Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
ok cool man. Luck never happens in sports you got it figured out.
Also you can’t compare what happens in MLB to ranked. UNLESS you can show me a game that is filled with HOF in their prime. But what do i know. I am not smart enough to agree or have a batting average high enough to be worthy. Thank you for even gracing me and the forum with your presence....I guess
Yes... luck doesn't decide sporting outcomes very frequently at all - and even if it does so, it is between sides that perform at the same level... Not where one side is crushing the other.
The show has HoF hitters and HoF pitchers, what's your point? If it was only live series teams thered be less luck involved? Smh.
Bill Buckner, Chanel Sonnen, Dennis Exkersley, the Russian Hockey team, the 96 Rockets, Jessica Andrade, 2001 Diamondbacks might view luck a bit different. But it’s cool...no luck in sports. Not even sure why people say “Good luck” before a game
How can one side be crushing if they aren’t winning. Don’t tell me my small .267 mind may not be able to comprehend your genius
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
What determines it?
You do know there is an objective hit analysis built into the game right? The player that is significantly outplaying his opponent should always win. I cannot make this any simpler.
Player input and card ratings should set the range of possibilities.
An objective hit analysis would not necessarily account for clutch or RISP or even power. But it’s ok. I am not smart enough for your simple explanation. I will just accept that you know it all. See that is how group thinks work. This an me repeating what you said a without understanding how meaningless or at best flawed it is
No, this is a fundamental disagreement we have.
Player ratings should only determine how difficult it is to get perfect input and what is the exit velocity after a perfect input. That's it. A perfectly squared ball should be hit at the optimal launch angle for that specific player. If this makes power hitters more usable than contact hitters, so be it. But you achieve balance with giving contact hitters bigger PCIs.
So to be clear are you looking for a baseball sim game or something else?
-
You're saying Sonnen got unlucky because he got caught in a triangle? No, he tried to lay and pray after he gassed in the fifth and got caught... That wasn't luck.
I dont know who Jessica Andrade is but the miracle on ice? Yeah the team that performed better that day won... You think that was luck?
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
What determines it?
You do know there is an objective hit analysis built into the game right? The player that is significantly outplaying his opponent should always win. I cannot make this any simpler.
Player input and card ratings should set the range of possibilities.
An objective hit analysis would not necessarily account for clutch or RISP or even power. But it’s ok. I am not smart enough for your simple explanation. I will just accept that you know it all. See that is how group thinks work. This an me repeating what you said a without understanding how meaningless or at best flawed it is
No, this is a fundamental disagreement we have.
Player ratings should only determine how difficult it is to get perfect input and what is the exit velocity after a perfect input. That's it. A perfectly squared ball should be hit at the optimal launch angle for that specific player. If this makes power hitters more usable than contact hitters, so be it. But you achieve balance with giving contact hitters bigger PCIs.
So to be clear are you looking for a baseball sim game or something else?
I'm looking for a competitive baseball game where input rules, not luck.
-
Yes, very unlucky. Unless you think it was Silva tremendous set up.
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Yes, very unlucky. Unless you think it was Silva tremendous set up.
No dude he made a mistake, got caught and lost. I dont think Chael himself would call it getting unlucky lol.
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:?
I'm looking for a competitive baseball game where input rules, not luck.
Ok we are just looking for different things. I don’t want Gallo playing like Ted Williams. I like a baseball sim balancing user input with card stats
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:?
I'm looking for a competitive baseball game where input rules, not luck.
Ok we are just looking for different things. I don’t want Gallo playing like Ted Williams. I like a baseball sim balancing user input with card stats
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Yes, very unlucky. Unless you think it was Silva tremendous set up.
No dude he made a mistake, got caught and lost. I dont think Chael himself would call it getting unlucky lol.
Ok... difference of opinion I guess. I think Anderson was very lucky to capitalize on a hawks brain fart. But I can tell you like the concept that you are in control and everything you have is solely a function of you. But the larger point is by any stat a chael was winning and based off of what you said he earned victory
I am not going to waste the time arguing or insulting you. It wouldn’t matter because you only listen to opinions you value aka agree with you. Plus I think some of this revolves around preference. I think I would hate your ideal game and I know U would hate my ideal game.
-
MMA and boxing are sports where a single mistake can cost everything - that is very rarely the case with MLB unless you have something like two perfect games going into the 9th.
What it wasn't, is luck
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
The problem is that if Rebels Gallo can hit like Williams why the hell should anyone bother getting Williams. Also hitting in real life is not easy. There are aspects the game can’t aim properly because it’s a video game. If Rebels Gallo hits homers every AB it undermines the sim aspect of the game.
If that’s the case play with a bunch of nameless players and no stats. Let everyone be Williams.
But once agin that is preference
-
@Vipersneak said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Sorry to burst your arrogance bubble.
The guy made a very objective and balanced post and this is your reply?
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
The problem is that if Rebels Gallo can hit like Williams why the hell should anyone bother getting Williams. Also hitting in real life is not easy. There are aspects the game can’t aim properly because it’s a video game. If Rebels Gallo hits homers every AB it undermines the sim aspect of the game.
If that’s the case play with a bunch of nameless players and no stats. Let everyone be Williams.
But once agin that is preference
There would be a point, go look at Rebels and CB5s lineups in 15 and 16. They had all the best cards. Why? Because in their hands they were even more effective.
Rebels Gallo might outperform my Williams but his Williams would do even better. That's how it should work.
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
MMA and boxing are sports where a single mistake can cost everything - that is very rarely the case with MLB unless you have something like two perfect games going into the 9th.
What it wasn't, is luck
eckersley slider to Gibson cost everythingEspecially in striking there is an aspect of luck. Zig instead of zag is luck. Yes your opponent can set you up to sit instead of sat but sometimes it is a flip of the coin. I have definitely in my life rocked someone because of a good guess
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
MMA and boxing are sports where a single mistake can cost everything - that is very rarely the case with MLB unless you have something like two perfect games going into the 9th.
What it wasn't, is luck
eckersley slider to Gibson cost everything
Especially in striking there is an aspect of luck. Zig instead of zag is luck. Yes your opponent can set you up to sit instead of sat but sometimes it is a flip of the coin. I have definitely in my life rocked someone because of a good guess
Yes, Eckersley hung his slider and it got blasted. How did they get there though? You had two teams performing very evenly up to that point.
I also wouldn't call a puncher's chance simple luck. You're either hitting someone where they are or where you think they will be. Unless you're straight up punching with your eyes closed I suppose.
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
This is funny to see people complain about losing a video game. Sometimes those are the breaks. If you have ever played a competitive sport irl you would know that it’s not always being better often if about being timely.l and sometimes a bit of luck. There are so many factors that go into any given win. The best team or athlete in sports doesn’t always win. I think of Anderson Silva vs Sonnen or Derek Jeters career. But whatever, some people want to think that some outside force or ent is holding them down...grievance mindset, instead of growth mindset
[censored].
I've competed in several sports at a relatively high tier, freeskiing, badminton, BJJ - in none of those sports does luck play a factor.
You severely exaggerate the influence of luck in baseball as well.
Tigers can beat the Yankees but relatively speaking the skill gap between the two is far from what the skill gap is between your average DS grinder and Rebel. Furthermore, the days in which the Tigers beat the Yankees they either objectively outperform them or play on par with them to leave an opening for any luck to factor in.
Never in baseball do you have a situation where one team is absolutely crushing the ball and loses to a team hopelessly flailing at pitches. In MLB the show that actually occurs.
It's also ridiculous and inane to call a desire for meritocracy a "grievance mindset".
Wow you are really salty about this. I am sorry that your high level badminton
experience does not align with most sports experience. It is very ironic because by any objective measure the Astros are better than the Nats. Matter of fact in baseball it is rare that the consensus best team wins.I am not surprised by your concept of meritocracy as a counter to my grievance mindset. If it were a meritocracy then things like spending tons of money on monitors, internet connections and better cards play a far bigger issue. Are you earning your wins if you are blasting bombs with say Ruth compared to a guy who can’t afford him.
In baseball, over the long term, the better team wins. There are upsets in wild card games, short five game series, etc but it is not nearly so random as you suggest. This is why they play 162 games and playoff series.
At this point of the year, if you’ve played enough ranked games online, you know there is a lot of random outcomes. If you are trying to argue that these outcomes accurately mirror MLB outcomes and are caused by user error (or arrogance?) then you’re in the severe minority.
Good Luck next year.
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
The problem is that if Rebels Gallo can hit like Williams why the hell should anyone bother getting Williams. Also hitting in real life is not easy. There are aspects the game can’t aim properly because it’s a video game. If Rebels Gallo hits homers every AB it undermines the sim aspect of the game.
If that’s the case play with a bunch of nameless players and no stats. Let everyone be Williams.
But once agin that is preference
There would be a point, go look at Rebels and CB5s lineups in 15 and 16. They had all the best cards. Why? Because in their hands they were even more effective.
Rebels Gallo might outperform my Williams but his Williams would do even better. That's how it should work.
I am fine with that. But there should be a ceiling. In fairness I have no idea
How good rebel is, but if he is hitting 600 with Williams and ,500 with Gallo it’s a bit sillySo i guess luck doesn’t exist then. That is your argument
-
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
The problem is that if Rebels Gallo can hit like Williams why the hell should anyone bother getting Williams. Also hitting in real life is not easy. There are aspects the game can’t aim properly because it’s a video game. If Rebels Gallo hits homers every AB it undermines the sim aspect of the game.
If that’s the case play with a bunch of nameless players and no stats. Let everyone be Williams.
But once agin that is preference
There would be a point, go look at Rebels and CB5s lineups in 15 and 16. They had all the best cards. Why? Because in their hands they were even more effective.
Rebels Gallo might outperform my Williams but his Williams would do even better. That's how it should work.
I am fine with that. But there should be a ceiling. In fairness I have no idea
How good rebel is, but if he is hitting 600 with Williams and ,500 with Gallo it’s a bit sillySo i guess luck doesn’t exist then. That is your argument
Clearly that's not my argument. Clearly you love arguing strawmen.
But when it comes to competitive videogames luck should play a very minor role. Broadly speaking it should only ever determine the winner between two players performing on the same level. It should never carry an objectively undeserving player to a victory.
And what ceiling? If you're talking about an artificial ceiling on batting average then I could never agree with you. Like I said, if the devs believe that some players have too high of a batting average then they should make hitting more difficult across the board.
-
@halfbutt said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
This is funny to see people complain about losing a video game. Sometimes those are the breaks. If you have ever played a competitive sport irl you would know that it’s not always being better often if about being timely.l and sometimes a bit of luck. There are so many factors that go into any given win. The best team or athlete in sports doesn’t always win. I think of Anderson Silva vs Sonnen or Derek Jeters career. But whatever, some people want to think that some outside force or ent is holding them down...grievance mindset, instead of growth mindset
[censored].
I've competed in several sports at a relatively high tier, freeskiing, badminton, BJJ - in none of those sports does luck play a factor.
You severely exaggerate the influence of luck in baseball as well.
Tigers can beat the Yankees but relatively speaking the skill gap between the two is far from what the skill gap is between your average DS grinder and Rebel. Furthermore, the days in which the Tigers beat the Yankees they either objectively outperform them or play on par with them to leave an opening for any luck to factor in.
Never in baseball do you have a situation where one team is absolutely crushing the ball and loses to a team hopelessly flailing at pitches. In MLB the show that actually occurs.
It's also ridiculous and inane to call a desire for meritocracy a "grievance mindset".
Wow you are really salty about this. I am sorry that your high level badminton
experience does not align with most sports experience. It is very ironic because by any objective measure the Astros are better than the Nats. Matter of fact in baseball it is rare that the consensus best team wins.I am not surprised by your concept of meritocracy as a counter to my grievance mindset. If it were a meritocracy then things like spending tons of money on monitors, internet connections and better cards play a far bigger issue. Are you earning your wins if you are blasting bombs with say Ruth compared to a guy who can’t afford him.
In baseball, over the long term, the better team wins. There are upsets in wild card games, short five game series, etc but it is not nearly so random as you suggest. This is why they play 162 games and playoff series.
At this point of the year, if you’ve played enough ranked games online, you know there is a lot of random outcomes. If you are trying to argue that these outcomes accurately mirror MLB outcomes and are caused by user error (or arrogance?) then you’re in the severe minority.
Good Luck next year.
I am actually agreeing with you. I am not saying everything is random at all. If it were random the everyone would have the same record and stats. I am saying just like you said their are upsets and things happen.
I am not saying it perfectly mirrors MLB because that is near impossible and because it’s a video game. I am saying that it does a decent job at it.
-
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@Maverick31762 said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
@SefarR said in Hate to say it but it feels like 50-50 games are decided by the computer:
Imagine how broken that ideal is though. You dont want Gallo to ever hit better than Williams, regardless of who is using that card... You dont seem to understand how much better Rebel is over your average player. If you dont want Rebels Gallo to hit better than the average players Williams, then what you get is a meaningless CPU simulation where we watch the CPU play itself.
The problem is that if Rebels Gallo can hit like Williams why the hell should anyone bother getting Williams. Also hitting in real life is not easy. There are aspects the game can’t aim properly because it’s a video game. If Rebels Gallo hits homers every AB it undermines the sim aspect of the game.
If that’s the case play with a bunch of nameless players and no stats. Let everyone be Williams.
But once agin that is preference
There would be a point, go look at Rebels and CB5s lineups in 15 and 16. They had all the best cards. Why? Because in their hands they were even more effective.
Rebels Gallo might outperform my Williams but his Williams would do even better. That's how it should work.
I am fine with that. But there should be a ceiling. In fairness I have no idea
How good rebel is, but if he is hitting 600 with Williams and ,500 with Gallo it’s a bit sillySo i guess luck doesn’t exist then. That is your argument
Clearly that's not my argument. Clearly you love arguing strawmen.
But when it comes to competitive videogames luck should play a very minor role. Broadly speaking it should only ever determine the winner between two players performing on the same level. It should never carry an objectively undeserving player to a victory.
Ok, so what percent should it play. How many points higher should Rebels winning percentage be? That would probably be the % points difference you would want luck to play. Or how much higher should his batting average be.
Once again how do you define on undeserving. If you get 2 hits and a walk and then I get a hard liner out after you work the count and get a double play. Your avg is .500 and you only hit one ball poorly. If I then strikeout 2x and then hit a homer. How is that undeserving? The answer to that is subjective
