billharris44 Posted March 6, 2005 Author Share Posted March 6, 2005 as you pointed out, if the contact ratings are progressing exponentially, then it makes sense that the strikout leader totals decrease at the same rate, perhaps even quicker. Hard to tell if there's a way to increase one without sacrifying the other, maybe if they had added an "experience" modifier (sorta like age, but measured in league years experience instead), then that would probably solve it..(ie: pitchers with a certain level experience are subject to the modifier which increases strikouts by a certain amount for example). I actually read somwhere that the game had modifiers like this integrated in the progression, just don't know which, maybe you'll stumble across them The probability tables for position players are separate from pitchers but not from each other. In other words, there's one probability table for all pitcher ratings and one for all position player ratings. So you could reduce contact ratings without affecting pitch movements, but not without affecting power. I think the problem is that it's difficult to create one or two great strikeout pitchers without creating twenty. That's true of almost every baseball engine I've ever seen, so it's not unique to MVP. And I think league strikeout totals will be steadily within 5% of 2004 real totals over time, which to me is much more important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackcasper49 Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 bill, are you anticipating adjusting the total number of players with a high star rating (i.e. five stars, four stars) in the rookie creation or are you going to leave it default and tweak the progression of each level to help reduce the exponentially high number of high ranked players ... this approach would be important for roster makers out there who want to know whether to limit the number of high valued stars as opposed to just leaving it closer to default this question ties into what Cris987 was talking about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billharris44 Posted March 7, 2005 Author Share Posted March 7, 2005 bill, are you anticipating adjusting the total number of players with a high star rating (i.e. five stars, four stars) in the rookie creation or are you going to leave it default and tweak the progression of each level to help reduce the exponentially high number of high ranked players ... this approach would be important for roster makers out there who want to know whether to limit the number of high valued stars as opposed to just leaving it closer to default this question ties into what Cris987 was talking about For now, I would say to have the rosters correspond to the default rosters in terms of ratings distribution. In the progression system as it's developing, those guys aren't sure things. I can't stand it when a highly-rated prospect is a slam dunk to become a star. The way the probability system is set up, it's possible to produce both All-stars from 1* prospects (although highly unlikely, as it should be) and 5-star flameouts (much more frequent than a 1* becoming an All-Star). Default roster ratings are much more important this year. Last year, the definitions for min/max by age category were hard caps--if some rosters were out of whack, the first spring training adjusted them. Now, though, that doesn't exist--it's all probabilities--so what's out of whack initially will take 10-15 years to clear through the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boulet430 Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 Bill, another question for you, and Im not sure if this is even editable, but what about player retirements. It would be kind of stupid to play this game if Randy Johnson is going to retire at the end of the year, which the only person I know who played a Yankee dynasty said he and Roger Clemens did. Is it possible to tweak that in the data file to where players retire based on skills not just at a certain age? Obviously skills decline with age, but when the skills are still there, i.e. Roger, RJ, etc. its disapointing to have them retire after year 1 of the dynasty when they are in fact playing still in real life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackcasper49 Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 thanx for the info bill ... I'll be doing my best to keep it even, though right now I have to do my best to get things in the right scope, because EA had a very odd distribution on the star potential rating from my assessment ... I'll do a little research and tweak the % back close to what EA had for star ratings in each category for the minors and majors for my roster set as it nears completion ... thanx for the info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billharris44 Posted March 7, 2005 Author Share Posted March 7, 2005 thanx for the info bill ... I'll be doing my best to keep it even, though right now I have to do my best to get things in the right scope, because EA had a very odd distribution on the star potential rating from my assessment ... I'll do a little research and tweak the % back close to what EA had for star ratings in each category for the minors and majors for my roster set as it nears completion ... thanx for the info I think we're all flying a little blind right now since all of us are nowhere near finished. I think we'll be able to coordinate pretty well in another few weeks, when we've gotten more work behind us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billharris44 Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 thanx for the info bill ... I'll be doing my best to keep it even, though right now I have to do my best to get things in the right scope, because EA had a very odd distribution on the star potential rating from my assessment ... I'll do a little research and tweak the % back close to what EA had for star ratings in each category for the minors and majors for my roster set as it nears completion ... thanx for the info The way that EA had the default up/down/same probabilities for ratings were very biases in favor of higher-star players. The problem with that was that they also had a huge ratings advantage at creation because of their star level. So it was a double whammy, and 5* players wound up with extremely high ratings far too often, with low* players (the vast majority that are created) had almost no chance. I've changed that fairly significantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbythepier Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 just a quick thanks to the work of billharris, jackcasper, and co. your mod will prove INVALUABLE to the overall enjoyment of dynasty and owner modes. i will wait patiently and expectantly for your release ( with no requests for a timeline). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billharris44 Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 just a quick thanks to the work of billharris, jackcasper, and co. your mod will prove INVALUABLE to the overall enjoyment of dynasty and owner modes. i will wait patiently and expectantly for your release ( with no requests for a timeline). Thanks man. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GForce22 Posted March 8, 2005 Share Posted March 8, 2005 Nicely done, Bill. You may inspire me to pick this game up yet GH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billharris44 Posted March 8, 2005 Author Share Posted March 8, 2005 Nicely done, Bill. You may inspire me to pick this game up yet GH Thanks GForce. I consider that a high compliment. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.