FLAW IN GAME ENGINE RESULTS??

Ho Hum. What might have happened since I opened this inquiry modestly here in the Suggestions Forum? Well my Barnstormers team got underway 4 days ago. Hot as a firecracker at 5-7. When we're pitching the Game Engine puts us on the Hitters Card 265-247 for a MINUS 18 differential. And when we bat? Now the Game Engine "likes" the Pitcher Card 244 to 227 for a MINUS 17 differential. That's a net -35 in just 12 games. And yes, those results again lie within overall probability margins for 980 or so rolls. BUT, for my team to have the same advantage that my opponents enjoyed, we'd have to REVERSE THE CARD ASSIGNMENTS OF 70 ROLLS in just 12 games. Granted, again, this is anecdotal. But this is happening with all 5 of my 4 current and 1 just completed teams.

By contrast, at this writing, a Division Leader in the current 2024 Barnstormer Championship underway now is also -18 when pitching, but is +35 when batting, for a NET +17 OVERALL. However, this is through 96 games, 8 times the 12 games my little team has played. These numbers are far more consonant with true probability than mine.

The fairness of this game is player performance being accurately reflected first on their Strat Cards, Cards designed to be combined with an honest random number generator that determines which card the play is on and which line on the player card determines the play, further refined by -- again with random number generation -- a players running, an outfielder's arm, a defender's range, a pitcher's hold, a catcher's arm, the Inning Durability of Starters, and so on.

So, the adventure continues, but I am about to alert Dr Who of yet another apparent crack in the Universe.

rules in understanding pitcher's card say
"@ -- These [sic] @ symbol is ignored as Pitch-Count fatigue is used instead."
but I can't find anything that explains how fatigue is used - what changes are made?

rules in understanding pitcher's card say
"@ -- These [sic] @ symbol is ignored as Pitch-Count fatigue is used instead."
but I can't find anything that explains how fatigue is used - what changes are made?

https://stratomatic365.fandom.com/wiki/ ... nt_Fatigue

Similar to POW, PCF affects readings on pitcher cards preceded by an "@", but it doesn't automatically turn them all into SINGLE**. Instead, it is a more gradual effect, and the variety of the resulting penalties is greater. Basically, once a pitcher's Condition falls below F9 (full strength), the chance of an "@" reading turning into a hit or a walk increases incrementally with each point descending towards F0. The hits can be singles, doubles, triples, or homeruns.

Nothing about substituting a reading from the hitter's card.

Ho Hum. What might have happened since I opened this inquiry modestly here in the Suggestions Forum? Well my Barnstormers team got underway 4 days ago. Hot as a firecracker at 5-7. When we're pitching the Game Engine puts us on the Hitters Card 265-247 for a MINUS 18 differential. And when we bat? Now the Game Engine "likes" the Pitcher Card 244 to 227 for a MINUS 17 differential. That's a net -35 in just 12 games. And yes, those results again lie within overall probability margins for 980 or so rolls. BUT, for my team to have the same advantage that my opponents enjoyed, we'd have to REVERSE THE CARD ASSIGNMENTS OF 70 ROLLS in just 12 games. Granted, again, this is anecdotal. But this is happening with all 5 of my 4 current and 1 just completed teams.

Muadib
The quote above is from a March posting you made four nights into the BS 2025 Event 1. That league has now concluded and I find it interesting that your team ended up +13 in roll differential for the entire season. Your batters were +62, while your pitchers were -49. This does not really support your various insinuations that there are issues in the game engine, or managers are hacking into the system to alter results, or somebody at Strat is over-riding the results.

This is probably blasphemy to the Strat-O-Matic cultists, but the basic 50-50 pitcher-batter system is flawed from the start, even if the results are totally pure and random. Some pitchers were simply more dominant than others, and this game design doesn't reflect that. Mariano Rivera was much more dominant a reliever than Jerry Augustine, for example. Yet, in Strat, half the time (or more, if there are behind-the-scenes coding shenanigans going on) the best pitchers in the history of baseball are no more effective or in control than any 0.50M scrub. This results in ridiculous and aggravating blown saves and comebacks at an alarming rate.

Again, this is probably a blasphemous suggestion, but shouldn't the best pitchers have a better than 50% chance of controlling the situation and having the result on their cards? If the first die roll was based on a 20-sided die, the best pitchers could get a result on their cards on a 8-20 or 9-20 roll, while the shakiest pitchers would need an 11-20 or 12-20 roll. Using a 20-sided die would allow for more subtlety in grading the pitchers based on ERA or some combination of stats, and since Strat already uses 20-sided die rolls to determine many other results, it wouldn't be that big a leap.

I know, it's a radical idea. But I can't be the only one who is sick of spending millions on pitchers and watching results that would have been exactly the same if a 0.50M hurler was on the mound. Strat talks about "simulation"; the simulations could be a lot more believable with some simple upgrades to the game design.

It's 50/50 offense/defense which obviously tracks with real life. For position players/pitchers it's actually 17/10. In real life it's probably closer to 4/3. That said, I do think it's blasphemous and that the way Strat splits hitting pitching and fielding is so elegant as it is. Yes, a more complex simulation might include more dynamic pitching/fielding splits to account for groundball pitchers, flyball pitchers, strikeout pitchers etc. But that would be too fundamental of a change to this game. Strat's method is simple and that's okay. They still manage to get the replay stats right regardless.

Actually, in super advanced, I'm pretty certain that some results can get overridden in the case of extreme strikeout pitchers or low-walk pitchers.

Well, anybody who thinks the all-time best pitchers were only effective half the time is pretty delusional. I'll continue to complain, but by all means enjoy the cult

Looking at raw roll results doesn't tell the whole story. WHEN the rolls fall on the hitters' cards makes a huge difference. A pitcher's rolls may total close to 50/50, but I've noticed that most relief pitchers seem to suffer from a disproportionate number of rolls on the hitters' cards as soon as they enter the game, usually resulting in a high percentage of inherited runs scoring. If this game was a true "simulation", a solid relief pitcher, coming into the game warmed up and fresh, would have a distinct advantage over the first couple batters. But in this game, the opposite seems to be the case most of the time.