[Syd Thrift]

dola,

The issue with making your league that flat by boosting development and knocking down aging to that degree is that you're going to create a league with altogether too much talent compared to real life. So every year a team has not just, say, 2 MLB quality first basemen to choose from but 6, and since the game doesn't give a hoot about the name or even the past performance of the incumbent, even a small regression by a starter is going to make him a backup now. And on top of that, you're going to have so many guys with similar numbers that it makes more and more sense to platoon stars in every season except for their absolute primes and even if you don't, to give them set rest patterns to ensure they never play tired.

I guess what I'd probably run is leave the 3 year calc on and see what aging patterns *that* gives you - probably using 1s for both aging and development. If you're testing the game engine itself I'd probably just go for full fictional players without worrying as much about what "Pete Rose" does but YMMV.

FWIW I currently have my league set to I think 1.25 development and 0.75 aging and try to balance out leaguewide talent with a 150 TCR, which is probably not a thing you necessarily want to impose on a "historical" league. I still find that the game does a relatively bad job at cutting 30+ year olds who aren't significantly better than 25 year olds in the system; I think it really just looks at performance level and pays very little attention to age in those cases.