Anyone done any testing on prospect development in v25.2.52?

[md40022]

Credit to everyone on this thread who has run tests and experimented with all of this. I bring absolutely nothing of value to this discussion in terms of the OOTP game itself haha, but as someone who has played baseball at a (relatively) high level earlier in life, I just want to throw the reminder out there that coaching only goes so far. At the end of the day, you can either hit the curveball or you can't.

IRL every single day MLB organizations are putting their prospects through the absolute top-notch highest-end clinics, practices, camps, etc. and guys are still flopping constantly because they can't lay off the slider in the dirt.

Not to sound like a meat head, but sometimes baseball becomes too much of a numbers game and becomes too analytical in its assessments. I haven't done any number crunching at all, and again big credit to everyone who invests their time in really breaking this stuff down, I'm just simply throwing out a reminder that for every prospect that turns into a star, 5x as many are not living up to projections. And ALL of those guys have access to be the best coaching on the planet.

In OOTP can you build your organization by targeting specific tools or traits that you value? Speed? Power? Defense? Absolutely. And while coaching can push a guy or nudge a guy in the right direction, at the end of the day the player either has it or he doesnt (and most do not). Look at how many players come from p*ss poor countries where they are playing with a stick as bat and rolled up sock as a ball through the age of 18 yet turn into superstars, while at the same time every suburban kid in america is going to summer clinics and playing 500000 travel-ball games a year from the moment they start t-ball and they don't do a darn thing with it. There's always outliers, but for the vast majority these development clinics don't do much..... which seems like maybe is exactly what is being realized here?

[md40022]

**double post

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by Rain King

IMO, if this feature was implemented to be as strong as you seem to want it to be...it would be game breaking.

This is where I strongly disagree. If the focus system does work as described and adding to the bar increases your odds even slightly, while removing everything from a bar has no discernible effect, then there is no penalty for ignoring anything.

I want penalties. I would be happy to trade (using editor values here, not scout) 30 points in defense to add 10 points in avoid K just to see what happens. Or sacrifice stamina training in the minors to work on control hoping to improve my odds for a bump in potential while maybe regressing on stamina (kind of like they do with pitch counts IRL). None of that is actually happening in any quantifiable way.

The lab does what you describe - guys with outstanding results can jump 10%+ right now. As in guys with 420 ratings jumping to 460+. But, if you get a poor result your guy can take a very significant hit. That is what I’m talking about.

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by Sweed

This has always been the danger of implementing a user system to influence and train players. These type of changes aren't easy in real life, nor should they be in OOTP. If throwing money at development were the key to success everyone would do it..... successfully. Yes, spending money should have the possibility of moving the needle, but it shouldn't guarantee improvement whether large or small.



Exactly, and "game breaking" is what I feared most when the feature was announced.

I am not sure there are any two people here who play the same game. Being very honest, I really don’t care what settings anyone uses. If there is a focus setting where I can increase the positive and negative results, sign me up.

If it gets increased and you decide not to use it - you do you!

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by md40022

Credit to everyone on this thread who has run tests and experimented with all of this. I bring absolutely nothing of value to this discussion in terms of the OOTP game itself haha, but as someone who has played baseball at a (relatively) high level earlier in life, I just want to throw the reminder out there that coaching only goes so far. At the end of the day, you can either hit the curveball or you can't.

IRL every single day MLB organizations are putting their prospects through the absolute top-notch highest-end clinics, practices, camps, etc. and guys are still flopping constantly because they can't lay off the slider in the dirt.

Not to sound like a meat head, but sometimes baseball becomes too much of a numbers game and becomes too analytical in its assessments. I haven't done any number crunching at all, and again big credit to everyone who invests their time in really breaking this stuff down, I'm just simply throwing out a reminder that for every prospect that turns into a star, 5x as many are not living up to projections. And ALL of those guys have access to be the best coaching on the planet.

In OOTP can you build your organization by targeting specific tools or traits that you value? Speed? Power? Defense? Absolutely. And while coaching can push a guy or nudge a guy in the right direction, at the end of the day the player either has it or he doesnt (and most do not). Look at how many players come from p*ss poor countries where they are playing with a stick as bat and rolled up sock as a ball through the age of 18 yet turn into superstars, while at the same time every suburban kid in america is going to summer clinics and playing 500000 travel-ball games a year from the moment they start t-ball and they don't do a darn thing with it. There's always outliers, but for the vast majority these development clinics don't do much..... which seems like maybe is exactly what is being realized here?

I hear you, totally appreciate the sentiment, and I’m not trying to pick a fight, but we ain’t playin’ baseball, we’re playin’ spreadsheets.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by FantasyDrafter

I am not sure there are any two people here who play the same game. Being very honest, I really don’t care what settings anyone uses. If there is a focus setting where I can increase the positive and negative results, sign me up.

If it gets increased and you decide not to use it - you do you!

Just stating my opinion, nothing more. It's been a civil thread with differing views on how a feature does or should work. I think they've struck a good balance with development and a few tweaks this year and beyond will put it up with some of the best work they've done. You obviously wouldn't agree with my opinion.

At the end of the day, I find when one doesn't chime in they sometimes wake up with changes they don't like/want. If that happens? Well, that's the way it goes. As long as one can express their thoughts and opinions it's all good.

[Cluboris]

Originally Posted by Rain King

They aren't. It is pretty ridiculous to believe so.

Why is it ridiculous to believe so? Dev sliders were turned down completely and there was no discernible negative effect on development.

If these added influences on development, with the exception of the dev lab, don't really influence development or have such a subtle effect as to be hardly noticeable, what exactly is the point of implementing them?

And yes, I understand totally that scouts miss, guys flame out, not every prospect works out, and MLB is full of average players and generational players should absolutely be the exception. I welcome the fog of war.

I appreciate all of the feedback. Agree to disagree and all that. But if I can't see a difference in some of the developmental choices I make, it's hard to just take someone's word for it.

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Just stating my opinion, nothing more. It's been a civil thread with differing views on how a feature does or should work. I think they've struck a good balance with development and a few tweaks this year and beyond will put it up with some of the best work they've done. You obviously wouldn't agree with my opinion.

At the end of the day, I find when one doesn't chime in they sometimes wake up with changes they don't like/want. If that happens? Well, that's the way it goes. As long as one can express their thoughts and opinions it's all good.

The good thing is that as currently implemented you can turn off focus and it would change nothing. As far as I can tell I can’t turn it up.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by FantasyDrafter

I hear you, totally appreciate the sentiment, and I’m not trying to pick a fight, but we ain’t playin’ baseball, we’re playin’ spreadsheets.

While you, and others, may be playing spreadsheets, I, and others, are trying to play a simulated baseball world. I've played a lot of sports titles over the years and there has always been these two pools of players. And you're right it's not a fight, it's just different styles and expectations.

It's why I would never play in an online league. I have done that with FOF and one group is playing the spreadsheet and what it allows, while others are playing football. There's nothing wrong with either way, but they don't fit well together.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by FantasyDrafter

The good thing is that as currently implemented you can turn off focus and it would change nothing. As far as I can tell I can’t turn it up.

You say that as if it's a fact. I play slowly managing every game. I just received my first scouting update in season and some increases were in areas where I moved the bars. Normal development or focus? I can't say factually either way.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Cluboris

Why is it ridiculous to believe so? Dev sliders were turned down completely and there was no discernible negative effect on development.

My educated guess is that if you turn everything down it probably has the same affect as leaving things on default.

Again, from the developer's guide on this.

The new player development focus sliders (found on the Development tab on the player screen) allow you to split up their finite time into the areas of their game that you want them to spend time on with coaches.

The sliders are essentially changing the ratios of the coaching influence. If every category is a 1...that is the same influence for every category. The player isn't sleeping in and arriving at the field 5 minutes before the game. They are still getting their work in. You are just making the denominator for the ratios 10 instead of 100 (for example).

[itsmb8]

Originally Posted by Rain King

My educated guess is that if you turn everything down it probably has the same affect as leaving things on default.

Again, from the developer's guide on this.



The sliders are essentially changing the ratios of the coaching influence. If every category is a 1...that is the same influence for every category. The player isn't sleeping in and arriving at the field 5 minutes before the game. They are still getting their work in. You are just making the denominator for the ratios 10 instead of 100 (for example).

Agree 100% here. Turning everything to zero should have the same effect to turning everything to max. You arent prioritizing anything so it'll have no difference.

Another thing to point out is taking a Prince Fielder or Big Papi and focusing only on baserunning, fielding range, and speed. It doesnt matter how much you focus their development on being fast and agile, they will never be that IRL. Thats essentially what this is in the game. You can tell them to focus on some aspects more than others, but it'll only have a small effect. You cant completely overhaul a player's development, but you can try to lead it in a certain direction.

I think we're past the argument of "player's arent developing at all in 25" and have realized what everyone is seeing is the new way overalls are being calculated to be more in line with real life.

[FantasyDrafter]

1. It isn’t possible to turn everything to max. You are supposed to have to sacrifice one to enhance another. Going to either extreme doesn’t really change anything.

2. I also hypothesized that turning everything to zero might effectively deactivate it. Still, according to the developer subtracting from a bar should have a greater effect than adding to a bar. I have set entire organizations to min/max settings. Nothing in the editor over many, many seasons indicates that happens. Robbing speed to add to power doesn’t hurt speed.

3. People continue to confuse scout ratings with the actual ratings in the editor. Scouting indicates the scouts ranking/sorting of a player against the current MLB players (or a different league if you switch it). The editor numbers are where the changes are recorded.

4. If a player follows a ridiculous training plan they should suffer. Billy Hamilton shouldn’t be sacrificing his speed to work on his power. It doesn’t matter if you do that right now - you are actually better off removing all points from speed for example because initial rating and then the aging process is all that really matters. 80 speed guys stay around 80 speed, 50 speed guys stay there too. If you want to train base running use the lab. Same with defense.

5. Totally side note, but as I brought up to them on the first day, the implementation of focus for pitching is extremely strange. If the bars are supposed to represent time spent / effort dedicated to an activity, having more pitches should mean a player is spread thinner. Instead, they get an extra half bar per pitch in their arsenal. I’ve tested it many times, doesn’t really seem to matter, but I’m not sure why having 6 pitches allows you to for example fill control, movement and stamina and still have 1.5 full bars left over while having 2 pitches means you cant even fill 3 bars - clearly it is just set up so you can put all bars at 50%, which begs the question, “what’s the point?”

If it is truly an independent layer (and it can be turned on and off so it should be) - then leaving it at this level by default but offering the ability to enhance the effects should be possible. I’d love the opportunity to actually independently train my guys and for it to matter.

Good luck to all in their personal, fictional baseball worlds.

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by Sweed

You say that as if it's a fact. I play slowly managing every game. I just received my first scouting update in season and some increases were in areas where I moved the bars. Normal development or focus? I can't say factually either way.

I’m glad you enjoy playing that way. For you the development won’t be that big a deal since you won’t get very far.

I usually get 50 seasons out of a start, multiple generations of players. I set their strategies and sim in chunks. Totally different experience.

[FantasyDrafter]

Originally Posted by Sweed

While you, and others, may be playing spreadsheets, I, and others, are trying to play a simulated baseball world. I've played a lot of sports titles over the years and there has always been these two pools of players. And you're right it's not a fight, it's just different styles and expectations.

It's why I would never play in an online league. I have done that with FOF and one group is playing the spreadsheet and what it allows, while others are playing football. There's nothing wrong with either way, but they don't fit well together.

We are both playing the spreadsheet, whether we want to or not. We are at the mercy of the tool the developer has given us. I want the developer to give me as much control as possible so I can create what I believe would be closer to my vision for development (within the constraints of the tool). I thought we were getting more control this year, but at best it is underwhelming.

My tests aren’t to break the game so I create a team of 100HR monsters to beat up the AI with. It is to force the game to show me if there is any impact while I wait for them to fix the issues that crop up every season on release. Cant play “develop an organization” if the player development is wonky and the AI isn’t managing their organizations well (which is where I currently find the game).

[84Cubs]

-

[OutS|der]

What we need is a setting to determine how much lab effects ratings outside of sliders.
Kinda like catcher framing impact

[locuspc]

Originally Posted by FantasyDrafter

The raw numbers change a bit, but always the same general bucket, even if I, in the developers words, apply a significant detriment to him.

You are making up words and putting them in the developer's mouths. You are inventing things to get mad about here.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by Cluboris

Why is it ridiculous to believe so? Dev sliders were turned down completely and there was no discernible negative effect on development.

If these added influences on development, with the exception of the dev lab, don't really influence development or have such a subtle effect as to be hardly noticeable, what exactly is the point of implementing them?

And yes, I understand totally that scouts miss, guys flame out, not every prospect works out, and MLB is full of average players and generational players should absolutely be the exception. I welcome the fog of war.

I appreciate all of the feedback. Agree to disagree and all that. But if I can't see a difference in some of the developmental choices I make, it's hard to just take someone's word for it.

Many other things influence development. The focus is more on what players are working on during batting practice, which, if you ask any pro baseball player about baseball practice, there isn't much of it, so the effect should be subtle...

The labs are programs held during the offseason, so bigger changes can happen.

The focus is a nudge in a certain direction for development and a preventive aid for declining players in certain areas.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by FantasyDrafter

1. It isn’t possible to turn everything to max. You are supposed to have to sacrifice one to enhance another. Going to either extreme doesn’t really change anything.

2. I also hypothesized that turning everything to zero might effectively deactivate it. Still, according to the developer subtracting from a bar should have a greater effect than adding to a bar. I have set entire organizations to min/max settings. Nothing in the editor over many, many seasons indicates that happens. Robbing speed to add to power doesn’t hurt speed.

3. People continue to confuse scout ratings with the actual ratings in the editor. Scouting indicates the scouts ranking/sorting of a player against the current MLB players (or a different league if you switch it). The editor numbers are where the changes are recorded.

4. If a player follows a ridiculous training plan they should suffer. Billy Hamilton shouldn’t be sacrificing his speed to work on his power. It doesn’t matter if you do that right now - you are actually better off removing all points from speed for example because initial rating and then the aging process is all that really matters. 80 speed guys stay around 80 speed, 50 speed guys stay there too. If you want to train base running use the lab. Same with defense.

5. Totally side note, but as I brought up to them on the first day, the implementation of focus for pitching is extremely strange. If the bars are supposed to represent time spent / effort dedicated to an activity, having more pitches should mean a player is spread thinner. Instead, they get an extra half bar per pitch in their arsenal. I’ve tested it many times, doesn’t really seem to matter, but I’m not sure why having 6 pitches allows you to for example fill control, movement and stamina and still have 1.5 full bars left over while having 2 pitches means you cant even fill 3 bars - clearly it is just set up so you can put all bars at 50%, which begs the question, “what’s the point?”

If it is truly an independent layer (and it can be turned on and off so it should be) - then leaving it at this level by default but offering the ability to enhance the effects should be possible. I’d love the opportunity to actually independently train my guys and for it to matter.

Good luck to all in their personal, fictional baseball worlds.

In this case, he will lose speed faster when he ages than he would if it was at default or higher...

Long story short "Development focus" is probably the wrong name to use for this feature. Its confusing people.