MLB The Show 17 News Post

MLB The Show 17 - Behind the Scenes "Playing Out of Position" Changes

04:56 PM - January 31, 2017 by Russell_SCEA

So yesterday we had a little game design round-table with everyone on how to handle playing out of position better. (First and foremost we weren't going to talk about this in a vlog or the streams. So that's why we are talking about this now.) We hope you guys enjoy this little behind the scenes look.

A little back story on how we got here, I sent an email to one of the programmers inquiring what could be done to A. make utility players more valuable, B. discourage people from playing guys out of position (especially in DD) to get more bats in the lineup, and C. make secondary positions matter more.

A few of us (I'm lying it was just me) wanted to go full napalm and just completely nerf anyone playing out of position which we currently do in some instances. However SS and 2nd baseman shouldn't get nerfed too bad playing other IF positions. But we all know that strong defensive SS for example could probably play a decent 2nd base if he had to, right?

That's the cliff notes version of how the round-table came to be. (fyi this all happened over the course of the last 3 work days Saturday, Sunday and Monday) After we all talked and hashed it out here's the email the lead programmer sent everyone after he made the changes based on the discussion. (There are no edits to the email just raw information enjoy.)

"I (Jeff lead programmer) just checked in the following changes:

� Gill (Lead Gameplay Producer you've seen Gill on all the Gameplay streams) and I made few changes to the out-of-position table to penalize guys a little more in certain combinations
� When calculating a fielder�s attribute when he�s out of position, it will now look at his secondary positions as well as his primary position and will calculate his attribute for each position he can play using the out-of-position chart. His attribute will be the highest of these values.
� Any fielder playing middle infielder that does not have at least one of the middle infielder positions as a primary or secondary position will now use the out-of-position double play turns, regardless of his fielding attribute after the out-of-position adjustment.
� Any left handed fielder playing C, 2B, 3B or SS will only receive 10% of their fielding attribute (which will force missed branches.)

Here are a few examples that is impacted by a couple of these changes:

Player A. on Houston is a 3B with LF and SS as secondary positions. His fielding ability is 83. I moved him to 2nd base. Using the old logic, he would have lost 40% of his attribute, leaving him as about a 49.

With the new logic, since player A. has SS as a secondary position, it uses the SS  2B penalty instead of the 3B  2B penalty, which is only 10%. We also take the extra 5% off because we�re basing this off of a secondary position, but even with a 15% penalty, he�s now only brought down to a 70 instead of 49. Also, since he has SS as a secondary position, he�s still allowed to use the normal double play turns.

Another example: player B. is a 3B with no secondary positions and a fielding ability of 84. I move him to 2nd base. A 3B playing 2B is penalized 40%, so that would leave him with an attribute of about 50. This is above the �low ability� cutoff of 30, so using the old logic, he would have been able to do the athletic double play turns. With the new logic, since he�s not able to play either of the middle infield positions, he�ll only use the out-of-position double play turns. Any of his other throws will still branch, but his DP turns will be significantly slower than a normal 2B.

Also, when Gill and I adjusted the chart, we made it so that no outfielder moved into the infield would end up with fielding ability above 30. This will ensure that outfielders playing in the infield are always treated as �low ability�. Unless, of course, they have a secondary infield position that causes them to get less of a penalty.

Disclaimer we are still testing and there is a possibility we might change things so nothing is concrete. (We aren't taking suggestions)However we hope you all enjoy this incoherent behind the scenes look at The Show take care.

Game: MLB The Show 17Hype Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS4Votes for game: 36 - View All

Member Comments

# 41 WaitTilNextYear @ 02/01/17 03:51 PM

While we're on the "out of position" train, it's also probably worthwhile to mention that the cpu logic burns through the backup catcher too aggressively. I can't even count how many times I've been in a game where the cpu pinch hits or runs for their catcher (or double switches) and, having already burned the backup as a pinch hitter, then brings in a non-catcher to play catcher. It's far too common of an occurrence and it goes way too smoothly. Maybe someone can back me up on this with some video evidence?

If it is to continue this way, it would be good to really make it an adventure back there with more passed balls and such.

# 42 MauerMorneau09 @ 02/01/17 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShowTyme15


	I like the new idea. I personally have always thought you guys should have sliders for each secondary positions in the editor for players. EXAMPLE: Lets say a player plays 1B as primary, but LF/RF are secondary positions it will look like this in the editor with sliders C - 0 1B - 99 2B - 0 3B - 0 SS - 0 LF - 77 CF - 5 RF - 80 A utility guy that plays all 4 infield spots and can play CF C - 0 1B - 55 2B - 75 3B -70 SS -82 LF - 15 CF - 75 RF - 10 These are just a few examples of what I'm trying to explain. Anything over 50% should show up as secondary positions on the player card. This actually helps when guys switch positions or try out new positions in real life. It allows us to adjust without having to change primary and secondary positions to make it work. A guy like Howie Kendrick has become somewhat of a utility guy. He can play 1B/2B/3B/LF 1B - 60 2B - 90 3B - 77 SS - 10 LF - 70 CF - 0 RF - 10

I would love to see this, I remember 2K used to do the exact same thing.

# 43 YankeesMVP @ 02/01/17 06:09 PM

Hey Ramone,

Just wondering if the new system can help remove the way people would play guys at 1st base to keep them in the lineup. They do this because the chances of a defensive mishap is lower than putting that player in a different position.

Thanks!

Examples from games played against human opponent:

Ted Williams - 1B

Prime A-Rod - 1B

Nolan Arrenado at 1B because Machado was their 3B

# 44 ninertravel @ 02/01/17 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear


	While we're on the "out of position" train, it's also probably worthwhile to mention that the cpu logic burns through the backup catcher too aggressively. I can't even count how many times I've been in a game where the cpu pinch hits or runs for their catcher (or double switches) and, having already burned the backup as a pinch hitter, then brings in a non-catcher to play catcher. It's far too common of an occurrence and it goes way too smoothly. Maybe someone can back me up on this with some video evidence? If it is to continue this way, it would be good to really make it an adventure back there with more passed balls and such.

Yeah that is a totally different topic, the way the CPU Manager handles pitchers too is a MASSIVE problem. in a 1-0 game I have seem them panic in innings 6 with the pitchcount at 60 because a runner is on base, and then throw in a reviler straight away and panic then I know I am gonna win the game. even with the manager slider on full blast for CPU Hook still does it.. flipside to that if the score was 5-0 the CPU would keep the starter on for 150 pitches in the 9th with no energy. and they will use a burnt out closer in innings 9 EVERY SINGLE closed situation, maybe the CPU logic needs to be based on fatigue rather then the score in the game.

Anyway that's a total different topic. but perhaps the postion changes can fix this in fact I don't see the point of the closer position they should all just be RP and put one in the closer slot,

# 45 Caulfield @ 02/01/17 07:46 PM

Its going to be interesting to see how the Show (online) handles Ian Desmond. Before 2016 he had been almost exclusively a SS (7938 of 7985 inning spent at SS). Then in 2016 he moved to CF for the first time in his big league career. Now there is talk of the Rockies moving him to first base for 2017, again for the first time in his career. I guess that will be addressed in a roster update during the season.

# 46 JTommy67 @ 02/02/17 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 41_Tom_Seaver_Fan


	THANK YOU, Ramone, for the 'inside look' at the e-mail. I LOVE information like that. I will echo that seeing what their position attribute would be on-screen would be phoenomenal. One other thing...will the "2nd" positions ever get expanded? There are some combos that simply are not there...for example, a LF who also plays 1B and CF/RF. As it is now, you have to chose A) LF....1B B) LF....OF C) 1B...OF (making a LF primarily a 1B) There is no way to have a primary of LF, and a secondary of an OF/1B combo. Same is true of a 2B who can also play SS/3B, you have to give him IF as secondary, adding 1B in there which he does not play. "Custom secondary", like an OF who can also play 2B, 3B would be so cool. Doesn't happen often, but there have been cases. As of now, one of those gets a major hit penalty for the "left out" position. It can be done, because there are SCEA made players that have unique combos for secondary. Having that for us would be great. THANKS again for the info!

^THIS^

The choices are too limiting. We need SS/2B, SS/3B, 2B/3B, OF/1B.

I still favor simply selecting which positions can be played from a chart, which someone noted previously.

# 47 ninertravel @ 02/02/17 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTommy67


	^THIS^ The choices are too limiting. We need SS/2B, SS/3B, 2B/3B, OF/1B. I still favor simply selecting which positions can be played from a chart, which someone noted previously.

it obliviously can be done because they do it for Prado, it's just 'locked' for us to be able to do for some reason. if Online play is the excuse then just lock it for online play!

# 48 Houston @ 02/02/17 12:47 AM

Currently if you make a 2B and his secondary is 3B,SS you cant give it to him unless you give him all INF which he never has played 1B in his career. The only way to do this currently is make him a 3B and then you can add the 2B/SS which in reality he is the starting 2B not 3B.

Same could go for someone who plays 1B but also 3B and 2B noway to give him just those without giving him SS also using all INF.

Another example is a Catcher who plays 1B, 3B and LF or RF noway to currently just give him those specific positions. It's either you make him his Primary a C then do 1B/3B or you can only make him C/RF or C/LF or even C/OF which he never played CF and guessing a Catcher might not have the speed to cover CF.

# 49 EmmdotFrisk @ 02/02/17 01:06 AM

# 50 doctorduck @ 02/02/17 02:08 AM

Seems like a good change. I hope the secondary positions get expanded. Even if it was a checklist where we just click on whichever position we want. Also if franchise had a way to teach players new positions. Like you could choose to have a player practice a position for 2 weeks to a month to make it a secondary but having a chance of failing depending on his fielding attributes and main position. Like a first baseman trying shortstop will fail pretty much everytime but a shortstop learning third will stick 90% of the time and complete the transition quicker. Might work better as a offseason only thing with a limit of how many players you can add positions to(say like 5 or 6 in your entire organization)

It would be nice to be able to add secondary positions without editing because some players don't adjust as well as you would think. Xander Bogaerts was a pretty bad third baseman the half season he was over there if I remember correctly. Then there are players like Holt. He came into 2014 as a middle infielder only but ended up starting 8 games at every position but catcher. And he had a week or two of practice before his first game at first then a week later he moved to the outfield with about the same amount of practice in the middle of the season. Yet despite the lack of practice, he was atleast average at every position.

It would be nice to have that type of flexibility but I can see why that could be hard to put into the game. Just some hopeful thinking

# 51 Caulfield @ 02/02/17 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninertravel


	it obviously can be done because they do it for Prado, it's just 'locked' for us to be able to do for some reason. if Online play is the excuse then just lock it for online play!

Exactly. Let us offline franchise guys add up to 3 secondary positions.

Also I'd like to be able to choose from 3 'new' choices of secondary positions.

1)MI-middle infield
2)CI-corner infield
3)CO-corner outfield

Then, my secondary positions could look like this:
C/CO/CI

Instead of:
C/LF/RF/3B/1B

I guess that would be more for aesthetics and looks 'cleaner' IMO

# 52 WaitTilNextYear @ 02/02/17 12:01 PM

It sounds like we're all pretty much in agreement that the way secondary positions are currently assignable in the game needs to be changed. SDS may not have the time to change it for this cycle, but hopefully they understand the consensus building on this issue. Basically I should be able to have a CF who I can make have whatever combination of secondaries I want, not just the basic presets of OF, IF, MI, CI, C/1B etc.

They already pre-program SCEA player models this way; the functionality just needs to be unlocked for the gamer (at least in certain modes).

# 53 Qb @ 02/02/17 12:36 PM

Like the changes, but what jumped out at me was the "low ability" cutoff being 30. From context, I assume this cutoff deals mainly with animations/branching available to the player. I'd love to hear more about it, as it leaves me wondering about how the fielding rating is scaled.

I don't feel like too many guys are that lowly rated, so is it intended more for out of position penalties, or would it better represent someone who is just a butcher in their primary position?

EDIT: So according to listed DD-available players on Daddy Leagues, it appears only pitchers have fielding ratings under 30. So that kinda answers my question, but leads to ask if it should be that way? Well known DH-only types David Ortiz & Billy Butler are at 45 & 40.

Again, I'd love to know more about the "low ability cutoff" and its intended impact on gameplay.

# 54 nomo17k @ 02/02/17 03:01 PM

Indeed this is a nice improvement overall.

I don't know if this is something being adjusted but I still think the fielding attribute values should make it possible to replicate very poor fielding players at the lower end, especially in hardest defensive positions where desired skills are more unique demanding (SS, C, etc.)

I think the premise in interpreting the range of 0 - 99 has been that even the lowest end of spectrum corresponds to the ability of poor fielders in the "professional level," which is still pretty respectable.

Putting an outfielder as a catcher and making him have 0 fielding/blocking attribute is sensible, but if that 0 attribute still makes him play like a professional catcher with extremely poor defensive skills, he is still pretty respectable on an absolute scale of fielding standard. Instead, I think he should be near hopeless in things like effectively blocking pitches in the dirt.

Hope expanding the dynamic range of player skills has been given considerations!

# 55 El_MaYiMbE @ 02/02/17 08:07 PM

I wish one of the primary positions was DH. I really hate seeing David Ortiz (I know he is retired now) being played to start at 1B over anyone, instead of DH, when the CPU makes the lineup.

In addition (and somewhat related) I wish that not only the penalty for playing out of position would be more realistic (as stated by Ramone as being the goal), but I wish the logic under which the CPU took those values into account would too.

Example: Hanley Ramirez should start at 1B over Ortiz 99.9% of the time. It would help if DH was available to select as a primary position, but it would also help if the CPU could just determine Hanley is a better fielding 1B (technically).

Alternatively, I think a depth chart would probably be a better option. Just because you a primary DH, but you have a secondary position, it doesn't mean that position should only be 80% of your fielding capability because its technically the ONLY fielding position being taken into account.

So maybe instead of a Primary DH option, there should be a team depth chart, where your primary position can be 1B lets say (100% of your fielding ability will be taken into consideration), but your #1 on the depth chart when it comes to DH. When the CPU then auto generates lineup it should take that into account. Allowing players to be in the depth chart at multiple positions should be allowed also.

# 56 Bobhead @ 02/02/17 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_MaYiMbE


	I wish one of the primary positions was DH. I really hate seeing David Ortiz (I know he is retired now) being played to start at 1B over anyone, instead of DH, when the CPU makes the lineup. In addition (and somewhat related) I wish that not only the penalty for playing out of position would be more realistic (as stated by Ramone as being the goal), but I wish the logic under which the CPU took those values into account would too. Example: Hanley Ramirez should start at 1B over Ortiz 99.9% of the time. It would help if DH was available to select as a primary position, but it would also help if the CPU could just determine Hanley is a better fielding 1B (technically). Alternatively, I think a depth chart would probably be a better option. Just because you a primary DH, but you have a secondary position, it doesn't mean that position should only be 80% of your fielding capability because its technically the ONLY fielding position being taken into account. So maybe instead of a Primary DH option, there should be a team depth chart, where your primary position can be 1B lets say (100% of your fielding ability will be taken into consideration), but your #1 on the depth chart when it comes to DH. When the CPU then auto generates lineup it should take that into account. Allowing players to be in the depth chart at multiple positions should be allowed also.

I actually prefer the first idea. A depth chart sounds amazing until trades and free agency stuff starts happening. At some point the CPU is going to be responsible for re-filling the depth chart, and then you'll be right back to David Ortiz as the regular 1B.

# 57 El_MaYiMbE @ 02/02/17 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobhead


	I actually prefer the first idea. A depth chart sounds amazing until trades and free agency stuff starts happening. At some point the CPU is going to be responsible for re-filling the depth chart, and then you'll be right back to David Ortiz as the regular 1B.

Agree, so maybe the right thing to do is both!
There should be a DH position and depth charts.

# 58 Russell_SCEA @ 02/03/17 12:02 AM

One of the programmers was kind enough to add a few new combinations into the editor today.

� 2B/3B/SS
� 2B/3B
� SS/3B
� OF/1B

P.S. this isn't an invitation to ask for more changes in this area.

# 59 ShowTyme15 @ 02/03/17 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_SCEA


	One of the programmers was kind enough to add a few new combinations into the editor today. � 2B/3B/SS � 2B/3B � SS/3B � OF/1B P.S. this isn't an invitation to ask for more changes in this area.

# 60 tree3five @ 02/03/17 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_SCEA


	One of the programmers was kind enough to add a few new combinations into the editor today. �2B/3B/SS �2B/3B �SS/3B �OF/1B P.S. this isn't an invitation to ask for more changes in this area.

That is awesome. Thank you!

« Previous 1 234 Next »

More Links

MLB The Show 17 - Behind the Scenes "Playing Out of Position" Changes