In a couple of our many threads, questions have come up about our rating of players. Their actual power number and contact numbers have been brought into the discussion and I figured, why can't we come up with a formula for rating each player?
If anyone has ideas on how to do this, please post them here. I'm gonna check out all the ratings and see what I can do. Thanks.
(This way, the game itself will rate its players objectively and our opinions won't get in the way. Not that it will truly matter, of course, but you catch my drift?)
Alright, so we got power, speed and contact. For whatever reason, power and speed are normal rankings. The higher the number, the better it is. Contact is the opposite. Lower number, better contact.
So, if we add together power and speed and then subtract contact, is that final number a good measuring stick for quality of player? Or are one of the three more important? If yes, how do we weigh the more important category?
Gantry, I need a little help with the pitcher stats. I have no idea what all those columns mean. It's gonna be a bitch to figure out a pitcher ranking system.
I think the best thing to do is to compare the numbers of the best power hitters and see what is similar between them.
Lower contact doesn't mean anything, or if it does it barely affects the game. Per my last post on catchers, look at EVans and Jackson. Then look at the people with low contact (Gwynn, Aldrete, Boggs, Molitor) it doesn't seem to help them out too much...
So it's really 80-90% power and 10-20% speed. And probably a bonus for being lefty, at least in straight pitch. Too tough to come up with an agreeable formula...
Damnit, I guess we'll scrap it. I was just trying to be proactive and submit something to this site besides 400 something posts in a few short months.
These kinds of discussions make my brain bleed.
nightwulf
That was the exact problem I ran into. I was like, wait a minute, power plus speed minus the square root of contact divided by three to the exponent of AAAAAAAAARRRRGGHHHHHH! I tried for all of about two and half minutes before the argh. Sorry guys. Aren't there any accountants or physicists out there?
For what its worth (and it may not be worth anything) my cohorts and I always considered Boggs and Aldrete (and Gwynn to a lesser extent) to be singles machines, and I had no idea what their ratings were. So maybe contact rating does do something, its just hard to define exactly what it does.
Quote from: fknmclane on 12/05/03, 02:20:35 PM
I was like, wait a minute, power plus speed minus the square root of contact divided by three to the exponent of AAAAAAAAARRRRGGHHHHHH!
Wth, you totally forgot about pi.
Nightwulf
I thought contact rating somehow contributed to otherwise intagibles like the "pettis" factor?
Also, Nightwulf isn't your namesake a character from MKIII. I freaking hated that game.
Dove, what kind of question is that. Of course his name is from MKIII. And yeah, the game was disappointing.
Yeah, I definitely think contact contributes to the Pettis rating. I think it gives more control over where the ball is going to go.
I hate Boggs and Gwynn as a player because they treated baseball like softball and put balls wherever they wanted them. But they seem to do the same in RBI.
Yep, the name's loosely lifted from Nightwolf from MK3. I spell it "wulf" for my own personal amusement. My avatar is cropped from a screen shot of the MK3 character select screen ... thought that would've given it away. :P
QuoteAnd yeah, the game was disappointing.
Yeah yeah ok, it was no MK2. But it was still a great game. Better than any of the bullshit that comes out these days. And I can still kick your ass in it. :P
Nightwulf
Yeah I only said the game sucked cause it is too much for me. I spent a long time mastering MKII (Baraka especially) and then MKIII came out and I was just too worn out.
MKII was the shit. III took it to a different level, one that I didn't really like all that much. Plus, the game at my local arcade had a fucked up screen and everything looked green. I can never forgive the game for that even though it really wasn't it's fault.
I spent so damn many hours with the MK series... The first one sucked, but 2 was awesome, and 3 was decent. A friend and I would rotate between those and whichever was the newest Street Fighter II version (original, Turbo, Super) on the SNES. I actually liked MK4 pretty well, too - the 3D was done without messing up the gameplay much, and the fatalities kicked ass, especially Quan Chi's "Rip off their leg and beat them with it". I've played Deadly Alliance on the XBox, but they screwed with the control setup, and I didn't really get into it as much as the old ones. Also, they changed Scorpion's fatality, so he doesn't roast his victims anymore.
Two words: Soul Caliber.