Position change & Fielding pcg.

zonk84 · 01-31-2003, 01:09 PM

This issue was alluded to in another forum -- and I did search around this forum -- but I think this constitutes a bug.

When I try to 'teach' minor leaguers new positions, and they "succeed" - it appears that only a range rating is added to the player.

For example.... Using the GeForce/Rolenv3 set - I try to teach CF Jackson Melian to play LF, then RF, in addition to his set position of CF.

After a period of sim time - I receive reports that Melian has learned this new position and receives a D/C/whatever rating.

So far so good....

However - he receives no fielding percentage for this position, or more accurately, gets a .000.

When I try to use him in the majors - he, of course, misses every single ball hit to him when plays LF or RF.

Of course - this shouldn't be happening. There shouldn't be much a learning curve for a CF learning LF/RF -- and while there are some minor nuances, catching a fly ball in CF is more less the same as LF.

I can't say for certain that this isn't due to the roster set I'm using - I've never seen it happen in any other roster sets - but, as I generally teach players I see as utility IF/OF additional positions - it's rare that I notice a players fielding inadequacies.

Thanks in advance for any enlightenment -- and I apologize if this has already been brought to light.

Scott Vibert · 01-31-2003, 01:55 PM

Some players don't learn a position well even after a "success" I had a 2B learn SS with an .750 fielding percentage.

That said I agree you generally should not see a CF fail to learn the other OF spots at least passably.

zonk84 · 01-31-2003, 07:52 PM

I totally agree that I shouldn't expect .990 fielding percentages at newly learned positions -- but since I started paying attention to this, I haven't seen a single position change with any kind of reasonable fielding percentage.

In other words - 95% get .000, no matter what the switch. The other 5% seem to be fairly neglible (.001, etc).

As I mentioned - this could simply be a function of the roster file I'm using.... Perhaps I'll experiment with some other files.

However - I would say that such switches shouldn't be 'successes' - but should probably be reported as failures to adapt.

In other words - if a player "learns" a new position, it seems to me that there should be a minimum fldg pcg --- maybe > .800 or so. Anything under .800 is really no more than qualifying a player as an 'emergency' backup (like say... keith moreland would probably qualify as an emergency catcher, based on the fact that he caught a few games in his career). If the results of the learn new position algorhythm (or however the process is actually handled) - are below this threshhold, I would say the experiment should be called a failure, with a note suggesting that the experiment end, as it does when a player cannot learn the new position.

Admittedly - I probably overuse this feature (virtually any player I don't see starting someday learns 4 or 5 positions by the time he reaches AAA in my organization!)

Beyond this - I'd like to see arm ratings be more 'generic' -- a strong arm is a strong arm whether it's on a catcher/OF/1B/SS (though accuracy and release is another matter).... but that's a matter for a different forum and thread.

Iron Horse · 02-02-2003, 02:21 PM

I too have wondered about generalizing arm ratings. Arm strength comes into play at 3B/SS just as much as LF, maybe more.

Killebrew · 02-02-2003, 03:23 PM

Quote:

In other words - 95% get .000, no matter what the switch. The other 5% seem to be fairly neglible (.001, etc).

I have never seen this and I have used the position learning features of OOTP4 a lot. The default fielding % seems to be .950 with almost all the new positions learned.

Quote:

As I mentioned - this could simply be a function of the roster file I'm using.... Perhaps I'll experiment with some other files.

Yeah, it sounds like a result of the games functions combined with a manually edited player. Try a fictional or historical league and I bet the issue does not appear.

zonk84 · 02-04-2003, 01:32 PM

I tried a different roster set - and the problem doesn't re-appear.

Looks it was tied/exclusive to the roster set I was using.

I tried both the pre-packaged fictional set, and another edited roster set.

The one that seemed to dislike position changes was the GeforceRolen v3 set.

zonk84 · 02-04-2003, 01:33 PM

....And how come I don't get credit for quick posts on my 'standings'?

Sheesh... no wonder i've been stuck in single A forever ;-)

01-31-2003, 01:09 PM	#1 (permalink)
zonk84 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 249 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1x in 1 post	Position change & Fielding pcg. This issue was alluded to in another forum -- and I did search around this forum -- but I think this constitutes a bug. When I try to 'teach' minor leaguers new positions, and they "succeed" - it appears that only a range rating is added to the player. For example.... Using the GeForce/Rolenv3 set - I try to teach CF Jackson Melian to play LF, then RF, in addition to his set position of CF. After a period of sim time - I receive reports that Melian has learned this new position and receives a D/C/whatever rating. So far so good.... However - he receives no fielding percentage for this position, or more accurately, gets a .000. When I try to use him in the majors - he, of course, misses every single ball hit to him when plays LF or RF. Of course - this shouldn't be happening. There shouldn't be much a learning curve for a CF learning LF/RF -- and while there are some minor nuances, catching a fly ball in CF is more less the same as LF. I can't say for certain that this isn't due to the roster set I'm using - I've never seen it happen in any other roster sets - but, as I generally teach players I see as utility IF/OF additional positions - it's rare that I notice a players fielding inadequacies. Thanks in advance for any enlightenment -- and I apologize if this has already been brought to light.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-31-2003, 01:55 PM	#2 (permalink)
Scott Vibert Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: My Computer Posts: 7,551 Thanks: 72 Thanked 48x in 30 posts	Some players don't learn a position well even after a "success" I had a 2B learn SS with an .750 fielding percentage. That said I agree you generally should not see a CF fail to learn the other OF spots at least passably.

01-31-2003, 07:52 PM	#3 (permalink)
zonk84 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 249 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1x in 1 post	I totally agree that I shouldn't expect .990 fielding percentages at newly learned positions -- but since I started paying attention to this, I haven't seen a single position change with any kind of reasonable fielding percentage. In other words - 95% get .000, no matter what the switch. The other 5% seem to be fairly neglible (.001, etc). As I mentioned - this could simply be a function of the roster file I'm using.... Perhaps I'll experiment with some other files. However - I would say that such switches shouldn't be 'successes' - but should probably be reported as failures to adapt. In other words - if a player "learns" a new position, it seems to me that there should be a minimum fldg pcg --- maybe > .800 or so. Anything under .800 is really no more than qualifying a player as an 'emergency' backup (like say... keith moreland would probably qualify as an emergency catcher, based on the fact that he caught a few games in his career). If the results of the learn new position algorhythm (or however the process is actually handled) - are below this threshhold, I would say the experiment should be called a failure, with a note suggesting that the experiment end, as it does when a player cannot learn the new position. Admittedly - I probably overuse this feature (virtually any player I don't see starting someday learns 4 or 5 positions by the time he reaches AAA in my organization!) Beyond this - I'd like to see arm ratings be more 'generic' -- a strong arm is a strong arm whether it's on a catcher/OF/1B/SS (though accuracy and release is another matter).... but that's a matter for a different forum and thread.

02-02-2003, 02:21 PM	#4 (permalink)
Iron Horse Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 47 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0x in 0 posts	I too have wondered about generalizing arm ratings. Arm strength comes into play at 3B/SS just as much as LF, maybe more.

02-04-2003, 01:32 PM	#6 (permalink)
zonk84 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 249 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1x in 1 post	I tried a different roster set - and the problem doesn't re-appear. Looks it was tied/exclusive to the roster set I was using. I tried both the pre-packaged fictional set, and another edited roster set. The one that seemed to dislike position changes was the GeforceRolen v3 set.

02-04-2003, 01:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
zonk84 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 249 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1x in 1 post	....And how come I don't get credit for quick posts on my 'standings'? Sheesh... no wonder i've been stuck in single A forever ;-)