Scores generated in career through simming

[The_Pharoah]

I thought I'd do a little 'test' for the fun of it but also to see whether it would impact the simulated scores.

Basically, I cleaned out the Warwickshire team and replaced it with the following lineup:

Me
D.Warner
R.Ponting
S.Tendulkar
A.De Villiers
G.Sobers
J.Kallis
K.Sangakkarra
S.Warne
D.Steyn
G.McGrath

Looks like a dream team. Anyway, started a career on Pro and we played Middlesex:
1. we batted first, I go out for 25; we are then all out of 325 with the highest scores coming from Warne/Steyn/McGrath!
2. They then bat and score 550; so i go in to bat again with a deficit of 225 and go out cheaply to a nice ball....we're then all out for 180 with the scores again mainly coming from the bottom three.

I played a 2nd game and the results were similar but we drew (although Ponting scored a century in the 1st, and Sobers a century in the 2nd). Maybe my sample size is too small, but it looks like it doesn't take into account the actual 'quality' of the players when simming. Would that be right? Shame if it is. Was hoping to see Warne take five for and us being 3-600 or something but no. The above team bats like any other standard team.

 

[cricfan11]

I think this problem was discussed long time ago. I am not too sure about it, but it has to do something with linking of newly created players with the ones that come with game. So the 3 bowlers that were scoring for you might have been linked with a batsmen with some random name that came pre-installed. I would suggest to check the skills of these players. Also, try creating a new player yourself with proper skills and attributes and not link them, then simulate if it really works the way they are supposed to.
Check this link as well that has a discussion almost similar to this, it might clear some doubt.
Linking Players - Don Bradman Cricket 14 Forum on PlanetCricket Forums

P.S.: I have a very less idea about these issues, so I might be completely wrong and you might have already done all of that.

 

[Dutch]

Langveldt I think he is called did extensive research into this: he has a whole thread on it somewhere .....

 

[cricfan11]

How do you make tailenders play like tailenders?

 

[The_Pharoah]

I'll see if the players in the team are linked to the 'official' ones off the disc. Hopefully that should fix it.

 

[MattW]

Normalisation:

Nope, you're not understanding the normalisation we will use. It does not make all teams equal, it will make them equal to the teams we had originally set.

Basically, if you replace a team with a user created one, their stats are normalised to the level of the team you replaced - so that you can't 'cheat' the career mode by making your team really good and the rest crap so that you can really boost your score on the leaderboards.

Obviously, lots of people don't care about leaderboards, but that's the system we've got.

 

[The_Pharoah]

ah ok, its because of those stupid leaderboards! makes sense I guess but kinda kills the fun.

In FIFA (for example) just for fun, I'd sell all the players in my fav team (Newcastle United FC) and replace them with the world XI. Would be fun for about 3 hrs until winning 6-0 each time got boring. Guess it won't work here.

 

[cricfan11]

Normalisation:


Basically, if you replace a team with a user created one, their stats are normalised to the level of the team you replaced - so that you can't 'cheat' the career mode by making your team really good and the rest crap so that you can really boost your score on the leaderboards.

Obviously, lots of people don't care about leaderboards, but that's the system we've got.

That might be an effect on entire team. But doesn't this linking problem affect in someway switching of player's attribute? Like batsman to bowler and vice versa? I vaguely remember something in this regard been discussed before.

 

[MattW]

That might be an effect on entire team. But doesn't this linking problem affect in someway switching of player's attribute? Like batsman to bowler and vice versa? I vaguely remember something in this regard been discussed before.

Before patch 1 it did - now it is simple normalisation by limiting the team overall to be equivalent to the original on disc team, and then just scaling players to fit that - a player that is better than another one still will be, but their overall stats would be lower.

Another post by Ross said it's the same as the normalisation option for online play - which seems to function well in nerfing those custom teams of top players.

 

[Fantazm]

I much preferred it back in the day when single player games were actually single player games and didn't have online fluff affecting them.

Yes, absolutely have online play, but a single player form should be just that.

 

[The_Pharoah]

I much preferred it back in the day when single player games were actually single player games and didn't have online fluff affecting them.

Yes, absolutely have online play, but a single player form should be just that.

Totally agree. There should be some sort of disconnect between online/offline play. A lot of us couldn't care less about scoreboards or online play and, similar to say FIFA/NBA/etc, we should be able to adjust SP gameplay to how we like it. It would've been nice (even in SP fantasy) to actually play with some of the greats (and probably would've been a good indication of how 'well' those players were replicated in DB) in a proper career mode.

Disappointing.

 

[ChinamanSpin]

Totally agree. There should be some sort of disconnect between online/offline play. A lot of us couldn't care less about scoreboards or online play and, similar to say FIFA/NBA/etc, we should be able to adjust SP gameplay to how we like it. It would've been nice (even in SP fantasy) to actually play with some of the greats (and probably would've been a good indication of how 'well' those players were replicated in DB) in a proper career mode.

Disappointing.

From what I recall from when this was discussed before, Ross mentioned how this was a requirement from Microsoft/Sony for this sort of leaderboard system to be in place, rather than a decision from Big Ant.

One way I like this system is I can trust the best teams from the Academy will not have any bad balancing issues and can just jump straight into a career without having to adjust all the stats, although I understand your point.

 

[T.J.Hooker]

As far as sim scores are concerned it's also my impression that the tail scores way too many runs, and that as a result the end of season bowling averages seem too high right across the board in the first class game.

I'd be interested in hearing what kind of ballpark the top FC bowling averages are in for some other players. Last time I checked I think I was only seeing a few bowlers averaging under 30 at the end of the season, when really you should probably be seeing 30 players or so under 25 and a top 10 at 20 or under.

The one day stats seemed to work out more realistically.