Then try going back to 20 or earlier, if you feel you have to and can, until this is figured out somehow. Certainly all your versions of the IPA, for instance, can't be possibly corrupted or something, can they? I hope not, of course, EC. I hope things do ultimately work out for you with your leagues, even if you lose a certain number of seasons, however many that may be. Keep us posted, please, and try not to lose hope about your leagues, if you can. CD out.

And if you do happen to lose some seasons, then perhaps you could reconsider the idea I suggested earlier to perhaps let others run certain IPA teams in an online league-type format like legendsport is doing with his FABL or Mythic timelines, for instance, to reduce your potential workload here in relation to the IPA, at least. I do hope you are able to continue the league or leagues in question, but remember to make backups periodically, you know. Especially when you try and send your related files to the developers and all here that may be having problems with them, for sure. CD out.

Stay calm, stay patient, and stay relaxed, EC, and let's see what the Lord does in relation to your leagues, if anything at all. Besides, even if we can't play our leagues, surely He has our best interests always at heart, and He cares for us immensely and all. He won't let anything steal our joy if we let Him handle everything, you know, for sure, as He sees fit and all. CD out.

Spring training games are not regular-season games, as you know, EC. I've periodically seen high-scoring spring training games before, I'm quite sure. But when the regular season games are started, the scores get to be much more realistic, if I remember correctly.

I think the average scores for games generally depend on the quality of the players playing in them, at least for the most part, if not entirely. And sometimes certain people may be rather rusty coming off an off-season or various injuries, you know. So please don't be so hasty, potentially, in calling a possibly premature end to the IPA, even if the spring training scores seem to be greatly out of whack. Just a suggestion here or two, that's all. CD out.

CD, I can't send my files to the OOTP developers... I am not skilled like that... I can't even zip and unzip files to send to you and other via email or private messages.

Thanks for the suggestion to make an on-line league for the IPA, but I have absolutely no interest in an on-line league... that is a lot of work as I understand it... those guys are serious gamers with lots of knowledge of game finances, players contracts and knowledge of how to play OOTP baseball... I have no interest in financials and have never used them in my game... I just set up a league, watch it unfold and recap it here on the Dynasty Forum... that is how I enjoy the game... I enjoy good graphics and playing out the playoff games in the IPA... that's enough for me.

Talk to Lukas Berger and The Game, for instance. I think they might be able to help you out somehow, either in how to send files to others, including OOTP, for instance. The Game, at least, sent me certain things a good while back to one of my email addresses, in a zipped format.

If I remember correctly, Lukas has a link in his signature related to sending files for checking out, or at least did for a while, here on the forums. He should hopefully be able to make it simple enough for you to understand how to do that, I think.

I hope your IPA isn't damaged, of course, at the very least. But as you so wisely said, there's more to life than the IPA, or any league or game that any of us may have created or are creating or may create here with OOTP. Much more. While it may be frustrating, for instance, to lose something one may have spent a lot of time working on at times in their lives, there's more to life than baseball or hockey, you know, for sure.

Thanks for your time and attention and all here, and I really hope everything ultimately works out for you and yours, no matter what, Lord willing and all, EC. CD out.

Busy a bit with a dynasty I may talk about later on the forums, but not sure yet if I will. Currently running the Providence Grays in 1883 for an OOTP 21 dynasty. Not sure how long I will play or simulate it out, but am now on my second franchise for said dynasty. Albeit only because the franchise that eventually becomes the Cardinals is not present starting in 1871, of course, by default.

So I started out as the Fort Wayne Kekiongas, the eventual Dodgers franchise. If I decide to continue the dynasty after 1952, I will probably turn off automatic historical evolution to a degree, at least so the classic teams stay in their proper locations. I don't yet know if I will ever be able to get that far in that dynasty, though, for various reasons.

Will post more later, if and when I can, I'm sure, Lord willing and all, then, folks. CD out.

High scores in spring training are not always a bad thing, EC, I think. But they shouldn't necessarily be all that common normally in regular-season play. No matter what era or eras of baseball your dynasty or dynasties may take place in, that is. Sometimes pitchers may be rusty coming out of offseasons for a while, or after getting hurt. You know that's been true many times, especially when franchises are not very good at a particular time, in terms of their players' general quality, or the quality of their coaching, managing, and/or front office personnel.

So do try to relax a little bit, even if game box scores may be having teams score considerably more than you would normally expect, like during ST, for instance. Just a suggestion here, that's all, EC. CD out.

No, CD... this was not the case of the scores just being a little bit high... I was getting scores of 100-75, 98-34, 89-56... this is not normal... sorry, I would never play a league with game scores like that.

I think I have fixed it some... game scores are back to being realistic scores... I checked a button on the Games Settings screen "automatically adjust league totals modifiers for accuracy" and then clicked on the AutoCalc button and got good game results... I'm sure I will have to refine the league batting average and league fielding average, stolen base frequency, passed balls and a few other stats.... but this will get me started again with pretty good stats.

Deleted that dynasty I just mentioned, sometime after 1883. Basically considering it as a potential test league or game, in essence. May recreate it later, however, but not sure yet, to be honest.

In the meantime, I will try to get some more writing done or work on other things done soon, if and when possible and all, Lord willing and all. CD out.

Hey, EC, why not do things a bit different this time around, when it comes to the IPA playoffs? Why not have each league's playoff setup seeded so that the fourth-best division winner in each league meets the top seed in their applicable league, and the third-best winner meets the second-best seed, in the first round? And then the higher of the two surviving seeds could potentially host more games than their opponent in the next round, in each league? I think it would really make it a much more interesting post-season setup if each of the first-round matchups weren't always between two specific divisions apiece in either league, you see.

Just a thought here you might want to consider and all, of course. Talk more later, if and when I can, I'm sure, Lord willing and all. CD out.

Thanks, CD... I will think about your suggestion... might be a good idea so the same divisions don't play each other each year.

I agree with CD on that suggestion. I seed my IPA playoffs #1 vs. #4 and #2 vs. #3. It works out very well and is more fair.

The only change I might make for the best-of-7 series is to change the 2-3-2 format to 2-2-1-1-1.

I think 2-2-1 is best for best-of-five series, 2-3-2 for best-of-seven ones, and, quite possibly, 2-2-2-2-1 for best-of-nine ones, in truth, folks. But that's me. You each may prefer differently, of course.

I hope someone has graphics or can make graphics related to my latest graphics request that won't have anything needlessly to do with Photobucket, but if they don't want to help me or can't help me, then so be it, obviously, folks. Two of the teams basically only really need a sleeve patch removed and/or changed fonts, I think, if not three of them. The fourth team's looks and all can basically be however a potential designer might want to design them here, in truth.

Will write more later, I'm sure, if I'm not otherwise occupied and all, Lord willing and all. Such as being occupied with working on Lighting Up the Darkness's thirteenth chapter, for instance, that is. Until the next post, then, I'll close this. CD out.

I'm using 2-2-2-2-1 for my best-of-nine IPA Pro Cup now.

The reason that I prefer 2-2-1-1-1 over 2-3-2 for best-of-seven is that I feel that at no point in the series should the lower seed play more home games than the higher seed. I do see the upside in the 2-3-2 in that it cuts down on travel. However, it seems like home field doesn't matter as much as it used to. Plenty of road teams have won Game 7s in recent years, and look at the 2019 World Series where the home team lost every game. Even in this year's NBA first round between the Clippers and Mavericks which went 7 games, the road team won the first 6 games. Two years ago in the Stanley Cup Finals the Blues beat the Bruins in Boston in Game 7, and quite easily.

Well, due to recent/current and what I believe may be possibly unneeded circumstances, the home field/court/rink/whatever advantages have potentially been weakened or minimized to some degree, if not eliminated, due to the lack of fans and all. Increased parity likely also plays a part in certain playoff results, too, when the teams are more equalized in terms of competition quality, like they seem to have been more recently than not to me. Of course, you people may disagree with my assessment of certain things here, but this is just how I feel, when it comes to playoff-related matters and all.

Speaking of parity, it seems that your dynasties have some superteams in them, in that their records are probably much better than they would be if the standings were more realistic in terms of records and all. Now, don't take this as unfair criticism, seeing as I don't know how you've set up your leagues and all, please, but it seems that the statistics and records seem to have been boosted to yield much higher or much lower levels of wins and/or losses than one might normally expect for seasons of 162 games apiece. I really don't think a team could normally maintain long streaks of winning 100-110+ games a season for more than a few seasons, even in a season with 162 games for it. And your NHL-themed dynasty seems to have the division winners regularly posting win totals of at least 110 wins a season before the playoffs, if not even more than that, for example.

You may have to adjust your modifiers and/or other details for your dynasty leagues at some point, for the reasons already mentioned, at least, in order to increase parity and competitiveness for your dynasty leagues. Of course, you don't have to agree with me, because they're your leagues, simply, but I still think it might be a good idea here for you to at least consider doing so, jg2977.

Thank you for your time and all. And yes, I was quite glad to see the Blues win the Cup a couple of years ago. Will talk more later, of course, Lord willing and all, I'm sure. CD out.

Well, I do my dynasties for my own enjoyment. I decided to create some superteams and players in my NHL. The IPA is more fun for me if I keep it more true to form. I think there's still too many offensive outbursts in my IPA so I will have to tone the modifiers down. What modifiers and ratings would you suggest? Since my IPA will take place in 1941 next season, I'll try to use similar ratings from the actual MLB season.

Not sure, because I normally haven't played outside of the dead-ball era, except for maybe a few dynasties at most. I generally don't like rotations of more than four pitchers, and not a great number of relievers in the bullpen, on my teams.

I'm the kind of guy who would probably build his teams on pitching, defense, speed, and contact, mainly, if an whenever possible. I'd prefer starters who could often go 7 or more innings, and then be able to turn over the ball to a single player for the rest of the game, if they couldn't complete it themselves, no earlier than perhaps sometime in the seventh or eighth inning. I wouldn't likely mind closers/stoppers who could go more than an inning or two, if need be, either, to finish the game.

I'd probably try to have a strong middle of the field, and home runs wouldn't necessarily be all that important to me, in the general scheme of things, with my teams. Defensive ability and quickness and intelligence and ability to get along well with teammates and/or coaches would be considered as positive characteristics by me more often than not, I think. In essence, I'd probably have more of a traditional or smallball-style approach to things, and not really a sabermetric-style approach to things. I'd want my players to be fast, and good hitters and runners, more often than not.

I don't know much about modifiers or ratings, et cetera, so I can't really give you a good answer, other than what I've already mentioned. However, I do like the St. Louis-era Pujols, generally, and my favorite player of all time, in terms of baseball, is still Bruce Sutter, even nearly 40 years after the Cardinals won the World Series in 1982. I'm not really a fan of artificial turf, either. I'd prefer games only be played on grass, if and whenever possible, to be honest. And preferably not in non-retractable domed stadiums, or with the use of designated hitters, come to think of it.

I don't like the DH, never have, and never will. But if others want to play with it utilized, that's up to them, no matter who they are, of course.

Just some thoughts of mine about baseball and all, that's all. Take them as you will or not, then, jg2977 and others who may see this particular post. CD out.

If you went with my suggestions, EC, the first-round match-ups in the IPA would be Claxton versus Sligo and Taranto versus Marston in the RU, and Rolling Hills versus South Fork and Southport versus Blue Lake in the TU, just so you know. That is if I remember correctly, of course. CD out.

CD, the playoff schedule has already been generated... I didn't want to risk fouling things up by changing them... my changes have not been going well lately... maybe next year I will seed the playoff teams.