50 to 100 converstion rates

[anant_shah94]

... and he's gone for 99

[El_Zigi]

When this thread started I hadn't played a long enough game to know if this was an issue. But now I'm a good few seasons into a save playing as Pakistan and it does seem to be a problem for all, bar one, of my players. The only exception is Younis Khan, he frequently converts 50s into 100s. In the current season he has scored 3 50s and 4 100s, last year +1 he scored 4 50s and 3 100s. Umar Akmal has now scored 22 50s and only 3 100s. Fawad Alam has scored 12 50s and only 2 100s. Those are just two of several examples I could give of my batsmen failing to convert 50s into 100s.

I wonder tho is this an issue with the game or is it me 'managing' my batsmen wrong after they've gotten to 50. In the case of Umar Akmal and Fawad Alam, two aggressive style batsmen, I wonder should I bump them up to 4 bars aggression once they reach 50-70 instead of the 3 I tend to always leave fully settled batsmen on in Tests. Any thoughts??

[Phylos Fett]

I wonder tho is this an issue with the game or is it me 'managing' my batsmen wrong after they've gotten to 50. In the case of Umar Akmal and Fawad Alam, two aggressive style batsmen, I wonder should I bump them up to 4 bars aggression once they reach 50-70 instead of the 3 I tend to always leave fully settled batsmen on in Tests. Any thoughts??

I never have my batsmen at 4 bars, and I only use 3 if the conditions are favorable. If the pitch is deteriorating or an absolute shocker, my players are lucky to get up to 2 bars!

[enigma]

Agree with Phylos Fett, I also never bat my batters at an aggression higher than 3 (unless I'm looking for a declaration or chasing a gettable target in the 4th innings), and as Phylos has said, even 3 aggression-bars are sometimes too high. I usually prefer aggressive or very aggressive batters because once they're set, they usually score at an SR of 50 or so even on 2 bars which is a fair rate (non-aggressive batters score too slowly though) & I get a fair amount of 100s & even 200s.

I think you might see an improvement in your batters' conversion-rates, if you keep them on 2 or less bars at all times (though you may go for 3 bars in really batting-friendly conditions or against average bowlers with high career-economy-rates & part-timers).

I don't think conversion-rates of average-batsmen can be improved a great deal; OD(I) conversion-rates, on the other hand, tend to be a bit of a hit-or-miss.

[El_Zigi]

Well I have a very straightforward approach to setting my batsmens aggression. Pretty much everyone starts on 1 bar, with the odd exception. Non-aggr batsmen move up to 2 bars when they reach the equivalent of 3 bars settled and then up to 3 bars when the equivalent of 1 bar away from being fully settled. Aggr batsmen move up to 2 bars when the equivalent of 2 bars settled and 3 bars when the equivalent of 5 bars settled. I very rarely find myself going to 4 bars or more. This is pretty much the way I've always worked my batting since I first started playing the game a good number of years ago.

Hopefully I can win a series with a test or more to spare so I can experiment a little with 4 bars aggr for fully settled aggr batsmen, and see how they get on.

[enigma]

In my opinion, the cause of your affliction is only too obvious; I find it very odd that you move up aggressive batsmen very quickly & non-aggressive batsmen very slowly, ideally, I think it should be the other way around because we have to move up non-aggressive batsmen quickly as they tend to score slowly while we can afford to move up aggressive batsmen slowly as they're already aggressive & would still score pretty quickly even on less aggression.

The more aggression-bars, higher are the chances of the batsmen getting out so I don't know how going on to 4 aggression-bars is going to solve your problem; if anything, it'll only make it worse.

[El_Zigi]

Well I took note of you and Phylos' comments and in my latest test innings my no.6 got a hundred. He had previously scored 9 50s but no 100s. He has a very aggr style. I started him on 1 bar and only moved him up to 2 when he he was about 60-70% settled and I left him on 2 bars the whole way. Actually I lie, I couldn't resist it, at one point I bumped him up to 3 bars and he immediately edged one but thankfully was dropped. I promptly knocked him back to 2 bars.

I see where your coming from in your above comment. However, you could also argue that an aggr batsman would be happier and bat better on a higher aggr because, well, he's aggr, and vice versa for def batsmen. This is just a case of perception tho and is probably my problem here as the game is working a little different from how I percieve it should.

My system has always worked fine in past versions and has worked I would say OK in this version, but I'm definitely going to go with the lower aggression approach for a season to see how it goes. After my no.6 got that 100 I suspect it will work better.

Of course it goes without saying that regardless of what I do, the batsmans ability will have a large bearing on how he performs.

Off topic: I'd be curious to know what field settings and aggr you adopt for your opening bowlers with the new ball at the start of an innings.

[enigma]

I'm glad our advice has worked for you I think you'll see a lot more 100s & 200s if you adopt this strategy.

However, you could also argue that an aggr batsman would be happier and bat better on a higher aggr because, well, he's aggr, and vice versa for def batsmen.

Well, I've never seen any "Happiness-Meter" in the game to be honest.
Aggressive/non-aggressive batting styles ONLY refer to the pace at which batsmen score their runs & the game's manual is pretty clear about it as well so I see little point in assuming anything otherwise. Aggressive-batsmen score quickly but they do so by batting in somewhat risky manner so if you make them take even more risks by moving up their aggression, very quickly & early in their innings, then they're bound to not perform as well as they can.

Usually, I start my batters on 1 bar & move them on to 2 when they're 30% or so settled. It has to be mentioned though that 2 aggression-bars aren't necessarily the panacea, in cloudy conditions, I not only start my batters on 1 bar but keep'em there until the cloud-cover has moved on.

Off topic: I'd be curious to know what field settings and aggr you adopt for your opening bowlers with the new ball at the start of an innings.

First thing first, the more aggression-bars, the more chances of the bowlers taking wickets BUT at the cost of being more expensive than usual; further, as I've mentioned in another thread, the game works on all sorts of probabilities so bowling aggressively does NOT guarantee wickets at all times.

(Look at the attachment) - This is the field I set for not only the new ball but for each new batsman as well (exceptional circumstances excluded) as one ought to give oneself the best chance of picking up every catch that may pop up to keep the odds/probabilities on one's own side.

In cloudy conditions, 0 aggression for all bowlers (exceptional circumstances excluded). In batting-friendly conditions, max/normal aggression (depending on quality of each opposition batsman & match situation) for all new batsmen for my best bowlers (good career-average/economy-rate); normal/0 aggression for all new batsmen for the second-string bowlers depending on the circumstances.

NOTE : As the distance from the stumps is longer for RF/RMF, to have more cover, I often move the leg-slip into the slip-cordon as the 5th catcher.

[Phylos Fett]

Glad the batting tips worked out for you.

Under ideal circumstances, my batsmen start at 2 bars, and when they settle to about 50% the get the nudge to 3 bars.

If the pitch is at about 50%, or the conditions are really overcast, I'll start at 1 bar, move to 2 bars at 50% settled, and to 3 at 100%. If there is a break of play, or any other circumstance that drops their being settled below 100%, then I'll drop back to 2 until they get back to 100%, and then it's back to 3 bars.

If the pitch is really bad (0%) or the pitch is at 50% and it is overcast, I'll start at 0 bars, move to 1 bar at 50% and 2 bars at 100%, and reduce as above.

As for bowling, my formula is quite simple, as well. My bowlers start at maximum aggression for new batsmen (I let the game set the field), and I bowl opposite to the batsman's preference (bowl outside off in they have a legside preference, and short if they like the front foot). Once they score 5 runs, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 10, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 20, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 40, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 60, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 80, I knock the aggression back a notch; once they score 100, I bowl around the wicket, and swap from around to over (and vice versa) for every 25 runs they score after this.

When I take the new ball, I use the same aggression, unless they have scored more than 60 runs, in which case, I move the aggression back up to the same level as if they were on 40 runs. After the new ball is 10 overs old, I'll go back to the original formula.

If the bowler is a tail-ender (I classify this as a batsman with an average less than 20), I'll bowl full and on middle stump - adopting the old Glenn McGrath philosophy, if they miss, you hit. I'll drop aggression as with the formula above, but maintain the same line and length.

I have been toying with the idea of tweaking the runs versus aggression settings a little to take into consideration knicks and mis-timed shots, but so far I am not sure I want to bother with that level of management. For instance, if a batsman on 1 run snicks ones through the slips for 4 (bringing his score to 5), in this situation, I treat him as if he was still on 1 run. If he snicks another one when he is on 7 runs, and it goes for 4 (bringing his score to 11), I'd treat him as if he was on 3 (3 scored, and 2 snicks for 8). As I said, it's a bit more micro-management than simply being able to glance at the score and say "he ought to be bowled to at aggression X".

I'm not claiming that the above (batting and bowling) is everyone's cup of tea, but I seem to do well enough. I've been using (and refining) since the original ICC came out last century (see, that makes it seem like a long time ). I used to tinker with field settings a lot when I first started (looking at wagon wheels, and placing fielders in the places where batsmen were scoring runs agains particular bowlers), but I soon realized that I was spending more time per game setting fields than I was playing the game.

ANYWAY, hope this helps!

[El_Zigi]

Interesting stuff. I should point out that I wasn't necessarily looking for help with the bowling, more a case of being curious about what tactics you adopt.

Experience is the key with this game. It seems to me the game works like this: situations are predetermined (how difficult/easy batting/bowling will be) dependent on conditions and it's then down to the player to recognise the situation quickly through experience and then adopt the right tactics/approach. That's the key to success and yes, I've probably just pointed out the obvious.

An example of the above is a recent ODI I played against India. They put me in to bat first on a perfect pitch in unsettled conditions. Immediately the alarm bells should be ringing. I like to open with 2 aggr batsmen on 5 bars. In the previous ODI, in which I chased down 242 easy, my openers put together a stand of 120 in good time batting on 5 bars all the way. This time however things started badly. The first two overs went for just a couple of singles and there was a played and missed. My experience at this point should of told me, batting is not easy, knock back aggression, but no I blindly kept them on 5 bars and by the 5th over both openers were out. I ended up all out for 119. Every other bat came in at 3 bars with 2 exceptions who came in at 2 bars (tail-enders excluded). Ishant Sharma got a five-for!! Maybe he just had a very good day.

I'm waiting for my next Test series to try out this less aggressive batting approach.

[El_Zigi]

Incidentally, do the two of you, given your approach to batting, believe the makers are simply wrong when they say in one of their little tips that:

"in county and test matches you should start your batsmen on two bars and when they're 30% settled you should move them up to 3"

I know that this tip is probably meant as a guidline only, but it's still a very different way to treat the aggression bar than your more defensive approach.

[Phylos Fett]

Incidentally, do the two of you, given your approach to batting, believe the makers are simply wrong when they say in one of their little tips that:

"in county and test matches you should start your batsmen on two bars and when they're 30% settled you should move them up to 3"

I know that this tip is probably meant as a guidline only, but it's still a very different way to treat the aggression bar than your more defensive approach.

I believe that under optimal conditions, with good batsmen, in good form, that that is good advice. When I first started playing the game, I took that as the golden rule of batting in this game. My team pretty well, but I wasn't consistently making big scores, and wasn't breaking many records for partnerships and such. So I tried to be a bit more conservative. For a while I tried to be more aggressive. I remember in ICC2 (IIRC) I was playing as Australia, and I had a batsman that could do no wrong - no matter what setting I had him on, he was scoring runs (this was Ponting - in his first game for me he broke Bradman's Test Innings record, and had 500 runs after 2 Tests, and just kept scoring runs...). The whole team was doing fantastic. The first ODI I had Gilchrist faced the first ball, and smashed it for 6. It then dawned on me, that maybe I was doing so well because I had such a good side, which made it easier. So I picked the worst team I could find, and played with them. Winning was far from easy - most of the time I was praying for rain in the 4 day games so I could at least get a draw. But it good in the sense that it did get me to look at the way I was doing things. Which taught me a lot about what works and what doesn't work. I experimented with batting line-ups, bowling attacks, aggression settings - everything.

Anyway, that's enough rambling for one post

[enigma]

Interesting stuff. I should point out that I wasn't necessarily looking for help with the bowling, more a case of being curious about what tactics you adopt.

Come on, pal, you wouldn't have given a tinker's cuss about how we go about our bowling, if you hadn't been intending to glean at least a little something out of how we do things, especially since the topic wasn't directly in line with the original one, & there's nothing wrong with that either, people share strategies all the time here, at least be frank about it, pal.

Incidentally, do the two of you, given your approach to batting, believe the makers are simply wrong when they say in one of their little tips that:

"in county and test matches you should start your batsmen on two bars and when they're 30% settled you should move them up to 3"

I know that this tip is probably meant as a guidline only, but it's still a very different way to treat the aggression bar than your more defensive approach.

Firstly, you seem to assume that the developers are in the know of everything that is there to know about the game which is simply not true because as I've mentioned, the game works on all sorts of probabilities so even the developers have to actually play the game to realise how some of the aspects of the game work.

Secondly, if I'm not mistaken, most of those Tips were put up first by gamers like us & later, they were incorporated into the game-manual.

Further, the approach proposed in the Tip is useful if you're someone who'd rather score 300-350 at a decent run-rate then bowl the opposition out, then score another 250-300 pretty quickly & bowl the opposition out again while our approach is for those who prefer batting only once or very little in the 2nd innings by amassing 400-600 in the 1st innings itself, not to mention get more 100s & 200s for our batsmen; of course, the "cost" we pay for that at times is the somewhat slower run-rate due to the defensive approach so in answer to your question, no, I don't think the Tip is "wrong" or "bad" as such, rather it's just another way of doing things than how I like them done.

[Phylos Fett]

That particular "Tip" has been in every manual since the game started, now that I think about it...

[El_Zigi]

[QUOTE=enigma;16433]Come on, pal, you wouldn't have given a tinker's cuss about how we go about our bowling, if you hadn't been intending to glean at least a little something out of how we do things, especially since the topic wasn't directly in line with the original one, & there's nothing wrong with that either, people share strategies all the time here, at least be frank about it, pal.

It's true, it's true! Oh God help me it's true. No seriously tho I wasn't but I guess it's irrelevant whether I was or not, who cares.

Off topic again: Fitness. I was wondering what effect you've found it to have, if any, on players. I suspect players with say, 3 empty fitness bars, don't perform at their best always. Certainly I have had players perform just fine with this level of fitness but without being at all sure I do suspect that players are more likely to fail with 3 empty fitness bars. I don't really care about players with more than 3 empty fitness bars because I never pick them.