The high sinker.
-
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
-
-
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
What division in your opinion is good?
-
-
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
What division in your opinion is good?
Irrelevant as I don't think any division is good, if you make world series with a .500 record are you good? no, if it takes you 85 games to get to world series is that something that should be considered good? no.
If you're arguing for more sim and less user input and you have a record in the .500s hitting in the .250s it's very clear why you feel that way and no it has nothing to do with "realism"
-
-
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
What division in your opinion is good?
Irrelevant as I don't think any division is good, if you make world series with a .500 record are you good? no, if it takes you 85 games to get to world series is that something that should be considered good? no.
If you're arguing for more sim and less user input and you have a record in the .500s hitting in the .250s it's very clear why you feel that way and no it has nothing to do with "realism"
Got it. Nobody’s opinion matters unless they are in the top 1% of players or their thoughts align with yours. I think I understand you now. Good day sir.
-
-
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
What division in your opinion is good?
Irrelevant as I don't think any division is good, if you make world series with a .500 record are you good? no, if it takes you 85 games to get to world series is that something that should be considered good? no.
If you're arguing for more sim and less user input and you have a record in the .500s hitting in the .250s it's very clear why you feel that way and no it has nothing to do with "realism"
Got it. Nobody’s opinion matters unless they are in the top 1% of players or their thoughts align with yours. I think I understand you now. Good day sir.
Never said that at all, just said your opinion is based on you wanting to compete without actually having to get better, didn't say your opinion mattered more or less because of it.
-
-
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I believe you are referencing players that had poor plate discipline. Yes, it is possible to be more patient than that player was in real life, but for the game to be realistic there is no way you can have him hit for averages that he never came close to achieving in real life. If you don’t keep it realistic, than essentially every card is the same.
So Babe Ruth, should always be around .342 and 46 hrs because that was him in reality even though the real game completely changed since 1935. Makes sense.
This I agree with you becomes difficult because babe Ruth never faced today’s competition and vice versa. Some argue he wouldn’t even be a major league player into today’s game. If your going to have today’s players playing against players of the past, then you can do it one of two ways. Reference the numbers they put up back in their careers, or come up with a formula that you thought would accurately represent him into today’s game. I don’t think the latter is fair for players of the past bc they did not have the knowledge we do today about training.
So, we don't know what Babe Ruth would hit today right? So if we hit .400 with him in this game, what basis of comparison are you using to say that is not realistic?
We can't use his real life stats, because those are from a completely different era right?
I gave two options, using his stats he put up as a basis I think is a good idea bc he actually did that. Whatever formula we came up with to determine what he would do today, still didn’t really happen.
I used him as an example, but this is the case in the entire DD H2H world. Players from all different eras playing against each other, many of whom never faced each other.
So, how can we say whatever stats we get with them are "unrealistic" when there are no factual basis of comparisons?
You have to go off the numbers they actually put up.
Why? Not one of them had someone in their mind telling them what to do (except maybe Yogi Berra). They were not marionnettes subject to a user's whims.
If you enforce that their virtual stats must closely mirror their RL stats, then again I ask, what point is there in having a user input at all? It's basically The History Channel.
We discussed this already. Go back and read about decision making by the user.
Lol, you're "decision making" argument doesn't allow for the user to be a better decision maker and therefore achieve better results. Don't you see the contradiction?
I will spell it out:
-
If I make better decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .400 with him.
-
if I make worse decisions with Tony Gwynn, I should be able to hit .180 with him.
Both of these scenarios are completely dependent on my skill and are equally possible.
We had this discussion already. The decision making is what separates the users.
Yes, but according to you, that separation can only be so far, which doesn't make sense.
Yes, otherwise there would be no difference in cards (players).
But there is difference in cards, better card ratings = easier to produce better input = better results.
Correct, don't worry about it though, you're right he's wrong, he just wants to be able to compete without having to actually have skill.
I would never say I had skill at baseball bc I was good or bad at timing a meter in a video game.
You’re not good at the video game, because of that others shouldn’t be allowed to be good at the video game, we understand, participation trophies for everyone.
lol. You completely miss the point, it doesn’t matter how good I am at the game. You act as if my opinion matters more or less depending on my record. For the record though, I think I’m above .500, so I would say I’m right there in the middle of the pack.
When you argue for more simulation and less user input it 100% matters how good you are at the game
I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s be honest now, if I was undefeated you would still have your opinions and I would have mine. You act as if I’m going to have the ability to miraculously change your mind bc my record is better than yours. Good conversations though, you have your thoughts, I have mine.
Nah, people wouldn't look at your asinine point of more sim less user input as the ramblings of an average player wanting to compete more if your record was better...
Lol. Do you have to make WS to have a valid opinion in your mind? Or is the threshold at a lower division? Maybe have to go 12-0 to have a respectable opinions from your point of view?
Nope, but it's very telling when you have an opinion like this and you're not very good.
What division in your opinion is good?
Irrelevant as I don't think any division is good, if you make world series with a .500 record are you good? no, if it takes you 85 games to get to world series is that something that should be considered good? no.
If you're arguing for more sim and less user input and you have a record in the .500s hitting in the .250s it's very clear why you feel that way and no it has nothing to do with "realism"
Got it. Nobody’s opinion matters unless they are in the top 1% of players or their thoughts align with yours. I think I understand you now. Good day sir.
You always go to the extreme when you argue. Why is that? Is it because your point isn't valid unless you stretch what we are saying?
You keep saying we all ONLY want input to matter, and now you are saying we think only the 1% matter.
It's fairly obvious when someone keeps going to the extreme to make their case, that they don't have one at all.
-
-
@TroyF said in The high sinker.:
At the end of the day, the sinker is a POWER pitch. Because of its name, people assume it's only a pitch thrown at the knees. That's not the way it is used in real life at all. The sinker is thrown just like a fastball, all over the strike zone. Up, down, in, out. When Arrieta won the Cy Young award, 48% of his sinkers were waist high or higher.
People talk like the sinker is a change up that needs to be thrown low in the zone to be effective. That isn't the case at all. I'm not saying you should be able to live up in the zone with it if you repeat it over and over, but you shouldn't live anywhere with ANY pitch over and over.
Which wouldn't be a problem IF you could actually see seams and pick up the spin on the ball. With the way the game currently plays, the high sinker looks and acts completely unrealistic and defies physics.
-
I want both. I want input to matter about 50%. I also want the cards to matter. Everyone should play better with Kershaw than they do when they use a common, regardless of skill. However, the better arcade skilled player should be at an advantage if the cards being used are about equal. I find it hard to totally equate baseball skill with hitting a line with a red colored meter. That said, I guess it is the best way to add player input until VR baseball. So, if you are good at hitting that line with a red meter, don't fool yourself into thinking you are skilled at anything but hitting a line with a red meter. The best players should know baseball and have good input.
-
@skepple15 said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@yankblan said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I love competition and head to head. We just have different views on it. For me, I want the players I’m controlling to act like their real life counterparts. If I understand you correctly, no matter who you have on your team, you want to be completely responsible for any outcome. One is realistic gameplay, the other is arcade style gameplay. Both are fine, but cannot exist in the same space.
So a newbie with SS Kershaw should beat a hardcore with LS 83 gold P every time by your logic?
If he chooses the right pitches to throw at the right time and location, then more times than not he should put up a kershaw like performance. User input should be based on your decision making and baseball knowledge of players abilities. Obviously if the user knows nothing about baseball and throws every pitch down the pipe then he should get destroyed.
Wow
Hey, by his logic, I should be really good at this game. Somehow though, I still only hit like .249 this year. Huh.
-
Also, on the comment about two seamers, I mean, correct me if I’m wrong but a sinker IS a two seamer FFS. It’s called a sinker when it is thrown down in the zone to induce ground balls right?
Why not just throw two seamers if you want to throw the dreaded high sinker? That’s what I do.
-
@halfbutt said in The high sinker.:
Also, on the comment about two seamers, I mean, correct me if I’m wrong but a sinker IS a two seamer FFS. It’s called a sinker when it is thrown down in the zone to induce ground balls right?
Why not just throw two seamers if you want to throw the dreaded high sinker? That’s what I do.
A sinker is a version of a two seamer, same grip, but the finish in delivery is different.
Two seamers can run more side-to-side or even a bit up (shuuto), sink (sinker) or do a bit of both. It really depends on the pitcher.
Arrieta's runs more up while Cahill's sinks more, just based off slight differences in how their arm and hand works through the ball.
However in this game, I am not sure they account for the level of detail between the pitchers and different two seamers.
-
So is it a pronation of the hand thing, or a finish/release thing which differentiates the two?
-
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@halfbutt said in The high sinker.:
Also, on the comment about two seamers, I mean, correct me if I’m wrong but a sinker IS a two seamer FFS. It’s called a sinker when it is thrown down in the zone to induce ground balls right?
Why not just throw two seamers if you want to throw the dreaded high sinker? That’s what I do.
A sinker is a version of a two seamer, same grip, but the finish in delivery is different.
Two seamers can run more side-to-side or even a bit up (shuuto), sink (sinker) or do a bit of both. It really depends on the pitcher.
Arrieta's runs more up while Cahill's sinks more, just based off slight differences in how their arm and hand works through the ball.
However in this game, I am not sure they account for the level of detail between the pitchers and different two seamers.
Gravity would like to have a word with you.
-
@halfbutt said in The high sinker.:
So is it a pronation of the hand thing, or a finish/release thing which differentiates the two?
It's release angle and friction of the fingers on the seams, dictated by either arm angle or articulation of the wrist. More often than not, two seamers run and have a slight drop, but they can be extreme in any respect. It all starts with how the pitcher loads and unloads their hips.
-
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I love competition and head to head. We just have different views on it. For me, I want the players I’m controlling to act like their real life counterparts. If I understand you correctly, no matter who you have on your team, you want to be completely responsible for any outcome. One is realistic gameplay, the other is arcade style gameplay. Both are fine, but cannot exist in the same space.
Not necessarily. I think it should be ONLINE about a 85/15 split. 85% user skill and 15% attributes. Or even 90/10
That would not be an accurate representation of the sport of baseball and the players that play. I want realism, you want arcade style.
What you want is. To compete at a higher level then your skill allows.
I want to be as good as guys like Mitch and skepple and pitchingrebel too. So I go into pitching practice, and hitting practice, and
Request friendlies and league invites from these top tier players and get absolutely SMACKED. And then when you do that a lot...you start facing players you used to be similar to and you SMACK them...Then hopefully eventually I’ll able to be at that level. With practice and focus.
But you know what I don’t want?? A handout. Give me my reward for my input. But don’t give me a reward to make me feel equal.
I want a realistic game, that’s what I want. I don’t want to hit.400 with a player that only hit .250 for a career average. I don’t want a pitcher that is barely in the majors to have a sub 1.00 era. I want realistic gameplay, I want real baseball. You want the users ability to time a meter and put a circle on the ball to matter more. The latter has nothing to do with baseball. You like arcade games, that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with you. I like realistic games, we have different tastes.
But you also don’t want to hit 180 with a player that usually hits 300??? This is where the issue is. If you aren’t making inputs then you aren’t getting hits with those players how would you change this?
It’s about the decisions that the user makes. Should I swing at this pitch or wait for a better one. Does the hitter I’m controlling hit inside pitches well or not? Does he prefer pitches lower? This is where user “skill” comes into play. Does the user know the game of baseball or not.
This is confusing because:
-
You said you shouldn't be able to hit .400 with a player that never touches .300 in reality.
-
Then you said user skill should matter with decision making, like when to swing or not.
So if I'm a horrible baseball decision maker and I'm using Tony Gwynn, wouldn't it then be possible for sucky old me to hit .180 because of my poor user skill? How would that then be an accurate representation of reality considering Gwynn never hit below .289 in a season?
It’s your baseball knowledge or lack there of in this example that made you perform so terribly with that player. What I am saying is, if you make the right decisions with player “x” and play to their abilities, then you should have similar results with player “x” as he would in real life. Obviously if you lack baseball knowledge in this situation for example, you made poor decisions and performed poorly with one of the best hitters in baseball history. If you made good decisions with him, you should put up numbers similar to his real life counterpart.
It’s your gaming knowledge or lack there of. Snipers in the special forces are precise with thier shots timing and breathing but if you play call of duty you assume their attributes
but you don’t assume the actual shot you take. It’s the same concept you assume the attributes but you don’t assume the hit. You have to be on time and precise. And if someone is better at the game they should beat you weather that means you are using a god squad and they are using a gold squad why? Because the skill they assume is playing at a way higher level the the skill you are assuming. -
-
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@abbyspapa said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
@A_PerfectGame said in The high sinker.:
@sean_87_ said in The high sinker.:
I love competition and head to head. We just have different views on it. For me, I want the players I’m controlling to act like their real life counterparts. If I understand you correctly, no matter who you have on your team, you want to be completely responsible for any outcome. One is realistic gameplay, the other is arcade style gameplay. Both are fine, but cannot exist in the same space.
Not necessarily. I think it should be ONLINE about a 85/15 split. 85% user skill and 15% attributes. Or even 90/10
That would not be an accurate representation of the sport of baseball and the players that play. I want realism, you want arcade style.
What you want is. To compete at a higher level then your skill allows.
I want to be as good as guys like Mitch and skepple and pitchingrebel too. So I go into pitching practice, and hitting practice, and
Request friendlies and league invites from these top tier players and get absolutely SMACKED. And then when you do that a lot...you start facing players you used to be similar to and you SMACK them...Then hopefully eventually I’ll able to be at that level. With practice and focus.
But you know what I don’t want?? A handout. Give me my reward for my input. But don’t give me a reward to make me feel equal.
I want a realistic game, that’s what I want. I don’t want to hit.400 with a player that only hit .250 for a career average. I don’t want a pitcher that is barely in the majors to have a sub 1.00 era. I want realistic gameplay, I want real baseball. You want the users ability to time a meter and put a circle on the ball to matter more. The latter has nothing to do with baseball. You like arcade games, that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with you. I like realistic games, we have different tastes.
But you also don’t want to hit 180 with a player that usually hits 300??? This is where the issue is. If you aren’t making inputs then you aren’t getting hits with those players how would you change this?
It’s about the decisions that the user makes. Should I swing at this pitch or wait for a better one. Does the hitter I’m controlling hit inside pitches well or not? Does he prefer pitches lower? This is where user “skill” comes into play. Does the user know the game of baseball or not.
This is confusing because:
-
You said you shouldn't be able to hit .400 with a player that never touches .300 in reality.
-
Then you said user skill should matter with decision making, like when to swing or not.
So if I'm a horrible baseball decision maker and I'm using Tony Gwynn, wouldn't it then be possible for sucky old me to hit .180 because of my poor user skill? How would that then be an accurate representation of reality considering Gwynn never hit below .289 in a season?
It’s your baseball knowledge or lack there of in this example that made you perform so terribly with that player. What I am saying is, if you make the right decisions with player “x” and play to their abilities, then you should have similar results with player “x” as he would in real life. Obviously if you lack baseball knowledge in this situation for example, you made poor decisions and performed poorly with one of the best hitters in baseball history. If you made good decisions with him, you should put up numbers similar to his real life counterpart.
It’s your gaming knowledge or lack there of. Snipers in the special forces are precise with thier shots timing and breathing but if you play call of duty you assume their attributes
but you don’t assume the actual shot you take. It’s the same concept you assume the attributes but you don’t assume the hit. You have to be on time and precise. And if someone is better at the game they should beat you weather that means you are using a god squad and they are using a gold squad why? Because the skill they assume is playing at a way higher level the the skill you are assuming.You are assuming a lot (lol). What if I have a diamond team and they have a gold team and they are just a little better than me at timing? Are you saying they should win regardless of who the players are on each team? If they are "in another league" better than I am, ya they should win, but if they are just a small amount better and their team sucks or they have players in all the wrong positions and using a LF'er to pitch? All is lost because they can time a meter just a little better? At what point do you declare that they should be the winner? 1% better than me? 10% better than me? 100% better than me? And what is your definition of "gaming knowledge"?
-
-
-
@ag1982 said in The high sinker.:
Why do people only talk about high sinkers and not high sliders or high curveballs?
Because they aren’t nearly as broken as high sinkers are.
-
@DriveByTrucker17 said in The high sinker.:
@ag1982 said in The high sinker.:
Why do people only talk about high sinkers and not high sliders or high curveballs?
Because they aren’t nearly as broken as high sinkers are.
The up and in slider is crazy broken, it's just not used as much. Breaking pitches up should not break.
-
@ag1982 said in The high sinker.:
@DriveByTrucker17 said in The high sinker.:
@ag1982 said in The high sinker.:
Why do people only talk about high sinkers and not high sliders or high curveballs?
Because they aren’t nearly as broken as high sinkers are.
The up and in slider is crazy broken, it's just not used as much. Breaking pitches up should not break.
There’s a much higher risk of those pitches going right down the middle though, plus high curveballs get absolutely smashed more often than not.
