Quote: Originally posted by bighead34 on 5/09/2010it's impossible for admin to program the engine so that HR rates fall somewhere within the wide range that has been achieved in over a century of professional baseball?...we know that this isn't the case since the original "end of the steroid era" update accomplished exactly that (approx 2 HR/G)...when elite worlds now have HR rates 6% higher than the highest HR rate in MLB history (MG s15 @ 2.47 HR/G vs. MLB s2000 @ 2.34 HR/G) i look at it and think, "man, i wish that wasn't the case"...that is all...i'm not sure what you find so objectionable about that sentiment

Your unwillingness to acknowledge that it is that way because the people that play the game choose to make it that way is what is objectionable. 6%? Oh no!

What is impossible is making the game mirror MLB. It can't be done. Every change creates other things that don't lineup with MLB. Why aren't your panties in a bunch over the ERAs of the career leaders in that thread? How realistic are those numbers? How much lower do they go if you reduce the number of HRs?

well at least we're getting to the heart of the matter now...you and many others don't want it to be realistic...you weren't arguing with me about all the reasons before so much as you were defending the status quo...as i've stated before, that's fine by me, i can't argue with opinion, but i don't share your view...and 6% is the difference between an elite world (most realistic) and the most homer happy season in MLB history...when you do the HBD average (2.6) compared with the last 20 year average (~2.1) the difference is now 24%

I think it boils down to this:

WifS has stated that their goal is 2.4. That offends you because the 20 year average is 2.1. I think you accept that owner decisions are going to increase that number regardless of what it is.

Correct?

If so, the "problem" lies in what the people want. WifS cut it back to a "realistic" number. People complained.

it doesn't "offend" me, but yes you basically hit it on the head

Quote: Originally posted by bighead34 on 5/09/2010well at least we're getting to the heart of the matter now...you and many others don't want it to be realistic...you weren't arguing with me about all the reasons before so much as you were defending the status quo...as i've stated before, that's fine by me, i can't argue with opinion, but i don't share your view...and 6% is the difference between an elite world (most realistic) and the most homer happy season in MLB history...when you do the HBD average (2.6) compared with the last 20 year average (~2.1) the difference is now 24%

It has nothing to do with what I want, it has to do with what is possible. Until owners make the same decisions that MLB owners, GMs and Managers do, realism is impossible. That is what you're not understanding.

If they lower the HR numbers, it is going to skew other numbers (as it did when they lowered them) to unrealistic numbers. They've yet to address SB issues or the consistency of the top SPs in terms of production and career ERAs (which you want to make even worse by lowering the HR numbers further). They cannot just change HRs...everything is related. Every time they change something in the game, it affects what they meant to change, but also has side effects that are not intended. It has happened every time they've made a change. That is another reason why there is no way to do what you want.

I am all for making the game as realistic as possible. The difference between you and me is that I understand that there are limitations to how realistic it can be due to programming issues and owner choice issues.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by Crump123 on 5/09/2010People seem to think engine changes are the only answer, the real way to get the numbers down to a realistic levels is to modify the players generated, generate fewer players with 80-100 power and the HR rates would become more realistic, whilst also reducing the number of 50+ HR seasons, which also seems to be peoples 2nd favourite issue.

Sometimes the best solution is not the quick fix.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

Mordecai will top out with its leading HR guy at around 50-55 HRs. I'm OK with that.

Unfortunately, we're also going to have about 25 guys hitting between 40-50 HRs. THAT, I wish was cut back. Its too high.

Quote: Originally posted by smoelheim on 5/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by Crump123 on 5/09/2010People seem to think engine changes are the only answer, the real way to get the numbers down to a realistic levels is to modify the players generated, generate fewer players with 80-100 power and the HR rates would become more realistic, whilst also reducing the number of 50+ HR seasons, which also seems to be peoples 2nd favourite issue.
Sometimes the best solution is not the quick fix.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

Mordecai will top out with its leading HR guy at around 50-55 HRs. I'm OK with that.

Unfortunately, we're also going to have about 25 guys hitting between 40-50 HRs. THAT, I wish was cut back. Its too high.

Correct. People are playing marginal players with 80+ power over more well rounded guys with less power. We have a similar situation in most of my worlds. The leaders are putting up acceptable numbers, but the number of guys over 40 is much higher than MLB. Is that because too many 80+ power guys exist or because owners are choosing to play too many of them? Probably some combination of the two. It's one of many factors.

Power is the most predictable offensive rating in the game. When people don't understand the other ratings, they lean towards the one that they can understand and clearly see the results from.

Over the last 3 seasons MLB has had an average of about 30 players hitting 30+HR in a season. I would be very surprised if most HBD worlds were not close to being (or surpassing) double that average.

Quote: Originally posted by hartjh14 on 5/09/2010Power is the most predictable offensive rating in the game. When people don't understand the other ratings, they lean towards the one that they can understand and clearly see the results from.

You realize that's an argument in favor of nerfing Power, right?

Quote: Originally posted by antonsirius on 5/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by hartjh14 on 5/09/2010Power is the most predictable offensive rating in the game. When people don't understand the other ratings, they lean towards the one that they can understand and clearly see the results from.

You realize that's an argument in favor of nerfing Power, right?

No, it's not. It's why users CHOOSE players with ratings that create the appearance of a power issue where there isn't one.

If Power is more predictable than other hitting ratings -- your words, not mine -- then it needs to be brought in line with the other ratings.

Because it's more predictable?

Couldn't you say stamina is predictable?

Quote: Originally posted by antonsirius on 5/09/2010If Power is more predictable than other hitting ratings -- your words, not mine -- then it needs to be brought in line with the other ratings.

Predictable means people know what to expect. 3/4 of the people have no idea how the other ratings work exactly or how they work together, but high power guys will hit HRs. It IS in line with the other ratings, it's just used more.

Warning Track is currently in the playoffs, league leader finished with 58 homers. 4 players with 50 or more, 25 with 40+. Seems pretty realistic to me.