team that does the offer. I think the resulting demands are pretty reasonable... but of course, I am sure the dark cloud will dig out an example somewhere which proves me wrong...

The whole 'how much do I ask?' code starts somewhere, I'm sure, but the end result is dangling off the edge of a cliff. It's a train wreck. What Johnny93g pointed out has been par for the course in every OOTP 10 online league I've been in.

As far as your more recent point about 5/10 wasting half the scale...if the difference is that small between steps on the ladder, why not make that one a hardcoded 1-5, and let the different ratings scale options you've coded stand for the stuff where there IS more variation?