*****IMPORTANT**** Chief Myers Injury on #3

Whatever it is, I would not use that card again.

Steve-
I don't think its the card at all.
Many of us have used that particular card with different results;

This is one of those things that should cause one's spider sense to go off that there is something in the code about repeat injuries that we really 'should' be told about.

Whatever it is, I would not use that card again.

Steve-
I don't think its the card at all.
Many of us have used that particular card with different results;

This is one of those things that should cause one's spider sense to go off that there is something in the code about repeat injuries that we really 'should' be told about.

Like this in the code?

<<If (owner) = Nev>> then <<screw him over>>

LOL-

Nice B!

I dont think its particular to Nev, but it certainly seems like there is something in the code regarding injuries/repeat injuries that is not just simply what we see.

Even if you told me Meyers was an inj. 6 this wouldn't make much sense.

Well-

there are those who are going to say that 'since its statistically possible, then there is nothing wrong, and its just bad luck'.

I am not one of those people.

What is it then?

I wrote to Strat so maybe they can shed some light.


Although most of the time they do not answer, my fingers are crossed that they do.

What is it then?

Since i do not have the code all I can do is speculate based on empirical evidence.

Id guess that the code contains at least the following in order from my fairly certain to least certain:

1) A modifier that increases the chance of re-injury every time a player is injured; and would speculate that its a cumulative effect for a given period.
2) Some sort of overall injury base-chance determined by the total inj. ratings of all players on a particular team.
3) Some sort of batch injury chance of a particular player across the system.

As an aside: If someone does not believe the game code uses modifiers from what you see on the cards then you aren't paying close enough attention.

(am not claiming this [the modifers] are a cardinal sin, but its something that should be known)

I've long thought that "streaks" are built in to the code. Before there was an online game, Strat used to pitch its game with a "you are the manager" theme - eg "You decide whether to bench slumping players." Of course in a dice world that's moronic, and my friends and I used to always joke about that as soon as someone went hitless in their first two at bats ("if you're a good manager you'll bench Brett now"). Dice rolls are not dependent on one another.

But I can very easily see how, in a virtual dice world, you can build in streaks and finally make that marketing pitch true. In other words, simply from time to time heighten the probability that for a series of at bats rolls off a player's card will be on the same column. Haven't you seen some players get "hot" for a series? Like Mattingly hits three homeruns in a series with almost all of his rolls on the 1 column. And the news story says "Mattingly was unconscious out there today". Then next series there is a more random distribution and he sucks. It's more apparent with injuries, because of course there is only one injury - so when the code heightens the number of rolls off that column for a series of at bats, it heightens the chances of repeat injury.

Not trying to throw flames at Strat or anyone's statistical probability knowledge. It's my theory. I haven't taken the time to prove it mathematically. Let's just say I believe it, and if you don't agree with me, that's ok by me.

Wow! that was expressed well...and my thoughts exactly...So I'll say what he says.

I think it's all grassy knoll, and I don't buy any of it. I once threw SIX consecutive craps....playing REAL craps, with real dice. What are the odds of that I wonder? Maybe I should have accused the casino of "programming" the dice?

I think it's all grassy knoll, and I don't buy any of it. I once threw SIX consecutive craps....playing REAL craps, with real dice. What are the odds of that I wonder? Maybe I should have accused the casino of "programming" the dice?

Steve,

What do you think 'normalization' does for example? Its not even a question of being on or off- it exists- how do you think it works?

How do you think the Plus .1% is added to the home team?

Think for a minute about how that is accomplished. (these are done by +/- 'modifiers')

Again, this stuff is perfectly acceptable to be part of the game- BUT it should also be disclosed.