What's Wrong With This Picture?

[Ambermonk]

With patch 1.0.2 installed, the following event occured. To aid in clarity, I am replacing the player's names with their positions [in brackets]. The play starts with a runner on 2nd base.

the batter swings...
its popped high in the air...
on the infield, right side...
running at full speed is [2nd baseman]
but he can't make the play...
that'll fall in...
[runner] reaches third base...
[runner] is on his way home...
but [rightfielder] just brings it into the infield...
he scored...
a RBI single by [batter]

Its a sad thing when my 2nd baseman, who has an infield range score of 74, has to run full speed to get to a pop-up right above his head.

[OakDragon]

...and not only that, but the 2nd baseman is so demoralized about it that the right fielder has to run in to pick up the ball!

[jnshmoo]

Sounds to me that it's more like the word "Infield" may be misleading. I see nothing in that PBP that indicates that it is right above his head.
Maybe it was on the line?

It seems like maybe this call was meant for the outfielder on a fly to shallow outfield?

[TC Dale]

Moved to proper forum.

[Ambermonk]

Note that the text stated that the ball was popped on the infield, right side. There isn't much room on the right side of the infield. The first baseman would have half of the right side, and presumably the pitcher would have the front of the right side.

[M's rule]

Originally Posted by Ambermonk

Note that the text stated that the ball was popped on the infield, right side. There isn't much room on the right side of the infield. The first baseman would have half of the right side, and presumably the pitcher would have the front of the right side.

Ambermonk:

I dissected the PbP excerpt to narrow down the problem. Text category names (from the XML Cheat Sheet) are in all caps. Numbers in front of text lines are category number and object number, from the XML file.


SWING
189-11365 the batter swings...
FLYBALL_POPUP
226-6451 it’s popped high in the air...
[not in XML] on the infield, right side...
----The above line is in the game code, not in the XML file. I don’t know what triggers it, or how it affects the display of later messages. I’ve seen it cause a similar sort of problem before.
FLYBALL_CHARGE_HARD
243-5579 running at full speed is [2nd baseman]
-----This category uses the [%game fielder] token, which (I think) can return the name of any infielder or outfielder. However, the category seems designed for describing the sort of play an outfielder would make—infielders aren’t usually thought of as charging when they run after a fly ball. In this case, it seems as though the “on the infield” line pulled from the game code might have dictated that [%game fielder] has to be one of the infielders on the right side. Or maybe the location of the batted ball was determined before the “on the infield line” was called; I can’t tell. At any rate, somewhere between now and the end of the play, [%game fielder] changed.
FIELDER_EFFORT_MISSED
217-13440 but he can't make the play...
-----Seems okay, normal extension of the event
BALL_DROPS_FOR_HIT
253-14344 that'll fall in...
-----Likewise
ADVANCE_BASE_3
14-31 [runner] reaches third base...
-----And after this line, the rest of the message comes from within the game, so I can’t determine how the right fielder got involved.
[not in XML] [runner] is on his way home...
[not in XML] but [rightfielder] just brings it into the infield...
[not in XML] he scored...
[not in XML] a RBI single by [batter]

Entered this glitch as TT #2159.

[Ambermonk]

Thanks for your efforts.

[tysok]

Originally Posted by OakDragon

...and not only that, but the 2nd baseman is so demoralized about it that the right fielder has to run in to pick up the ball!

Hahahaha... well, wouldn't you be if you had to charge hard for a pop-up and still couldn't make the play?

Let's see... charging hard for the second baseman... the ball would have had to land next to the pitchers mound.... sounds like a pitcher that can't field his position too.

[SSG Troyer]

The "infield" part is the only misleading aspect of this that I see. Reading the text, I had a mental image of a 2B trying to make a play on the RF foul line ...

[ECrane67]

(Batter) hits a scorchng line drive to left, the left fielder then "drifts under it"--The PbP is really the only negative I've noted about the game so far!

[albatross11]

I've seen a batter hit a groundball weekly to a fielder...which I guess is ok if the batter is hitting that groundball every 7 days.

[Zeyes]

Originally Posted by albatross11

I've seen a batter hit a groundball weekly to a fielder...which I guess is ok if the batter is hitting that groundball every 7 days.

Heh. 160-8321...perhaps still possible to get fixed in time for patch 1.03?

[pstrickert]

Originally Posted by ECrane67

(Batter) hits a scorchng line drive to left, the left fielder then "drifts under it"--The PbP is really the only negative I've noted about the game so far!

I've seen this kind of PBP too many times. Often, one phrase will "contradict" a previous phrase. It creates havoc with the mental picture being formed.

[M's rule]

Originally Posted by Zeyes

Heh. 160-8321...perhaps still possible to get fixed in time for patch 1.03?

Text object 8321 isn't in the database any more (and isn't in the XML file that was released with the latest build for the testers). I remember fixing the "weekly" problem at one point, but I must have deleted the entry later for some other reason.

[M's rule]

Originally Posted by ECrane67

(Batter) hits a scorchng line drive to left, the left fielder then "drifts under it"--The PbP is really the only negative I've noted about the game so far!

Incongruities like this one come about because of the way PbP messages are created. Individual text objects are pulled from a number of different categories to create a full sequence of events, and it isn't easy to make sure that a later bit of information doesn't seem to contradict an earlier one.

If "scorching" is the word that actually appeared in the PbP, followed by "drifts under it," then it's possible this particular problem has been solved--the word "scorching" doesn't appear in the latest version of the XML file that was distributed to testers with the latest build today. I vaguely remember doing something a while ago to get rid of disconnects like this one.

[mnyakko]

OK, I am a little bit late on this and understand the complaint. One of the pictureS in my head as I read the PbP was not really a problem. But I was wondering if there were 2 outs?

Now, think about the technicality of the Infield Fly rule. Doesn't matter how far in the outfield a fly is, if an infielder is giving chase and has a reasonable chance to catch the fly it is subject to the INFIELD FLY rule.

So what I visualized in this PbP is the 2B-man giving chase to a 'tweener in short RF (likely towards the line directly behind the 1B-man) and j.u..s...t out of his reach. And just like that the chase is on by the RF to get the ball.

I have seen plays like that in real life (and are kind of strange to notate on the scoring sheet).