I’m convinced that feedback means nothing
-
Your point is well taken. It’s supposed to be all about fun, and good that you’re still enjoying the game.
I am too, in my own way, although I had to take a break from the game for most of 22.
I don’t disagree with you though.
To keep on topic though, I’d say the feedback du jour is the 11-12 pci hits. Any time something questionable happens in game, if I look at pci feedback, it’s usually an 11.
My last game just now, an event, I was facing a guy using Chris Sale. He refused to throw strikes at all so after the first inning, I started taking pitches. He refused to give in and just kept throwing sliders as far down and in (or down and away) as he could.
My first two guys walked, then, with Edgar Martinez hitting, I put my pci as far inside and down as it would go, literally holding the stick at its limit. Sure enough, he threw a slider there and it left the park down the line for a three run bomb. Pci score? 11.
Sim or arcade?
-
If you have good swings at a very constant rate you reduce the impact of the times you get screwed.
If you take more good swings than your opponent the odds of winning increase the higher amount of good swings made than your opponent.
Pretty obvious stuff if you’ve played this game enough.
-
This is true, in the long term. In the short term, like over the course of one game, my experience unfortunately is that it is not. I’m sure we’ve all lost games where we’ve had more good swings than our opponents.
This is my biggest beef with the gameplay.
-
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
This is true, in the long term. In the short term, like over the course of one game, my experience unfortunately is that it is not. I’m sure we’ve all lost games where we’ve had more good swings than our opponents.
This is my biggest beef with the gameplay.no, what they said is absolutely true in the short run. all they said is that it gives you higher odds of winning, which it does. you can still lose with better winning odds than your opponent.
-
@MAM8A-245300_XBL said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
This is true, in the long term. In the short term, like over the course of one game, my experience unfortunately is that it is not. I’m sure we’ve all lost games where we’ve had more good swings than our opponents.
This is my biggest beef with the gameplay.no, what they said is absolutely true in the short run. all they said is that it gives you higher odds of winning, which it does. you can still lose with better winning odds than your opponent.
So are you saying you’ve never lost a game to a player who had less good swings than you?
I honestly wish this was true.
-
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@MAM8A-245300_XBL said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
This is true, in the long term. In the short term, like over the course of one game, my experience unfortunately is that it is not. I’m sure we’ve all lost games where we’ve had more good swings than our opponents.
This is my biggest beef with the gameplay.no, what they said is absolutely true in the short run. all they said is that it gives you higher odds of winning, which it does. you can still lose with better winning odds than your opponent.
So are you saying you’ve never lost a game to a player who had less good swings than you?
I honestly wish this was true.
no. you are just reading what you want to read rather than seeing what we are trying to say. you can lose a game like that, but the probability of it happening are lower than 50%.
for sake of this example lets say you match someone exactly equal skill. its a 50/50 chance going in who will win. if you square the ball up that game consistently more than your opponent, your win probability will increase. lets just call it 75/25 for the sake of simplicity. there is still a 25% chance you lose based on lucky breaks or timely clutch moments for the opponent. but if you out hit your opponents consistently over a decent sample size, you will win roughly the right number of games as you'd be expected to.
-
Yes, you just proved my point!
“Over a decent sample size” is not the short term. -
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
Yes, you just proved my point!
“Over a decent sample size” is not the short term.No, you missed mine. You have a better chance at winning any given game by squaring the ball up more than your opponent. That does not mean you will win. Yes in the long run your results will likely regress to your expected win percentage, but that's because you will win the individual games you make better contact than your opponent a large majority of the time, but not always. There will be (fewer) times when you lose with a 75% expected win, but you'd expect that 1 out of every 4 times.
-
@halfbutt_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
That’s a perfect example of why it’s hard to get better. They introduced ppp because of all the complaints in the community about “gravity balls” or “forced meatballs”.
Then they introduced PAR because the community complained that pinpoint was OP.
Full circle. Nobody knows when their pitch might go right down the middle, or why.
Working as intended.
if you get a 100% on timing the ball will go within the par. if you are not 100% on the timing it changes the release point which adjusts the aim point and the par around it
ppl don't know this because they only see the original aim point, they don't see the new one if they aren't 100%.
that is how pitches can go down the middle even on good releases. -
I wish that was the case. So I guess there are two points being discussed here. 1) does more good swings=more likely to win the game (I say no in the short term, yes over time, you disagree)
- does the feedback really give us an accurate picture of what is a good swing? I say no, because you can have a bad pci placement home run and it could be shown as an 11.
-
@DeleteyourTTVBTW_MLBTS said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@TheHungryHole said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@SuntLacrimae50_MLBTS said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
@CCARR77_PSN said in I’m convinced that feedback means nothing:
This is the only game I know of that you can't get better by practicing.
You can't work on hitting because it's a different outcome even if the input, timing and contact is the same.
How did I just go opposite field when I swung so early that it was in the yellow on the feedback?
That's a ridiculous statement.
Two things can be true at the same time. I haven't played a game of ranked in months. I'd get smoked if I played someone on HOF. But I could (I won't) go take BP for a night on Legend and then be much better. So yes, you can get better.
AND the rng in the game can still exist.
I can such and strike out a lot, or get better and make contact a lot. Then when I make contact, the rng does its thing.
But the more I make contact, the greater my chances of winning.
100% mate
Maybe like 50%
The homeruns from non pci swings still count, as do the perfects that go nowhere. Taking months off and needing a couple hours of BP isn’t “practice” or “getting better” that’s just warming up. When’s the last time you saw a good player grinding BP for hours and hours? When they take 3 months off…that’s it. You’d be better by now if you could get better. It’s been half a decade, it hasn’t happened.
you didn't understand what i said - i said i agree with you 100%
-
A admin locked this topic on
