Please Post All OOTP10 PBP/News Typos and Errors Here

[Wrathchild]

The PbP claims there are 2 outs when there is actually only 1.

EDIT: I also wanted to ask if anyone else has the 'incomplete' text as shown by the Pitch Info '90 Mph'. It looks like the pitch name is being inserted and overwriting the beginning of the next field or something.

[pstrickert]

Been fixed a while ago.

[Wrathchild]

Thanks. Sometimes it's hard to know what's been fixed and what hasn't. Being new to this game, what the is historical patch schedule? Is it a fixed schedule or is it more dynamic?

[BMW]

Originally Posted by Wrathchild

Thanks. Sometimes it's hard to know what's been fixed and what hasn't. Being new to this game, what the is historical patch schedule? Is it a fixed schedule or is it more dynamic?

It's certainly dynamic. I've never a "company" work harder at issuing patches than Markus does. I remember he released one on Christmas or Christmas Eve a while back.

By the way, no slight to anyone who works on OOTP aside from Markus. I believe he does the majority or all of the OOTP model coding and I could be wrong.

[pstrickert]

Don't worry about it, W. The lengthy break between the last patch and the next will result in a number of duplicate bug reports. Not much we can do about it.

[bailey]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

(Quote from bailey)

I got an e-mail with an error in it.

The title of the e-mail was "Hits blitz for Giants Wagner"

The message was "Dave Wagner of the New York Giants had an outstanding game against the Cubs. His 5-hit day included a cycle and 1 run batted in as New York picked up a 4-3 victory at Polo Grounds III....."

The game was played at West Side Park II, home of the Cubs.

Edit: Just noticed I got a second e-mail with the same story except no mention of the cycle and it had the same error (wrong park). That headline read "Wagner torches Cubs for 5 hits". (quote)

This is an old problem from several versions ago (V2007). I guess it has never been fixed.

I'll report it again. Thanks for the post.

BZ #3408


__________________

I'm sorry about this--this one was from my online league 'The Baseball Chronicle', but I forgot that this league is still using ver. 9, so this may have been fixed.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by bailey

I'm sorry about this--this one was from my online league 'The Baseball Chronicle', but I forgot that this league is still using ver. 9, so this may have been fixed.

Thanks for letting me know.

Hopefully it has been fixed.

I did a search in Bugzilla to see if it had been previously reported.

The search found nothing.

[hopeful1212]

The PbP says Volquez is 5th in the NL in wins (with 1), but that's not the case.

[pstrickert]

Bz3412.

[Eugene Church]

I could be wrong, but the game PBP is technically correct.

All pitchers with 3 wins would be ranked 3rd on the leaderboard.

All pitchers with 2 wins would be 4th.

All pitchers with 1 win would be 5th.

All pitchers with 0 wins would be 6th.

It would be best for the game to not mention stats like this when it's too early in the season to get realistic rankings.
On second thought, I think this is the way the game should rank players on the leaderboards and in the PBP:

[Afino]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

I could be wrong, but the game PBP is technically correct.

All pitchers with 3 wins would be ranked 3rd on the leaderboard.

All pitchers with 2 wins would be 4th.

All pitchers with 1 win would be 5th.

All pitchers with 0 wins would be 6th.

It would be best for the game to not mention stats like this when it's too early in the season to get realistic rankings.

I believe it waits 10-12 games before it shows up. But I agree that even that is too early.

[hopeful1212]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

I could be wrong, but the game PBP is technically correct.

All pitchers with 3 wins would be ranked 3rd on the leaderboard.

All pitchers with 2 wins would be 4th.

All pitchers with 1 win would be 5th.

All pitchers with 0 wins would be 6th.

It would be best for the game to not mention stats like this when it's too early in the season to get realistic rankings.

That seems to be the way the PbP is figuring it, but it's not the way the leaderboards are. Here's another example from the next game. The Wins Leaderboard is from before the game. This is a little more obvious since Cueto is IN the leaderboard (where it says he's 5th) and the PbP says he's 3rd.

[hopeful1212]

Argh, Cueto is actually 4th in the NL Leaderboard. That's the Combined Leaderboard, but you should get the idea.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

I could be wrong, but the game PBP is technically correct.

All pitchers with 3 wins would be ranked 3rd on the leaderboard.

All pitchers with 2 wins would be 4th.

All pitchers with 1 win would be 5th.

All pitchers with 0 wins would be 6th.

It would be best for the game to not mention stats like this when it's too early in the season to get realistic rankings.
On second thought, I think this is the way the game should rank players on the leaderboards and in the PBP:

For instance if you had one player leading with 35 hits, followed by three tied with 33, three tied with 32, one with 31 and two with 30 hits, this is how they should be ranked in the leaderboard and PBP:

1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
5. Slaughter 32
5. Reese 32
5. Furillo 32
8. Mathews 31
9. Dark 30
9. Clemente 30

[hopeful1212]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

For instance if you had one player leading with 35 hits, followed by three tied with 33, three tied with 32, one with 31 and two with 30 hits, this is how they should be ranked in the leaderboard and PBP:

1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
5. Slaughter 32
5. Reese 32
5. Furillo 32
8. Mathews 31
9. Dark 30
9. Clemente 30

But this isn't an example of what you've described. The game is ranking players like this in two ways:

PbP:
1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
3. Slaughter 32
3. Reese 32
3. Furillo 32
4. Mathews 31
5. Dark 30
5. Clemente 30


Leaderboards:
1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
5. Slaughter 32
5. Reese 32
5. Furillo 32
8. Mathews 31
9. Dark 30
9. Clemente 30

I just think they should be consistent. And the way the Leaderboards do it makes the most sense really.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by hopeful1212

But this isn't an example of what you've described. The game is ranking players like this in two ways:

PbP:
1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
3. Slaughter 32
3. Reese 32
3. Furillo 32
4. Mathews 31
5. Dark 30
5. Clemente 30


Leaderboards:
1. Musial 35
2. Snider 33
2. Aaron 33
2. Ashburn 33
5. Slaughter 32
5. Reese 32
5. Furillo 32
8. Mathews 31
9. Dark 30
9. Clemente 30

I just think they should be consistent. And the way the Leaderboards do it makes the most sense really.

You are right. It should be consistent.

[Tigers09]

Was playing as Detroit against New York had a ground ball toward 2nd and it said Polanco makes a lunging stop deep in the hole from his knees..... No one at first Cabrera made a lunging stop but Ni didnt get over to cover the base. Ok so 2 players caught the ball?? Play by Play goofed.

[endgame]

Is there place sticked for html report areas, like BNN Player pages? I'll post up here first, and get it moved if it's inappropriate. FWIW, see below, the 911(st) pick rather than (th). Almost feel bad that it's such a little thing, but hey, they tell me the devil lives in the details.

[Wrathchild]

How else would you abbreviate nine hundred eleventy first?

[Eugene Church]

Sorry, I'm not much help with the PBP error and the HTML problem.

If no one knows what to do with them, I will BZ them.