Analysis of an opposite field home run
-
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.
I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.
The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.
I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.
In one of their updates/patch-note drops this year, they did specify something about pitch type and location being a big factor in hit result.
If you look at this example specifically, you had Chapman pitching. He throws very hard so it's not out of the question that your opponent could have been late. I guess you would have the context for where their bat speed was before that pitch. But if your opponent was swinging late, then a change-up on the outer half would have sped their bat up considerably and with a hitter like Arenado, a good swing in that instance would (hopefully) produce a hit and most likely an XBH.
-
@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.
I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.
The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.
I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.
In one of their updates/patch-note drops this year, they did specify something about pitch type and location being a big factor in hit result.
If you look at this example specifically, you had Chapman pitching. He throws very hard so it's not out of the question that your opponent could have been late. I guess you would have the context for where their bat speed was before that pitch. But if your opponent was swinging late, then a change-up on the outer half would have sped their bat up considerably and with a hitter like Arenado, a good swing in that instance would (hopefully) produce a hit and most likely an XBH.
He was early swinging most of the game, I started Darvish and he was cruising with a 5-1 lead until the previous inning, when it got out of hand and ended up tied at 5-5. I pulled Darvish for a PH and brought in Chapman to face Griffey, Arenado and Soto. He eventually struck out with Griffey on a slider breaking down and away. That was the first pitch of the next AB to Arenado, I was looking to throw the change up down and away and hopefully steal a strike or induce a rollover. My input wasn’t great, releasing the ball early, which left it higher than intended and Arenado promptly dumped it out.
-
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.
I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.
The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.
I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.
In one of their updates/patch-note drops this year, they did specify something about pitch type and location being a big factor in hit result.
If you look at this example specifically, you had Chapman pitching. He throws very hard so it's not out of the question that your opponent could have been late. I guess you would have the context for where their bat speed was before that pitch. But if your opponent was swinging late, then a change-up on the outer half would have sped their bat up considerably and with a hitter like Arenado, a good swing in that instance would (hopefully) produce a hit and most likely an XBH.
He was early swinging most of the game, I started Darvish and he was cruising with a 5-1 lead until the previous inning, when it got out of hand and ended up tied at 5-5. I pulled Darvish for a PH and brought in Chapman to face Griffey, Arenado and Soto. He eventually struck out with Griffey on a slider breaking down and away. That was the first pitch of the next AB to Arenado, I was looking to throw the change up down and away and hopefully steal a strike or induce a rollover. My input wasn’t great, releasing the ball early, which left it higher than intended and Arenado promptly dumped it out.
I find these discussions fascinating because we don't know how the game actually works.
If your input wasn't optimal, which obviously left the pitch up, then whatever that factored into the outcome was surely buoyed by their timing on the swing. I guess we could try to go deep in analyzing Darvish's speeds versus Chapman but a breakdown of each and every swing wouldn't amount to much.
It's also possible that your opponent simply ran into one. If you missed your input and the pitch was left in a hittable position, even someone struggling with timing all game could pop one out at a moment's notice.
-
I hate the PCI of 9 rating but I thought he put a good swing on the ball. Outer half of the plate, hit it slightly on the late side of good. I had no problem with it until I saw the “9”. Like @mitchhammond24 said, I’ve had what it seemed like perfectly placed PCI’s that went nowhere and PCI’s that didn’t even touch the ball hit out for a tank. Who knows?
-
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.
I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.
The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.
I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.
You're right, the "9" isn't good, but like I mentioned I don't trust any of the stuff because I've seen my PCI location be perfect and not get a 15, so either what I see in game is wrong or what I see in the detailed analysis is wrong. Either way, the biggest issue is a lack of clarity from the devs on what things we're seeing really mean.
That brings up the same point about the in game batter analysis. What does good, late, perfect, etc., really mean? Is it based on the location of the pitch, type of pitch (fastball/curve/slider), which would take into account the break and speed of the pitch, or is it all of the above? IRL if I'm trying to go oppo on a pitch over the middle or outside I'm wanting to be a little late. You can still drive the ball well if you're strong enough and even if you're not, you can still slap a ball that splits defenders, finds a gap, or slices into foul territory for extra bases. In the same way, you can definitely be a little early to pull a ball over the middle of the plate and probably should be a little early.
These are the things this game misses with our current hitting engine we're given. We simply are told the best result says "perfect" and from there it's a crazy drop off into the unknown realm of "good". There has to be more variance to the analysis and more hit variety to account for that variance. Essentially we have this beautiful, high level game, that is playing more like Ken Griffey Jr. baseball on the SNES with all the randomness we get. Either make input matter or remove features like analog pitching and zone hitting that shows the users great input not counting. Just leave it with directional hitting and pulse pitching. At least then we actually KNOW there is randomness to my input based off the virtual players' ratings.
Sorry, that was so long.
-
@Hikes83 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
I hate the PCI of 9 rating but I thought he put a good swing on the ball. Outer half of the plate, hit it slightly on the late side of good. I had no problem with it until I saw the “9”. Like @mitchhammond32 said, I’m had what it seemed like perfectly placed PCI’s that went nowhere and PCI’s that didn’t even touch the ball hit out for a tank. Who knows?
Not me! I’m not ragging on the game or bitching about the home run, it was inconsequential in the bigger picture as I ultimately lost 11-5. I’m trying to understand what is going on when we play the game and part of that is listening to other opinions, even those that may differ from my own.
-
I'm with you! I'd just like to have a clear explanation of what I should actually be trying to do so I can actually get better.
-
Well the way I see it, if the pitch is inside/outside, you get rewarded swinging early/late respectively.
The opposite is also true where you get penalized for swinging late/early on inside/outside respectively.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not always the case, I’ve seen plenty of early/rolled over HR’s pulled to the batters side by an outside slider. Those [censored] me off to no end but it doesn’t happen consistently so I shake my head in disgust and move on
-
@theu715 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
I'm with you! I'd just like to have a clear explanation of what I should actually be trying to do so I can actually get better.
Hmm, I found and read the in game handbook. It did offer more insight into the various features at work in the game, but a lot of things are still not clearly explained in detail, or are deliberately ambiguous in their description.
Some real gems in there though, if you’ve not had the chance to skim it. For example, did you know that “pitching accuracy is 2 steps more accurate in rookie and 1 step less accurate in legend, where 1 step is the difference between the most accurate pitcher and the average pitcher.” No? Well what the f-, huh? It’s all in the strategy guide!
“Perfect timing is slightly early for pitches down the middle, early for pitches inside and slightly late for pitches on the outside.”
There’s that answer then.
“As always, swing timing affects your final PCI location, with late + inside or early + outside having an even greater effect”
Right, well that doesn’t define the effect, but it tells us the game is factoring it in some major way. Which it seems had a direct influence on the Arenado homer on the outside half of the plate.
“97% of perfect contact will be fair, with the other 3% being just barely foul, due to wind, ball spin or the stadium (foul pole distance)”
That makes no sense really. Particularly when also shown perfect timing.
-
“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”
-
What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?
-
Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?
This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.
-
-
That ball was almost behind him, should've been a single/double down the line.
-
That is interesting. It does though make me lean to my thinking of what is the point of allowing so much user input for control, but still taking it away behind the scenes? Why not just make it matter fully and factor in the ratings to account for exit velo? If they want the game to be more sim with player ratings factoring in so much, just go back to a timing based system with the ability to influence a ball in the air or on the ground, ex. directional or analog swinging. For pitching just use something like pulse pitching where even if I get the ball really close to the release point there's still a bit of randomness to where it can go.
-
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”
-
What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?
-
Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?
This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.
I would assume the "Jammed penalty" is simply a reduction in your chances for a positive outcome on a result that reads "jammed." I don't think it's something that carries over. Or if it does, I would assume the more "jammed" results you end up with the less likely you are able to get hits with that result.
-
-
@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”
-
What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?
-
Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?
This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.
I would assume the "Jammed penalty" is simply a reduction in your chances for a positive outcome on a result that reads "jammed." I don't think it's something that carries over. Or if it does, I would assume the more "jammed" results you end up with the less likely you are able to get hits with that result.
If it does carry over, if - That’s where the problems start for me. You can’t have hidden cumulative penalties that you don’t know you’re racking up and don’t know how to get rid of, or if they expire. That’s then into the realms of nerfing good swings because the game says “I don’t think you’ve taken enough pitches, or you’ve been jammed too often.” That would indeed be the much maligned “RNG trumping user input” we hear so often with no proof.
-
-
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”
-
What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?
-
Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?
This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.
I would assume the "Jammed penalty" is simply a reduction in your chances for a positive outcome on a result that reads "jammed." I don't think it's something that carries over. Or if it does, I would assume the more "jammed" results you end up with the less likely you are able to get hits with that result.
If it does carry over, if - That’s where the problems start for me. You can’t have hidden cumulative penalties that you don’t know you’re racking up and don’t know how to get rid of, or if they expire. That’s then into the realms of nerfing good swings because the game says “I don’t think you’ve taken enough pitches, or you’ve been jammed too often.” That would indeed be the much maligned “RNG trumping user input” we hear so often with no proof.
Agreed 100%. The game does a better job confusing the player than helping them potentially improve. I've had to dumb myself down so much to continue playing the game without quitting again and accepting that the game is what it is. I remember seeing that big patch they put out that added the new swing feedback info and laughed because I don't think it made anything clearer - I think it just added more variables that lead to confusion.
-
-
I’ve been trying to apply the strategies as laid out in the handbook since the discussion in this thread a couple of days ago, but I continually run into nonsensical situations that I can’t make head or tail of. Here’s another quick breakdown of a single by Mike Trout which is just bizarre, by all accounts.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OVsXUh5juxI
First of all, the timing of the swing would appear to be roughly good based on the information supplied in the handbook, however, the game is quite insistent on all available feedback that I was early. In addition, the bat plane graphic shows I was late, which doesn’t make sense either and if we factor in the hitters tendencies, Trout is an extreme pull hitter, which would also make this swing more inclined to the later side of good, in my opinion.
While the batted ball outcome is roughly what you’d expect, in terms of learning by reading the available information, you’d believe you did everything wrong. Swinging at a ball out of the zone with early timing and succeeding. It appears that despite trying to play to the strategies suggested by the game, the many facets which are broken, not syncing correctly due to bad connections and not adhering to the realistic ball physics are making that difficult. If feedback makes no sense, you might as well just remove it completely.
-
Looks like the ball never touched the bat obviously so not sure what caused the ball to get launched in the opposite direction at such a high velocity. Perhaps Arenado was using a corked bat of sorts just with an IED which exploded seconds before contact which would explain why the ball ended up over the opposite field fence...
But seriously it sure looks like he was early/very early on the swing and usually those types of swings don’t end up as opposite field bombs
-
In all honesty, when I saw it in real time, the swing looked good, I was even surprised it wasn’t hit harder. The overhead view pretty much confirmed what I saw in real time but the feedback given looks incredibly off.
Maybe just me?
-
@Hikes83 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:
In all honesty, when I saw it in real time, the swing looked good, I was even surprised it wasn’t hit harder. The overhead view pretty much confirmed what I saw in real time but the feedback given looks incredibly off.
Maybe just me?
Yeah, with this second example showing the base hit by MVP Trout, everything looks natural with the swing and also the batted ball outcome as you said. I’ve been trying to account for the information given in the handbook and use that alongside the feedback to make sense of what’s happening. Here, the feedback given is absolutely atrocious on all fronts though, both in the pause menu batter analysis and in game HUD.
-
A admin locked this topic on
