Posted by MikeT23 on 12/22/2010 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Do you think we should know everything about how the game works?

No.  Never.

That takes the fun out of it.

We're not playing against the CPU in Madden.

So would realizing the fact that nothing could be done differently.

If you offered less than a max contract.... same result. And you couldn't offer anything more because it is a "max" contract. It isn't like this changed the scenario. 

Lets say your right and WIS removed it and is now planning a David Baldacci esque cover up...... would you have not offered a Max Contract? If your answer is no, your an idiot and if your answer is yes than you have no arguement.

Furthermore, looking a few posts back, you were discussing ways to not give a "max" deal. For that reason, I am skeptical that you even gave a max deal. If you didn't offer a no trade clause or a player option there were no tiebreakers because there was no tie.

There should be some things that we just don't know when it comes to FA signings, and why players sign with who they sign with.  In real life, players sometimes sign questionable deals.  Everybody thought Ivan Rodriguez was nuts when he signed with the Tigers in 2004 when the Tigers lost 119 games the season before.

Timf's point isn't that he's upset he lost the player, but that he feels the way the game works was changed without notice.  He was told one thing, and then it was changed without telling him.  In the future, I don't want to find out the hard way that, I don't know, I don't get a Type D comp pick when a draft pick doesn't sign with me, even though I offered him demands...only to find out I had to offer all his demands afterwords as well.  I know that's an odd example, but his point remains (What else is WifS not telling us?)....if, in fact, winning percentage was ever a factor in the first place.

At the risk of repeating Mike . . . why do you feel that you have the right to know how the game engine makes decisions?

I dont have the right to know.  Just don't lie to me.

 

Edit: I worded this wrong.  It's one thing to not tell us how free agents make decisions.  It's another to explain the process in depth, and then change it, explain how you changed it, and then leave a key part out of it. 

Would you be OK with my Type D pick scenario?

You do know that compensation changed in mid-season for a lot of owners, right?

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/22/2010 12:43:00 PM (view original):
Would you be OK with my Type D pick scenario?

Type A/B/D rules are based a very clearly defined process in MLB that is emulated in HBD.  WIS is not going to indiscriminately change the FA comp process in HBD to deviate from MLB.

Free agent signings are not.  There are no hard and fast rules in place in MLB to determine who a FA should sign with.  WIS has the right to emulate a clearly subjective process in any manner that they see fit within the HBD engine.

The funny thing is: if WIS never provided any more detail other than "we have coded some tiebreaker rules in the event of identical offers that we will not divulge", this thread would not even exist.

To me, this is clearly an example of why, sometimes, providing too much information about how something works can come back to bite you in the ***.

"The funny thing is: if WIS never provided any more detail other than "we have coded some tiebreaker rules in the event of identical offers that we will not divulge", this thread would not even exist."  -  this would have been fine, and probably how they should have gone about free agency. 

I know the compensation example isn't the best one, I'm just trying to make the point that the sim shouldn't explicitly describe how a process works, and have it be incorrect.  And this is the point tim is trying to make, which people seem to be missing.

They gave us information, likely too much, and worded it without any regard to clarity (which was probably intentional in order to muddy the waters).

People read it, and thought they knew how it worked.

Those people then took their expectations into FA and it didn't turn out how they expected.

Then the whining started.

And there still is no evidence that the "rule" that was supposedly removed from the tiebreaker was actually removed, as the orignal poster has not provided any information about the signing team's coaches or ballparks as compared to his coaches and ballpark.

Until we see that, one can only assume that the coach and ballpark factors may have simply outweighed the "previous season record" factor.

They gave too much information.  They basically spelled out how free agency worked.  Only it was wrong.  And this is the point...should we question everything they say? (What Else Is WiS Not Telling Us?)

Personally, I don't think it's a huge deal, because I think the answer to the question is "nothing you need to know" but the point remains.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/22/2010 2:06:00 PM (view original):
And there still is no evidence that the "rule" that was supposedly removed from the tiebreaker was actually removed, as the orignal poster has not provided any information about the signing team's coaches or ballparks as compared to his coaches and ballpark.

Until we see that, one can only assume that the coach and ballpark factors may have simply outweighed the "previous season record" factor.

fair point

I'd like them to post all the code for us to read.

That would clear any further misconceptions up nicely.

Thanks in advance!