Proof the Game is Rigged (Evidence Here)

Do you believe they went back in and changed the code this morning to fix the appearance of G Mists?

Are you familiar with Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor? Those seem to be quite relevant to this situation.

Yes, and Russell's Teapot is also relevant - No Salty if you are lurking out there, I'm not talking about religion, but about the "Well you can't disprove George Mists (and 3,000 other doppelgangers) don't exist and that a small army of Game Company programmers weren't monitoring the Boards on a Sunday morning and ready to step in to cover their tracks"

Let's face it, Strat said that home runs were not being stifled and we had data to prove otherwise. They admitted it was an accident and turned off the setting

Well let's talk about this because it gets to the credibility that FrankieT was alluding to. I believe what you posted above is true. I started playing the on line game during ATG2 and the "improve statistical accuracy" switch had already been identified and turned off by then. You posted that you quit the game because of this. What's exceedingly interesting is you also posted your first team, which was in ATGIII (which I verified). I cannot for the life of me understand why you quit the game because of a setting that had been identified and fixed long before you started playing?

Russell's Teapot! Yes!! It's not my burden to prove that your claim is false, but you have to prove its true. And G. Mists appearing 1 time has not been sufficient to demonstrate the existence of an entirely second card set.

Are you familiar with Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor? Those seem to be quite relevant to this situation.

Yes, and Russell's Teapot is also relevant - No Salty if you are lurking out there, I'm not talking about religion, but about the "Well you can't disprove George Mists (and 3,000 other doppelgangers) don't exist and that a small army of Game Company programmers weren't monitoring the Boards on a Sunday morning and ready to step in to cover their tracks"

Let's face it, Strat said that home runs were not being stifled and we had data to prove otherwise. They admitted it was an accident and turned off the setting

Well let's talk about this because it gets to the credibility that FrankieT was alluding to. I believe what you posted above is true. I started playing the on line game during ATG2 and the "improve statistical accuracy" switch had already been identified and turned off by then. You posted that you quit the game because of this. What's exceedingly interesting is you also posted your first team, which was in ATGIII (which I verified). I cannot for the life of me understand why you quit the game because of a setting that had been identified and fixed long before you started playing?

I quit because I felt that strange things were happening and then learned more about the history of the game. I lost faith in the product. It was always important to me to know if the playing field was legit or not. In fact, if Strat said "Yes, we do have controls in place for the better of the game." I would be much happier than being left to wonder. Seeing G. Mists proved to me that I was right to quit before, as I was highly suspicious and back then there were more of us but it seems most have quit.

Regarding proof, it works both ways. I have been asked for proof that is impossible to produce and in turn, I have asked for proof that is impossible to produce. As I said, none of us have access to the code. I do have knowledge of coding though and have been in the video game industry for over 5 years now. I have shown a photo that shows G.Mists. To me, that is proof that something is awry OR you can call me a liar. I have tried to teach how this sort of code works and why it cannot be a glitch that spat out a random name, it's just not how these things work.

We can cite Russel's Teapot, Occam's Razor, etc all we want but that does not change the fact that G.Mists exists. Again, you can choose to write me off as a liar if you wish but this cannot have been totally random, the card must exist. As I said, I encourage all of you to watch all the play-by-plays for all your games from last night, as this may be the only chance we ever get to find more instances of G.Mists or other mysterious cards.

I am spending a lot of my time here in this fruitless battle with a distant hope of making the game better and the company more successful. Gang up on me if you want, discredit my proof if you want, but the price is too high and there is not enough transparency. G.Mists only serves to worsen an already bad situation. I also would like to point out that many people do not wish to discuss these topics because they know the kind of reception they'll get and don't want to ruin their reputations or have otherwise ill outcomes. I put the integrity of the game first, my reputation has never been a consideration and I will not be cowed or bullied by anyone in my pursuit of the truth. Maybe someday after I'm long gone from the game someone will stumble upon this post after finding even more proof. But then again, when I returned I discovered my entire posting history was missing, so who knows? And lastly, would Strat take time on a Sunday to do 1 minute of work to protect their reputation with a simple text edit? Of course they would.

I dont think you are a liar. I think you believe that the game is fixed and you are looking for any evidence that is the case, regardless of how weak that evidence might be.

The reason I invoked Occam's Razor is because of how we each view the appearance of G. Mists. I agree with you that something was awry. I see that as the play by play function incorrectly reading a piece of data and/or displaying it improperly one time (and not repeatable). I may not be in the programming industry but I have used several software programs that cost from $50,000 to $100,000. Those programs will, on occasion, incorrectly display text. But when I reload the screen it all works right. Computers and code are not perfect.

You read G. Mists as the program mistakenly displaying an otherwise-until-this-one-occurrence hidden second set of cards with made up names that are occasionally invoked (even when the dice roll does not even use them). From this one typo, you have deduced there is an entirely independent second set of cards that the company has kept hidden so that they can manipulate outcomes.

What proof have you asked for that is impossible to provide? You have asked us to demonstrate that there is not an entirely hidden second set of cards? You want us to prove that there isnt a backup set of cards?

There is a big difference between all sorts of game options we know are there but that may accidentally get turned on when they are tinkering with code, versus creating a whole second game hidden under the 1st in order to manipulate outcomes.

You are convinced the game is rigged and nothing I or anyone else say is going to change your mind. Thats fine. I am not convinced that the game is rigged. I have a feeling I am going to enjoy the game much more than you are.

I appreciate your thoughtful and respectful reply, Chris. As I said though, I do not know with certainty exactly what is going on but the presence of this card is indicative of something being awry, as you agreed with. Given all of my experience and knowledge in running games and using and interpreting code, I have to stand by my claim that in this case, this cannot have been a typo and that the card absolutely does exist. I have created and edited countless files and seen many of them fail due to my own errors, I have seen what happens and how it looks. Therei s no question in my mind that this G.Mists card is very real.

Regarding the proof I asked for, I was specifically asking the naysayers to prove to me that the game operates as advertised. Simulated fantasy baseball with no hidden agenda, as Strat has adamantly claimed over the years yet has been disproven on multiple occasions. This proof involved data, which seems to be the only evidence some will accept, why is bizarre IMO. I did not actually expect to receive any proof.

To your point about you having more fun with the game than me, yes, that is true as I'm sure you do. I am having fun though but I want to have as much fun as possible and I want people like me, that are/were unhappy with the "conspiracies" to return to the game and I want new players to join. In essence, I want everyone to be happy. More than anything, I would love to be wrong about it all but I have now seen G.Mists and there is no turning back until Strat makes a public statement and ideally, admits that things are not always as they seem. I adamantly do not believe that these settings were accidentally left on in the past and I won't believe it if/when they get caught again in the future. The notion that these things happen unbeknownst to their team is very hard to believe, small company or not.

Regarding proof, it works both ways.

100% wrong.
Not in science, not in law, not in business, not in life.

Thank God. Otherwise, I can make an accusation against your integrity, identity, motivations, history, that you beat your spouse, whatever, on a website that you own and say "well if it isn't true, prove it."

Total nonsense. It is not up to others to prove the null hypothesis. If I say dinosaurs never walked the Earth because their bones were fabricated, proven by the fact I have a plastic dinosaur bone, it isn't up to the scientists who dug up the bones to prove they weren't. It is up to you to make the evidentiary case for your alternative hypothesis as better supported to replace the null hypothesis. This isn't mumbo jumbo--it is life.

This is also probably the only business enterprise that allows its customers to make accusations against its business of a vast, intricate, and diabolical deception scheme on a website it operates. And expecting its other customers to prove you wrong. Try that at any other business. Especially when the customer has not exhausted its feedback opportunities DIRECTLY with the business.

That's not fun.

Is he related to A. Fugazzi?

He just sent me a PM which I deleted without opening. I would trust 99+% of the people in this community and I don't know if Backfire's video game/programming expertise/owning a game company blather is blarney or not, but I'm not opening a PM from him. It's been demonstrated that Strat O Matic has no security in their software and I'm not taking the chance on what could be attached.

Please don't send me any more PMs Backfire.

To your point about you having more fun with the game than me, yes, that is true as I'm sure you do. I am having fun though but I want to have as much fun as possible and I want people like me, that are/were unhappy with the "conspiracies" to return to the game and I want new players to join. In essence, I want everyone to be happy. More than anything, I would love to be wrong about it all but I have now seen G.Mists and there is no turning back until Strat makes a public statement and ideally, admits that things are not always as they seem. I adamantly do not believe that these settings were accidentally left on in the past and I won't believe it if/when they get caught again in the future. The notion that these things happen unbeknownst to their team is very hard to believe, small company or not.

The thing about disproving a conspiracy is that the conspiracist will take every piece of evidence and use that to prove that the conspiracy exists. Strat has (apparently because it was before my time) admitted that an HR setting was set incorrectly. I was part of the discussion that figured out that the guarding lines effect seemed to be on. To do that, we identified specific pieces of data on multiple cards and showed that the only way that the outcomes could occur was if that particular setting was on. But now that Strat has admitted mistakes, you will believe that they are always lying because they...I dont know...admitted mistakes in the past?

This is where Hanlon's Razor comes in. Hanlon's razor says that "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". I have also seen it written as incompetence. In this case, "stupidity" or incompetence is having a mistake in the code. But you are jumping right past the possibility of an honest mistake to conspiracy.

Again, go back to the idea that this is a small company operating on a shoestring budget. Now with that in mind, weigh the likelihood that there was an incorrect piece of code versus a whole group of programmers all looking to develop an entirely second set of game cards with which they can manipulate game outcomes and working to cover their tracks by monitoring the boards.

Looking at what Frankie said, he is 100% right about the need for you to show proof of the alternative hypothesis. The company has said there is no conspiracy. The main piece of evidence you have is this one time appearance of an odd name which can be explained by much simpler things than a conspiracy, and the fact that players dont all do as poorly as you think they should when they join the site. But in my case, I had played strat for years before coming on to 365. I knew how to read a card, I knew how to judge ballpark effects and I knew the role of offense vs defense. Many people coming on to this site have that same background, and those that dont get crushed in their early leagues and dont come back.

Its on you to show that the game is fixed and, in my opinion, you have not even come close to meeting that bar.