Quote:
Originally Posted by Garlon
The ratings are not really changed, but performance can change based on the pool of players and the league totals.
If you give every team in 1921 a copy of Babe Ruth you should not expect them all to hit 59 HR. In fact, having 16 copies of Ruth in the league would probably knock them each down to like 8 HR or something.
The system is dynamic and accounts for the talent available in the league in order to produce the historical rates.
There is no issue with how this works.
|
You're arguing terminology. If the LTM adjustments don't change ratings what DO they change? It's admitted they change the ratings of the adjusted players. The effect is to adjust the ratings of the non adjusted players. Please stop the word games. Remember, your argument here is against statements made by the devs.
As I observed, a league of players using historical lineups and historical transactions with players rating on their historical stats cannot produce output reasonably close to historical without LTMs that themselves don't work out of the box and have to be tested three times against the league to determine the final numbers to be used. There is no argument to be made that ratings are accurate.
And your comments on a bunch of Babes in a league hitting 8 HRs each, well, that shows that when talent varies from historical, as it will in games played by human GMs, with historical retirement off and development and TCR on, then the output will not match the talent in the league. Such a league is hammered into historical output. So much for alternative history, which is what human GMs want!
*
You didn't address the issue on hot streaks and slumps. Do you accept my conclusion?