Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: modred
From my point of view I think puresim is treading into complexity that needs to be toggleable to keep it fun for someone who doesn't want to have to look at ratings every time he turns around.

I don't agree. You don't have to look at the ratings, you can simply look at how players are performing and make decisions accordingly. The nice part about them being a bit more dynamic is that you are faced with some more interesting decisions around managing the minor leagues, older players fading late in the season, etc.

And yes, a lot of it is based on playing time (major and minor)

ORIGINAL: puresimmer

ORIGINAL: modred
From my point of view I think puresim is treading into complexity that needs to be toggleable to keep it fun for someone who doesn't want to have to look at ratings every time he turns around.

I don't agree. You don't have to look at the ratings, you can simply look at how players are performing and make decisions accordingly. The nice part about them being a bit more dynamic is that you are faced with some more interesting decisions around managing the minor leagues, older players fading late in the season, etc.

And yes, a lot of it is based on playing time (major and minor)

Not trying to be argumentative, but can you explain how the decisions are made more interesting? We already have the ability to follow a players performance on the field and know if he is surging or fading. Was thought ever given to having a players' arc change in mid-season, but hide the immediate ratings changes from the user? To me, that sounds like it would create "challenging" decisions vs. having the UI hit you over the head with what's going on. [:)]

Here's a thought, in real life, scouting reports are updated on some regular interval by a teams advanced scouts. These changes occur after some period of time and the performace to back up the new rating. The scouts need time to spot the trend. Maybe the ratings change in PureSim's UI shouldn't happen until some time period after the actual internal change was made. So maybe it takes a month or so for the UI to update to reflect the players improved skills, making the user still need to keep an eye on his players. This way, if I'm too stupid to notice, my scouts will eventually be there to let me know of the changes... I think this approach makes things more interesting as you get the opportunity to spot the changes before they are "reported".

Thoughts?

ORIGINAL: PadresFan104

ORIGINAL: puresimmer

ORIGINAL: modred
From my point of view I think puresim is treading into complexity that needs to be toggleable to keep it fun for someone who doesn't want to have to look at ratings every time he turns around.

I don't agree. You don't have to look at the ratings, you can simply look at how players are performing and make decisions accordingly. The nice part about them being a bit more dynamic is that you are faced with some more interesting decisions around managing the minor leagues, older players fading late in the season, etc.

And yes, a lot of it is based on playing time (major and minor)

Here's a thought, in real life, scouting reports are updated on some regular interval by a teams advanced scouts. These changes occur after some period of time and the performace to back up the new rating. The scouts need time to spot the trend. Maybe the ratings change in PureSim's UI shouldn't happen until some time period after the actual internal change was made. So maybe it takes a month or so for the UI to update to reflect the players improved skills, making the user still need to keep an eye on his players. This way, if I'm too stupid to notice, my scouts will eventually be there to let me know of the changes... I think this approach makes things more interesting as you get the opportunity to spot the changes before they are "reported".

Thoughts?

I dont know.... you are getting into OOTP2006 territory and that is not a good thing.

ORIGINAL: VanScoy
I dont know.... you are getting into OOTP2006 territory and that is not a good thing.

Which part? In-season ratings changes? Or the idea not to show the changes to the user right away? Does OOTP already work like this?

ORIGINAL: PadresFan104

ORIGINAL: VanScoy
I dont know.... you are getting into OOTP2006 territory and that is not a good thing.

Which part? In-season ratings changes? Or the idea not to show the changes to the user right away? Does OOTP already work like this?

No the in season ratings changes are awesome and much more realistic, in my opinion, but the whole scouting mechanism, as in having scouting be seperate from the ratings. OOTP has scouts "rated" in their ability to perceive ratings PLUS they have biases towards, say, power or clutch hitting. You have to send scouts out to scout teams ad players and the whole thing is so time comsuming and complicated, it turns me off.

Ok, I agree 100% with that and I wasn't trying to take the game in that direction. (Ick!)  I just thought it would be cool if the rating changes weren't shown to the user right away, to better simulate real life.

Oh, my, let's not go the direction of micro-managing. I don't want this game to turn into a microscopic examination of each player's performance each week or so.

This, to me, would kill the joy of everyday game management. If Shaun really wants to go this route, I want pop-up messages from my scouts in-between games if a rating changes.

I like playing the dual roles of GM/everyday game manager, but give me the info between games via carrier pigeon or telephone or telex or e-mail or whatever. Don't make me have to look at it under the microscope until the next season begins.

To put it another way, for God's sakes, do NOT let this game become mired under layers of complexity. The simplicity is what I love about it.

And, to top it all, don't let the statistical model get skewed by these complex permutations. That would be be a giant step backwards, and you'd end up losing at least one customer.

I'll just make it an option.

Just to clarify, I really think this is a great feature that just needs a little tweaking. For historical careers, I think it solves a problem that was introduced with the early-import feature--that of the AI starting early-imported 'stars' without developing them in the minors. In some cases this was resulting in players having longer than usual careers with less impressive production (from not having enough development time in the minors because the AI would use them to fill gaps in the lineup, or worse, use them as bench players when they could developing in the minors). So in that respect I think the feature also improves the statistical model.

I think the feature makes the game more challenging without making it more complex. Why? Because it's more difficult to stack a team with pitching, with major-league level pitchers waiting in the wings. Older pitchers may fizzle out, and younger pitchers may not mature enough to be ready for the big leagues. I have to say it was enjoyable (if frustrating) to be trying out every single pitcher in AAA to fill out the last two spots in my bullpen, and finding out that none of them are quite ready, and having to look elsewhere for a solution.

Finally, to see players break-out in the middle of the year and become stars is awesome. In the career I was playing Jackie Robinson went from hitting .220 in early June 1948 to .330 by the end of August. Again I think the possibility of those types of statistical swings (not random) is more realistic. You don't know quite what you have after spring training. A young player that you kick off the big-league roster in April just might be ready by September.

I'm asking lots of questions, but not getting many answers. I've been trying to investigate this new feature myself, but I've been unsuccessful at downloading the patch (times out every time)....

1) Does the bar chart for player ratings update during the season? If not, where do we go to see the before and after? Is there a new report option?

2) Will we see less ratings changes when using the smaller scales (1-8, 1-10), thus missing out on some key info? But at our own choosing I guess.

3) How exactly does it solve the early-imported stars situation. How does gradual improvements over the year help keep the players in the minors? Wouldn't that cause them to be promoted sooner??

4) 33Sherman, in your example above regarding the AAA pitchers, I don't get the correlation of that situation with this new feature.

Now, I really like the idea of having the opportunity for players to have break out seasons that start sometime after April. That's ultra cool.

I think it may be jumping the gun to make this an option. It sounds like a good idea and I was just trying to present some thoughts for making it better.

ORIGINAL: PadresFan104

I'm asking lots of questions, but not getting many answers. I've been trying to investigate this new feature myself, but I've been unsuccessful at downloading the patch (times out every time)....

1) Does the bar chart for player ratings update during the season? If not, where do we go to see the before and after? Is there a new report option?

2) Will we see less ratings changes when using the smaller scales (1-8, 1-10), thus missing out on some key info? But at our own choosing I guess.

3) How exactly does it solve the early-imported stars situation. How does gradual improvements over the year help keep the players in the minors? Wouldn't that cause them to be promoted sooner??

4) 33Sherman, in your example above regarding the AAA pitchers, I don't get the correlation of that situation with this new feature.

Now, I really like the idea of having the opportunity for players to have break out seasons that start sometime after April. That's ultra cool.

I think it may be jumping the gun to make this an option. It sounds like a good idea and I was just trying to present some thoughts for making it better.

1)It just indicates whatever the ratings are on any given day compared to the previous year or years.

2) I haven't tried this.

3) Basically, if the AI tries to start highly rated players without developing them in the minors, their ratings drop. When their ratings drop, the AI re-evaluates them and sends them to the minors. If they improve in the minors, then they get sent to the majors.

4) I was trying to illustrate how the new system makes it more challenging to evaluate the talent that you have, even with the ratings visible. Certain player's ratings will stay the same (usually more mature players with more development in the minors and/or major league experience), certain players ratings will drop quickly (younger players who need more time in the minors or older players on the way out). Basically you just have to put them somewhere and see how they pitch. As of this patch, it's a little too harsh--players who aren't in their prime get rocked mercilessly.

Thanks 33. Appreciate the info.