9.11 test with questions

[Rimsky]

JWR38,

I'm helping Ynohtna's league, although more on a rules perspective and administrative rather than running the simulator (which I don't have access to).

All things equal, that player should be getting more points than other players in the same position. I don't care if he's the top scorer or not, but he should be outperforming the other C's. [EDIT: Read your other post that your second simulation, the C was the top scorer in his position. Relieved that at least that is working. How many times did you try this? More often than not, the player should be the top scorer in his position.]

The other issue that is more serious (in my opinion) - is that since all the teams are equal, their records should be <0.500 EXCEPT for the team with the ringer (Aryan Racers) which should be >0.500. It doesn't seem to have any bearing on the team's ability to win or lose games. Other teams should not be > 0.500 if their opponent is identical most of the time, with the occasion matchup against a better team (Aryan).

Have you done similar tests with V1? The total output amount - I'm indifferent, as it just is an issue of adjusting sliders.

I was worried that increased stats wasn't making him the top C.

[jwr38]

The increase in stats don't make him the top C very often. I have run the sim with a range of slider with auto function. I don't have one test where that center was able to be the top point scorer. even though he is the best center stat wise he often has not been the best center. More often than not he isn't. Not once in all my testing has this player been the best player, as his stat dictate. You can even see when I made a better team than all the rest it still can't make the playoffs. Personally if I was a GM with a better team and I couldn't win (by no fault of my own but the sim) I would be pretty pissed off.

I have been in a V2 league where non-GM teams that were much weaker stat wise out preformed GM'ed based teams with much better all round rosters.

It seems Simon is unable to answer my questions about how to create these different types of players. I am guessing it can't be done with any consistency is the main reason.

[Rimsky]

Ok, I wasn't worried yesterday, now I'm concerned if you're saying he's not even the top C. Back to my question - have you run a similar situation in V1 (all teams equal, one team superstar center, and that superstar center isn't the top point getting center at year end)

As a stress test, STHS SHOULD do this as part of their bug testing - this is the basis of the engine!

Scenario A (If all teams equal): End result should be every team should be a few standard deviations within 0.500; all players should be within a few standard deviations of a certain point/assist/PIM total at year end.
Scenario B (One team has a superstar center): Every team should be a few standard deviations <0.500 except the team with the superstar which should be >0.500; superstar center should be the top point getter in his position.
Scenario C (One team has a a guy with high fighting or checking): Every team should be a few standard deviations >0.500 except the team with the fighter which should be <0.500 (presumably due to more PIM and more penalty chances for opposing team); fighter should be the top PIM person in his position.

[jwr38]

I haven't run the same tests on version 1 as I don't have it. Since I don't own version 1 I am unable to save rosters and setting. I need to do this to make sure all my testing is consistent.

I am sure I could make these rosters into version 1 (removing the new stats). So if you have version 1 you can try them out if you want. See what you come up with.