OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

PSUColonel · 05-07-2022, 12:26 PM

Another year, another great discussion for sure!

.

I must admit I desperatley want to use 25/25/25/25 for so many of the reasons that have been articulated. For one, it allows the personality of each staff member to truly come into play. It also gives a better overall "body of work" perspective on each player.

Here is a question I have for those using these numbers: Do you not get an advantage over the AI when you can see the scouted grades drop, yet the AI cannot? (or not as clearly, as it's only 25 percent of the equation)

I think (as I have mentioned in previous posts & threads) this is where the challenge vs realism issue rears it's ugly head. The fact is...we all WANT both. Reality is...we CAN'T HAVE both.

Some will say, "well if you have ratings & stats split 50/50 that should do it". The truth however is that it doesn't seem to work that way. It has literally been my quest I think to try to find this middle ground which doesn't exist.

So my argument for 55 ratings is still there because 1. It helps the AI with trading, waivers and contract decisions. Is it realistic to see a player who is performing well suddenly place on waivers or cut? No...it isn't...but I contend you the human player can see the ratings dip and now weigh it more heavily than the AI...which gives the players a massive advantage. The only way for this not to happen is to not use ratings at all, and go stats only.

This is why 55 to me, is the best number. It allows for stats to be a pretty big part of the equation without blinding the AI to the facts. My biggest question however now, is the debate between Sweet & MathBandit....should the weights be 55/15/15/15...which at least looks at each year equally and in premise is a bit like 25/25/25/25 with the obvious exception of ratings....or go with the declining scale of 55/20/15/10?

People did use 40/30/20/10 for years, and seemed to like it as they felt any combination of the two had a lot of weight, and it was still mostly stats over ratings. I do think 25/25/25/25 is better than 40/30/20/10 simply because I feel if you use anything less than 55 for ratings, you might as well look at the entire body of work.

05-07-2022, 12:26 PM	#63
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,145	Another year, another great discussion for sure! . I must admit I desperatley want to use 25/25/25/25 for so many of the reasons that have been articulated. For one, it allows the personality of each staff member to truly come into play. It also gives a better overall "body of work" perspective on each player. Here is a question I have for those using these numbers: Do you not get an advantage over the AI when you can see the scouted grades drop, yet the AI cannot? (or not as clearly, as it's only 25 percent of the equation) I think (as I have mentioned in previous posts & threads) this is where the challenge vs realism issue rears it's ugly head. The fact is...we all WANT both. Reality is...we CAN'T HAVE both. Some will say, "well if you have ratings & stats split 50/50 that should do it". The truth however is that it doesn't seem to work that way. It has literally been my quest I think to try to find this middle ground which doesn't exist. So my argument for 55 ratings is still there because 1. It helps the AI with trading, waivers and contract decisions. Is it realistic to see a player who is performing well suddenly place on waivers or cut? No...it isn't...but I contend you the human player can see the ratings dip and now weigh it more heavily than the AI...which gives the players a massive advantage. The only way for this not to happen is to not use ratings at all, and go stats only. This is why 55 to me, is the best number. It allows for stats to be a pretty big part of the equation without blinding the AI to the facts. My biggest question however now, is the debate between Sweet & MathBandit....should the weights be 55/15/15/15...which at least looks at each year equally and in premise is a bit like 25/25/25/25 with the obvious exception of ratings....or go with the declining scale of 55/20/15/10? People did use 40/30/20/10 for years, and seemed to like it as they felt any combination of the two had a lot of weight, and it was still mostly stats over ratings. I do think 25/25/25/25 is better than 40/30/20/10 simply because I feel if you use anything less than 55 for ratings, you might as well look at the entire body of work.