The Equalizer aka rubberbanding
-
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in [The Equalizer aka
It defintely does have that effect at times, so it's no an insane stance. Pitching confidence matters much more then it should.
I notice pitcher confidence kicking in when it's down. You definitely start giving up more and more homeruns.
However, this wasn't the case in my game 6.
I didn't get him to swing on pitches, didn't get him to strike out and didn't manage to boost my pitchers' confidence bars.
So pitcher confidence wouldn't explain what happened in that game. Nor would it explain the outcomes of any other games where one batter has significantly more 15/Ns while not striking out at all and still loses.
There may not be ONE explanation that tidies everything up. Confidence, hot zones, pitcher ratings, hitter ratings, great advances and the interactions of each interplay for a result
This is what they told me. Which leads me to believe they should find a way to tidy it up to make it feel less random. And again, I don't take everything they say at face value.
-
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
The concept of good timing is also waaay off. It doesn’t exist. I think we would be better served without that system. The success of Where you barrell up and when you barrell up are dependent upon the type of swing you are attempting. NONE of which is controlled for on this game.
For example if you are a bit early and hit the ball on the bottom part of the bat with a level swing. You may very well end up with a hard liner through the infield. Same thing but your swing is an uppercut...weak chopper. I could give tons of examples like this. where swing type influences outcome
As far as I'm aware, SDS has never stated that a singular players swing time in the same location will vary if you use the same button.
Cody Bellinger's swing on a X swing down the middle will always look the same. Where do you get this idea of swing variance and has SDS stated that such a thing exists in the game?
No but it makes sense to me and “feels” right. And the game would feel too robotic to me if this was left out. Plus SDS has not fully explained things so that reason is better than you. I also feel that hot zones partly embody this.
Ahwell, suffice to say that I won't simply go by how you feel the gameplay operates.
Don’t. Instead describe every game in detail and wonder why things aren’t going as you think it tshould go while you wait for SDS to explain. Let me know how that works out
I'm not expecting SDS to explain anything (although it would be nice). I'm simply assessing how the community feels about this.
-
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in [The Equalizer aka
It defintely does have that effect at times, so it's no an insane stance. Pitching confidence matters much more then it should.
I notice pitcher confidence kicking in when it's down. You definitely start giving up more and more homeruns.
However, this wasn't the case in my game 6.
I didn't get him to swing on pitches, didn't get him to strike out and didn't manage to boost my pitchers' confidence bars.
So pitcher confidence wouldn't explain what happened in that game. Nor would it explain the outcomes of any other games where one batter has significantly more 15/Ns while not striking out at all and still loses.
There may not be ONE explanation that tidies everything up. Confidence, hot zones, pitcher ratings, hitter ratings, great advances and the interactions of each interplay for a result
But this is just as much speculation as a full on rubberbanding engine. We don't know any of this.
None of these factors you listed or their interplay would explain what happened in my game 6.
We're talking about nearly identical lineups, with nothing extraordinary happening with pitcher confidence and yet the batter putting in consistently better inputs lost. It just so happens that player also had a much better record.
What does an identical everything have to do with what I stated. Plus things weren’t identical. Were all pitches the same were you both the home teams,were Pci in the exact same spot. Did both users get equal sleep, is the internet connection the same.
Not too mention maybe the slight differences in confidence interacting with the other factors creates and spectrum of results no one thing is a big deal but the Gestalt does
-
Here's the thing though, it doesn't really make sense for a pitcher's ratings to have much, if any, effect on outcomes. The pitcher's ratings should make it increasingly more difficult to achieve high hit probability inputs. Tiny PCI's, sensitive zones within the PCI where achieving good or squared contact is hard, that sort of thing. Fact is, in this game, a good/squared input will almost always result in 100mph+ exit velocity...with almost every hitter. In the major leagues, hitters hit .620 last year on batted balls at or above 100mph, and in the low-mid .200's below 90. This game doesn't come close to reflecting that reality. Should hitters line out - of course. Should they crush ground balls at people, of course. But not more than half the time. I highly doubt I have more 14/15 hits than I have 14/15 outs.
-
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in [The Equalizer aka
It defintely does have that effect at times, so it's no an insane stance. Pitching confidence matters much more then it should.
I notice pitcher confidence kicking in when it's down. You definitely start giving up more and more homeruns.
However, this wasn't the case in my game 6.
I didn't get him to swing on pitches, didn't get him to strike out and didn't manage to boost my pitchers' confidence bars.
So pitcher confidence wouldn't explain what happened in that game. Nor would it explain the outcomes of any other games where one batter has significantly more 15/Ns while not striking out at all and still loses.
There may not be ONE explanation that tidies everything up. Confidence, hot zones, pitcher ratings, hitter ratings, great advances and the interactions of each interplay for a result
But this is just as much speculation as a full on rubberbanding engine. We don't know any of this.
None of these factors you listed or their interplay would explain what happened in my game 6.
We're talking about nearly identical lineups, with nothing extraordinary happening with pitcher confidence and yet the batter putting in consistently better inputs lost. It just so happens that player also had a much better record.
What does an identical everything have to do with what I stated. Plus things weren’t identical. Were all pitches the same were you both the home teams,were Pci in the exact same spot. Did both users get equal sleep, is the internet connection the same.
Not too mention maybe the slight differences in confidence interacting with the other factors creates and spectrum of results no one thing is a big deal but the Gestalt does
How would sleep or internet connection play into what happens after the input has been recognized as a good/squared by the game?
All I know is that I was carried by the game vs. a more skilled opponent and this only seems to happen when I play vs. better players.
-
@SefarR said in [The Equalizer aka rualso feel that hot zones partly embody this.
Ahwell, suffice to say that I won't simply go by how you feel the gameplay operates.
Don’t. Instead describe every game in detail and wonder why things aren’t going as you think it tshould go while you wait for SDS to explain. Let me know how that works out
I'm not expecting SDS to explain anything (although it would be nice). I'm simply assessing how the community feels about this.
So if SDS won’t explain and yo give a snark response when someone gives you an opinion what was the point of the thread.
Seraf “a guys what do you think about my idea”
Forum “no doesn’t sound right”
Seraf “ well it goes without saying i was not going to listen to you despite asking tons of questions”
Forum “
️ “ -
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in [The Equalizer aka rualso feel that hot zones partly embody this.
Ahwell, suffice to say that I won't simply go by how you feel the gameplay operates.
Don’t. Instead describe every game in detail and wonder why things aren’t going as you think it tshould go while you wait for SDS to explain. Let me know how that works out
I'm not expecting SDS to explain anything (although it would be nice). I'm simply assessing how the community feels about this.
So if SDS won’t explain and yo give a snark response when someone gives you an opinion what was the point of the thread.
Seraf “a guys what do you think about my idea”
Forum “no doesn’t sound right”
Seraf “ well it goes without saying i was not going to listen to you despite asking tons of questions”
Forum “
️ “If you paid a bit more attention you'd notice that many agree with me and many fall between you and I in terms of what they believe.
The opinion of the forum is not quite as black and white as you make it out to be.
-
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
If you paid a bit more attention you'd notice that many agree with me and many fall between you and I in terms of what they believe.
The opinion of the forum is not quite as black and white as you make it out to be.
Ok
Seems like you have it figured out. Do you just want us all agree and praise your genius. Were you just seeing how many people agreed with you. If so was that to find truth or ego stroke? Don’t answer...great idea. -
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
If you paid a bit more attention you'd notice that many agree with me and many fall between you and I in terms of what they believe.
The opinion of the forum is not quite as black and white as you make it out to be.
Ok
Seems like you have it figured out. Do you just want us all agree and praise your genius. Were you just seeing how many people agreed with you. If so was that to find truth or ego stroke? Don’t answer...great idea.Nope, and I feel like we reached a common ground with many posters - excluding you of course - which deviate to an extent from my OP. One might call that a success?
Ideally, this post could also work to inform SDS that we would like some transparency when it comes to batting and pitching outcomes.
-
So people agreeing s a success why? Agreement doesn’t make it more true. Does it just make you feel better, like a hug. This might help
-
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
So people agreeing s a success why? Agreement doesn’t make it more true. Does it just make you feel better, like a hug. This might help
Sigh.
Yes, people agreeing can be a success, especially if they started at a difference of opinion. I suppose you could call that a failure as well, but that's your prerogative.
Ultimately all these posts display to SDS that we dont understand why the batting averages on good/squareds deviate so much from real life and why we have so little influence on pitching outcomes even with perfect inputs.
Perhaps these types of posts will eventually encourage SDS to become a bit more transparent and maybe even explain why the amount of RNG seems to be increasing every year.
-
(Eyes ignore button)
-
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
So people agreeing s a success why? Agreement doesn’t make it more true. Does it just make you feel better, like a hug. This might help
Sigh.
Yes, people agreeing can be a success, especially if they started at a difference of opinion. I suppose you could call that a failure as well, but that's your prerogative.
Ultimately all these posts display to SDS that we dont understand why the batting averages on good/squareds deviate so much from real life and why we have so little influence on pitching outcomes even with perfect inputs.
Perhaps these types of posts will eventually encourage SDS to become a bit more transparent and maybe even explain why the amount of RNG seems to be increasing every year.
Just block him, trust me it makes life on the forum a whole lot easier.
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
-
@eatyum said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@SefarR said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
@Maverick31762 said in The Equalizer aka rubberbanding:
So people agreeing s a success why? Agreement doesn’t make it more true. Does it just make you feel better, like a hug. This might help
Sigh.
Yes, people agreeing can be a success, especially if they started at a difference of opinion. I suppose you could call that a failure as well, but that's your prerogative.
Ultimately all these posts display to SDS that we dont understand why the batting averages on good/squareds deviate so much from real life and why we have so little influence on pitching outcomes even with perfect inputs.
Perhaps these types of posts will eventually encourage SDS to become a bit more transparent and maybe even explain why the amount of RNG seems to be increasing every year.
Just block him, trust me it makes life on the forum a whole lot easier.
This seems rational
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
