Fictional league preview over at the FOF boards

[Doughnuts?]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

sigh... another year with scouts turned off

"

Unfortunately.

Alas, perfection is elusive.

[thbroman]

Originally Posted by silvam14

Understandable reaction to me. If people would just read Markus' initial posts, he wouldn't have to explain it over and over again.

I agree. There's a lot of just glancing at posts here without actually reading them.
I, for one, am REALLY looking forward to giving the new scouting system a try. (And I am keping my fingers crossed that it will the first step toward more intersting use of scouts in historical/fictional eras!)

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Doughnuts?

"

Unfortunately.

Alas, perfection is elusive.

Nope, it's fixed now

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by kq76

Markus, you said the intangibles (work ethic, intelligence, etc) would make it back onto the html pages (and view customizations within the game), but I don't see them on that player page. Did SkyDog just have them off and they don't then show? If not, there's still plenty of room for them to the right of the fielding ratings.

They are in the sortable lists, but not yet in the player reports... hopefully I can add that before release.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by chimanbj

Guys, please try to be constructive with your criticism...using words like moron doesn't really provide for a supportive environment for Markus. It just makes us look like complainers, when what we look for is a tweak in one way or another...

I agree. This is maybe the most responsive Markus has ever been to us (or at least since I've been around), let's repay him by trying to keep our criticism as constructive and respectful as possible. You know, that old "with honey" saying.

Originally Posted by Doughnuts?

"

Unfortunately.

Alas, perfection is elusive.

I agree, they look bad and if they're that all over the place then they probably shouldn't be in the player histories, but Markus said he'll try to improve it so let's see what he comes up with.

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

They are in the sortable lists, but not yet in the player reports... hopefully I can add that before release.

Thanks!

[Cooleyvol]

Originally Posted by jbmagic

But skydog can post anywhere he wants. He doesn't work for OOTP.

I thought signing an NDA made you sort of an employee.

That being said, I couldn't care less about this issue. I did in the past, but it never changed, so, like other things about here, I quit caring.

.......and to those who said its a 'review'. Its not a game review.

Should it be here? Yes. Is it? No. Do I care? Not really.

Here's WHY its there instead of here:
There are more users that will read it at that board. The reasons for this began way back when stuff like this began to be posted at other boards, but that's another discussion altogether.

[OldFatGuy]

I'm new to OOTP and totally unqualified to comment, but I'm gonna anyway.

I don't understand the complaints about SISA or OSA scouting. Personally, I want those ratings to suck, otherwise I can see a cheap "cheat" for the human player to save money on scouts and thus have more money for talent. Why hire scouts if the OSA scouting is even reasonable. I mean in the example above, the guy hits 35-40 HR's a year but his OSA ratings in power fluctuate all over the place. GREAT, that proves to me OSA ratings suck and I'd better invest in scouting, because I can look at that player and say to myself, "You know what, he's got good power, these OSA guys are smoking someting, so I'd better hire my own good scouts."

I don't mean to criticize just to be an antagonist, but I've posted before about the inherit weakness of baseball AI that gives the human player an advantage, I just don't want that advantage increased by being able to rely, at least to a reasonable degree, on the OSA scouting thus freeing up money for talent.

Ok, I'll sit back and wait to get hammered.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by OldFatGuy

I don't understand the complaints about SISA or OSA scouting. Personally, I want those ratings to suck, otherwise I can see a cheap "cheat" for the human player to save money on scouts and thus have more money for talent. Why hire scouts if the OSA scouting is even reasonable. I mean in the example above, the guy hits 35-40 HR's a year but his OSA ratings in power fluctuate all over the place. GREAT, that proves to me OSA ratings suck and I'd better invest in scouting, because I can look at that player and say to myself, "You know what, he's got good power, these OSA guys are smoking someting, so I'd better hire my own good scouts."

I don't mean to criticize just to be an antagonist, but I've posted before about the inherit weakness of baseball AI that gives the human player an advantage, I just don't want that advantage increased by being able to rely, at least to a reasonable degree, on the OSA scouting thus freeing up money for talent.

Ok, I'll sit back and wait to get hammered.

Would you really want them to be worse than what your own eyes tell you though? I agree, you want to use your own scouts and rely on them more as they could really zero in on guys, but is there really a point to having centralized scouting at all if it's this bad? I don't think so. What benefit is there from it? It's just going to be completely ignored by people who have at least some experience with the game and for those with no experience with the game they might just think the entire game is garbage after seeing it jump all over the place. I can easily foresee people trashing it without realizing that that part of the game is really not supposed to be worth relying on.

I don't know what to recommend, but I agree with the poster who said that the more well known a player is the more on target his central scouting should probably be. And even if the ratings are way off for youngsters maybe Markus should try to limit those way off ratings to only one or two ratings at a time for most. Another idea might be to make central scouting on a more general scale like 1-10 and team scouting on a more detailed scale like 1-100, but if the person selects the 1-10 scale that wouldn't make a difference. Anyway, there's lots of ways to improve it, but I think it should probably come close to telling you what you would tell yourself if you looked at the player's stats.

[Mike Donlin]

I am fine with a young player's ratings jumping around from year to year; this happens all the time with prospects who come out of nowhere or who do not meet expectations (i.e. were overrated). But, yes, as a player becomes more established, his ratings should settle down over time. Everyone more or less knows what Albert Pujols or, take a far less obvious example, Reggie Sanders is capable of. Sure, there might be disagreements and few people, leave alone scouts, would agree on a specific number to represent their power, but regardless of the system scouts would have a pretty certain fix on their ability.

It sounds like this is what Markus is doing--or did as a result of this thread--and if so, that's great. I'm looking forward to having scouting on for this version, as I can go back to my beloved 20-80 rating system without feeling like it is too accurate about player's performance and ability. Some noise in the system will make it less accurate and more fun.

[SittingDuck]

Originally Posted by kq76

I agree. This is maybe the most responsive Markus has ever been to us (or at least since I've been around), let's repay him by trying to keep our criticism as constructive and respectful as possible. You know, that old "with honey" saying.

No sh*t.

C'mon people!

[Kelric]

I have no problem with OSA ratings jumping all over the place and I am definitely going to give the new scouting system a try (after not using it almost ever), BUT.... I do dislike being stuck with the OSA ratings in a player's history. 30 years after he retires I don't want to go back to a player's page and see how badly OSA was scouting him, I just want to see his career accomplishments.

[markprior22]

Maybe a dumb question here...why do we even need an outside scouting system like OSA? All the teams have their own scouting systems. I don't know if the game will allow you to continue without hiring a scout but if it does, it shouldn't. If a team doesn't want to invest in scouting, they can hire a poor, inexpensive scout but they should be forced to have some kind of scout in place.

From the discussion I've seen concerning OSA and it's complete variance, I don't see what good it brings to the table. Unless there is a valid reason that I'm not aware of, instead of trying to "fix" it, why not just get rid of it and let each team rely on its own scouting system?

[Doughnuts?]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Nope, it's fixed now

You're on fire!

[falkonisback]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Nope, it's fixed now

I'd say he's on fire!! He needs to call the fire dept! LOL. I just think that the player history shouldn't store the OSA scouting history unless scouting is turned off because then the ratings will be accurate. Maybe with scouts turned on, it should save the ratings of your head scout or something like that. Maybe that's how it works, I don't know.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Cooleyvol

Here's WHY its there instead of here:
There are more users that will read it at that board. The reasons for this began way back when stuff like this began to be posted at other boards, but that's another discussion altogether.

Yes, and it all needs to be posted here from now on.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Maybe a dumb question here...why do we even need an outside scouting system like OSA? All the teams have their own scouting systems.

It mimics what happened in MLB. In 1985, MLB set up the MLB Scouting Bureau in an effort to cut scouting costs. Instead of individual teams doing their own scouting, they would rely on the reports from the MLB bureau.

Of course, problems soon encountered: who should the scouts be at this central bureau? How would their impartiality be guaranteed when it came to issuing reports?

Teams ended up still doing their own scouting.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Yes, and it all needs to be posted here from now on.

Posting on other boards is good advertising. Most of the people here are already customers, past or present, so posting here reaches fewer potential new customers.

Besides, it was posted here. By Markus. With a handy link to the original thread and everything. I don't see what your complaint is.

[OldFatGuy]

Originally Posted by kq76

Would you really want them to be worse than what your own eyes tell you though? I agree, you want to use your own scouts and rely on them more as they could really zero in on guys, but is there really a point to having centralized scouting at all if it's this bad? I don't think so. What benefit is there from it? It's just going to be completely ignored by people who have at least some experience with the game and for those with no experience with the game they might just think the entire game is garbage after seeing it jump all over the place. I can easily foresee people trashing it without realizing that that part of the game is really not supposed to be worth relying on.

I don't know what to recommend, but I agree with the poster who said that the more well known a player is the more on target his central scouting should probably be. And even if the ratings are way off for youngsters maybe Markus should try to limit those way off ratings to only one or two ratings at a time for most. Another idea might be to make central scouting on a more general scale like 1-10 and team scouting on a more detailed scale like 1-100, but if the person selects the 1-10 scale that wouldn't make a difference. Anyway, there's lots of ways to improve it, but I think it should probably come close to telling you what you would tell yourself if you looked at the player's stats.

Yeah, I see this, you're right. Especially if it totally turns people off to the game. I think if my two cents counted, and they don't, I would agree with the poster above who suggested just trashing the OSA ratings altogether. Plus I see the point about having those hideous ratings being part of the player history page forever. Be nice to me if they scrapped the OSA ratings altogether, and on the player history page it didn't include any scouting reports, or included links to specific scouts scouting reports maybe?? I dunno. LIke I said before, totally unqualified to speak, but that usually doesn't stop me.

[Cooleyvol]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

Posting on other boards is good advertising. Most of the people here are already customers, past or present, so posting here reaches fewer potential new customers.

Besides, it was posted here. By Markus. With a handy link to the original thread and everything. I don't see what your complaint is.

His complaint is that OFFICIAL news about a piece of software should be presented on that company's website.

Reviews are different things than what we have here.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by Cooleyvol

His complaint is that OFFICIAL news about a piece of software should be presented on that company's website.

Reviews are different things than what we have here.

How is a non-employee's fictional league blog official news?