Matrix Games Forums

First of all, thanks to Eric517, Amaroq, KG and others for getting me to look at the issue of fictional player career arcs.

For the fun of it I am pasting this message from the beta forum that I posted today. The genesis was some amazing analysis by Amaroq, which he said was brought on by comments from the folks I mentioned above.


========== Message from beta forum starts here ==============


I love it when a plan starts to come together. Amaroq, you are the man!

Seriously, this was just what I needed -- that career arc stuff has needed to be rebuilt ever since I decoupled the real player aging algorithms from fictional (real player works great as is these days, since it is based more on real-life performance from Lahman). This code is also very interesting to write and has been the antidote for "almanac and A-Bug burn out."

So, using a "Modified Amaroq" approach (by modified I don't mean better either, just that it fit in the framework of the engine without too much code churn) I think I am really on to something!

The key is each player now has internal variables for what I call "Peak Age", "Decline Age", And "Cliff Age". These are distributed to mirror real life distributions of player aging analysis I have done. Of course in true PureSim fashion we can also modify the spreads via the XML too! So by nature of these variables we'll see much better career arc trajectory variability. An idea pretty much ripped straight from our buddy Amaroq thank you very much

Even cooler, the little green/red/yellow indicator next to potential is a great way to see that your scout "thinks" a player has still not reached his peak age (green), is sort of holding steady (yellow) and appears to be on the decline (red) . Decoupling that from the potential rating was the key! The potential still influences how *much* a player can improve as he approaches his peak, but it is not the sole indicator of "if" he will improve. So, a low potential guy can sort of creep up slow and steady in some cases if he has a late Peak Age... Of course the best guys to find are the high potential ones, that said what if they peak at 26! See how cool this is

I actually built a very similar engine about 2 years ago during what was going to be a re-write which was scrapped, so it came together pretty quickly.

Additionally "inaate" ratings are much less volatile from year to year for a given player (Like Power and Velocity). Like Amaroq said, while power and velocity can certainly improve, they can't really be "taught" hence you won't be seeing guys with 20 power at 19 years old turn into home run machines. We may want to do some analysis here as there are some implications on initial player generation. So far it looks great though.

I also apply an algorithm that will determine what the optimal level a player should be at for the best possible player development before he reaches his peak, so be careful when you rush that prospect or try to hoarde 27 year old talent in AAA This algorithm's boundaries can be tweaked as well.

Last but not least I made some major modifications to the AI's player evaluation algorithms to improve valuation of youth and potential. I think it will be the most challenging AI in PureSim history. I'm not letting the AI "peek" at the age variables but that might be something I look into to ratchet up the challenge further.

The results so far:

* Career arcs vary MUCH more, way less predictible. Some players peak early, stay at the same level for a number of years then slowly decline, others bloom late but have shorter spans of consistent performace, e.g. they start to declient young, others never really blossom, still others can tail off rapidly, again this is centered around a mean, so the edge cases are infrequent. When you think about the combinations of the three age variables it can get quite interesting.

* I'm seeing a much better average age in the majors 29.xx which is much better, and since players are playing into their 30's much more consistently I'm seeign career stats that look great.

* The homerun explosion problem seems to be gone for good.

In case you can't tell, I'm excited. This was bugging the crap out of me that a former strength of PureSim had shown so much atrophy in the PS 2006 code base. Its not perfect, but I can't wait to get it in the testers' hands

Amaroq, I'm adding you to the credits as a design consultant if that's ok with you?

Glad to hear of these improvements. Players become useless after 34 was one of the reasons I stopped playing PS2005.

Is "juiced" one of the hidden traits? Several players have had some mighty sharp jumps in recent years (Sosa going from 36 to 66 homers?)[X(]

Yay!

Unfortunately, for many players, a few million dollars a year wasn't enough. They wanted even MORE millions and were (and maybe still are) willing to cheat and break the law to get those extra dollars.

Unless baseball forces its players to give blood and hair samples, the rule breakers will always stay ahead of the rule makers. Also, sadly, the backs of future baseball cards might contain the following:

Hat size:
Supplements Used:

Stadiums named after pharmaceutical companies and statues of personal trainers won't be far behind.

A few naive fringe players getting suspended for 50 games is laughable. A two-year ban for first offense and a lifetime ban for a second offense would send a better message.

(Please take further discussion of the steroids issue to another thread, thanks)

Playing around with this, I can't put into words how much better this career arc pattern feels to me.

Just skimming around the league after a 20-year unattended autoplay, I've encountered:

.. a home run hitter who blossomed into a slugger in the later part of his career
.. a high-current, high-potential hitter who just never.. got.. better
.. a low-current, high-potential pitcher who blossomed into the best in the bigs - in his tenth season!
.. players who are progressing in different directions on all three arcs - e.g., getting better power, constant contact, and losing eye, or some combination of the 9 possibilities there.
.. players whose potential has increased or decreased substantially from their initial numbers

I think this ought to be #1 on the list of features for the game, myself, though I understand it might not sell as many copies as animations, sounds, etc., will! [:D]

Will this arc be different for different players? Have to account for players like Julio Franco an Satchel Paige.

Absolutely, that's the whole motivation behind re-vamping the feature.

Shaun,

This sounds like great stuff. Wish I coulda gotten in on the beta testing. That was half the fun of being part of this game.

Still, I'm looking forward to release.

Steve

ORIGINAL: Amaroq

(Please take further discussion of the steroids issue to another thread, thanks)

.........................

Sadly it is a real part of baseball - and a serious part of a career arc. How you gonna simulate the career arc of someone like Brady Anderson?

Nothing to add except that this new development model sounds excellent, and is exactly what I'm looking for in a text sim.

I'm interested to hear how some of the tests turn out with this.

I found this post later via some Google link.  So I have to say now, this to me has been a tremendous boost to the capabilities of PSBB.  Just phenomenal and I can't imagine the game without it.  Way to go, guys.

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

I found this post later via some Google link.  So I have to say now, this to me has been a tremendous boost to the capabilities of PSBB.  Just phenomenal and I can't imagine the game without it.  Way to go, guys.

Look at the dates, Phil. Whatever Shaun did should already be in the latest patches. However, he may have decided that a few tweaaks will have to be postponed until PS2008.

Right.  My post was just really a follow-up to what was done some time ago.  Wanted to congratulate them on a very good and important development.

Oh yeah yah gotta add steroid use in the game now. A random factor that will have some players violate the rules....get caught and have to sit out a number of games first offense, on down to expulsion from the league. Yeah gotta have this realism. Alcohol abuse, drug abuse random drug test, wife beaters etc....lol the whole 9 yards.

Also in the play by play: Fan reaches out, catches ball keeps Cubs from going to World Series..other fans beat the crap out of this fan as the game continues.

Shaun, something that's been bugging me for quite a while was brought up in this thread (by you).

The POTENTIAL rating. I've seen a player with a potential rating of 9 having a green up arrow. And a player with a 65 rating having a yellow hyphen.

This doesn't make logical sense to me. Either the guy's got potential and it's going up or he doesn't and it isn't.

Can the way potential is displayed be tweaked so that the two values align more appropriately? Or at least can I get an explanation for why they would be so divergent?

Thanks.

ORIGINAL: Woodruff

Shaun, something that's been bugging me for quite a while was brought up in this thread (by you).

The POTENTIAL rating. I've seen a player with a potential rating of 9 having a green up arrow. And a player with a 65 rating having a yellow hyphen.

This doesn't make logical sense to me. Either the guy's got potential and it's going up or he doesn't and it isn't.

Can the way potential is displayed be tweaked so that the two values align more appropriately? Or at least can I get an explanation for why they would be so divergent?

Thanks.

Maybe Lastings Milledge would be a 70 potential with a red down or yellow "-"?

ORIGINAL: Woodruff

Shaun, something that's been bugging me for quite a while was brought up in this thread (by you).

The POTENTIAL rating. I've seen a player with a potential rating of 9 having a green up arrow. And a player with a 65 rating having a yellow hyphen.

This doesn't make logical sense to me. Either the guy's got potential and it's going up or he doesn't and it isn't.

Can the way potential is displayed be tweaked so that the two values align more appropriately? Or at least can I get an explanation for why they would be so divergent?

Thanks.

It actually makes perfect sense. Players have varied career arcs and peak ages. Just because a guy has a lower potential rating does not mean he can't continue to improve (albeit on a slower trajectory). The green arrow simply means your "scout" sees the player as still having room for improvement. The yellow bar means a player has leveled off, the red arrow means the "scout" feels like his skills may be on the decline.

Which leads to the question of how accurate is your particular scout? Is there one "Scouting Personality"? It would be helpful to know your scouts skills. Say is he more defensively minded? Does he pay more attention to younger AAA guys? or is he better at eyeing those undervalued vets?

Rod

ORIGINAL: puresimmer

ORIGINAL: Woodruff
The POTENTIAL rating. I've seen a player with a potential rating of 9 having a green up arrow. And a player with a 65 rating having a yellow hyphen.

It actually makes perfect sense. Players have varied career arcs and peak ages. Just because a guy has a lower potential rating does not mean he can't continue to improve (albeit on a slower trajectory). The green arrow simply means your "scout" sees the player as still having room for improvement. The yellow bar means a player has leveled off, the red arrow means the "scout" feels like his skills may be on the decline.

The number indicates how much a player will improve by, if he improves.

The arrow indicates his likelihood of improving, if all factors are correct (right level of playing time, right level of minor leagues, etc.)

A '9' with a green arrow is likely to improve - but not likely to improve very much, year-over-year.

A '65' with a yellow arrow is unlikely to improve - but IF he does, he will improve by much more than the '9' would have.

This also gives you interesting decisions like, who will peak higher:
- a 20-year-old, 40-40-40 guy with 40 potential, or
- a 21-year-old, 20-20-20 guy with 68 potential.

I used to bet on the 68 - now I'd bet on the 40, as he has one more year to grow, and he starts with a huge head start.

Regarding 'scouting personality', we used to have different scouts per team, but that added a lot of processing time for fairly little benefit, and Shaun scrapped it. So, currently, all scouts are the same; they are equal; they give you a good *but not perfect* view of the universe.