Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 26 Available - FHM 11 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 26 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Out of the Park Baseball 21 > OOTP 21 - General Discussions

OOTP 21 - General Discussions Everything about the brand new version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB and the MLBPA.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-30-2021, 05:29 AM   #1
Doc_Giggle
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 37
Most realistic Talent Change Randomness settings?

Has anyone done any research into this? I've had mine set to 145 since the beginning of my fictional league, and going through lists of drafted players, just about every 1st round pick has some major league time. About 2 or 3 never made it past the minors in each 1st round, but in looking at draft lists from a random selection of years since all 1998, it seems to range from around 7 to 10 first round picks who never even sniff the bigs on average (with a pretty good proportion of the others with only a small cup of ineffective coffee at the big league level). I've been pretty satisfied with 145, but it does seem like the odds are in your favor that your first round pick is going to be at least a solid regular for you.

Is the default being set to 100 done more to keep casual fans from pulling their hair out than recreating the actual crapshoot effects of the draft? Is 200 the way to go? Or maybe a slightly more moderate 160? Main drawback to going higher for me is the fear that an unrealistic amount of players from the later rounds will make it to the bigs lol.

Last edited by Doc_Giggle; 01-30-2021 at 05:31 AM.
Doc_Giggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 06:59 AM   #2
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
I feel like TCR is a thing that hits mainly established players. I have my league set to 120 and I see much the same thing that you do: highly touted draft picks usually come through, but established stars can suddenly forget how to hit HRs or whatever. I actually prefer that (I also have aging rather flattened out) but I don’t know if it’s truly “realistic” or not.

In the history of the game I think draft picks used to be a lot more random but people complained and now it’s not. ISTR there being an actual season or two where people were like “it’s a complete crapshoot and I hate it!”, ignoring, I guess, the fact that the actual draft is a bit of a crapshoot. It’s a little like the injury system: I remember people hated it when they were first goosed up to modern day levels and many still play with the “OOTP Classic” settings.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 09:27 AM   #3
MikeS21
Minors (Triple A)
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 276
I have never messed with the talent change randomness setting much.

While the “can’t miss” first round five-star pick sometimes (usually) “miss,” it would be nice for the occasional boring 29th round one-star draft pick to suddenly develop into a five-star talent.
MikeS21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 10:06 AM   #4
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
In the history of the game I think draft picks used to be a lot more random but people complained and now it’s not. ISTR there being an actual season or two where people were like “it’s a complete crapshoot and I hate it!”, ignoring, I guess, the fact that the actual draft is a bit of a crapshoot. It’s a little like the injury system: I remember people hated it when they were first goosed up to modern day levels and many still play with the “OOTP Classic” settings.
The real draft is a complete and total crapshoot. Real scouts and GMs still gotta put in the work they get paid to do to the best of their ability.

In OOTP though, I totally prefer the draft to be a *little* less of a crapshoot. The main reason is that there's a whole scouting system available to us to spend a lot of time meticulously researching and analyzing our potential picks. Just so many tools built into it that it'd be a shame if it were completely meaningless. I like that it's still a crapshoot, just a little less so than real life.

As for injuries, I used to feel they were too high, so I lowered the appropriate setting to my liking for a few seasons. And I discovered that by reducing the mix of frustration and opportunities created by injuries, you reduce too much of the immersion of running a team. I cranked them back up to reality and never looked back.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 10:29 AM   #5
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeS21 View Post
I have never messed with the talent change randomness setting much.

While the “can’t miss” first round five-star pick sometimes (usually) “miss,” it would be nice for the occasional boring 29th round one-star draft pick to suddenly develop into a five-star talent.
That doesn't really happen in reality though. The 29th round guys may become average big leaguers if things go *really* right, but it's almost a generational thing that someone drafted so low goes on to be a perennial all star.

Check out this list of the best low draft picks in history:

https://www.mlb.com/news/best-late-r...ory-c182980276

Lot of cool names on every round, but you can see how rare it is. Only about 5 guys total you can say were 5 stars beyond the 25th round. Also keep in mind the exponential growth and sophistication of scouting. It'd be impossible for a Mike Piazza clone to fall so far under the radar on draft day today.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 11:14 AM   #6
jpeters1734
Hall Of Famer
 
jpeters1734's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Juust a bit outside...
Posts: 6,117
Personally, I think the default 100 is already well balanced. Anything higher than that, I feel, lead to too many veterans losing ability for no reason. I use to always set my TCR to 200 for every game I created, I create many saves just to long-sim, and I found that very few players, if any, would reach the 3000 hit, 500 hr, or 2500 K milestones. And I'm talking sims going anywhere from 50-100 years.

Once I stopped changing the TCR, players started hitting those milestones again. In my experience, the effects are more noticeable with established players.
__________________
"Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!!

Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com

An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21

Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet

Last edited by jpeters1734; 01-30-2021 at 07:00 PM. Reason: edited for clarity
jpeters1734 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 01:36 PM   #7
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734 View Post
Personally, I think the default 100 is already well balanced. Anything higher than that, I feel, lead to too many veterans losing ability for no reason. I use to always set my TCR to 200 for every game I created, I create many saves just to long-sim, and I found that very few players, if any, would reach the 3000 hit, 500 hr, or 2500 K milestones. And I'm talking sims going anywhere from 50-100 years.

Once I stopped changing the TCR, players started hitting those milestones again. From what I can tell, TCR affects established players more.
Good info, thanks.

One theory could be that good players are more likely to get TCR'd downward and bad players upward, so it just kinda makes for more middling players on the whole.

Did you see an effect on single season individual player records?

Last edited by brotherblues; 01-30-2021 at 01:39 PM.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 02:10 PM   #8
Ace1234NY
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 47
The real life draft is definitely not a random crapshoot lol. You think MLB teams are spending millions of dollars in scouting, analytics, etc. and dedicating countless personnel all for it to be meaningless? They aren't (always) that stupid. If it was truly random, they wouldn't be doing any of that and would spend the resources elsewhere. They've also gotten much better at this than they were in the past. That isn't to say that being picked in the first round is a guarantee of success. But it feels like people overstate the futility of predicting success in the big leagues at all, as if difficulty automatically equals realism. If you have a good scouting department, you can be right more often than you're wrong, which is all you need to be.

Last edited by Ace1234NY; 01-30-2021 at 02:12 PM.
Ace1234NY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 02:33 PM   #9
brotherblues
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace1234NY View Post
The real life draft is definitely not a random crapshoot lol. You think MLB teams are spending millions of dollars in scouting, analytics, etc. and dedicating countless personnel all for it to be meaningless? They aren't (always) that stupid. If it was truly random, they wouldn't be doing any of that and would spend the resources elsewhere. They've also gotten much better at this than they were in the past. That isn't to say that being picked in the first round is a guarantee of success. But it feels like people overstate the futility of predicting success in the big leagues at all, as if difficulty automatically equals realism. If you have a good scouting department, you can be right more often than you're wrong, which is all you need to be.
Nobody is saying it's truly and completely and totally random. I think you are overstating the overstatements of others.

Edit: I realize I did call it a complete and total crapshoot. My bad, I did not mean it completely and totally literally. Of course there is a higher chance of nailing the top prospects, and the scouting in today's world could only have been dreamed of just 20 years ago. Even so, for now and the foreseeable future, there is still a huge crapshoot element to it, because prospects are *very* young humans with a lot of physical, emotional, and mental development ahead of them.

Last edited by brotherblues; 01-30-2021 at 02:42 PM.
brotherblues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 05:26 PM   #10
Doc_Giggle
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734 View Post
Personally, I think the default 100 is already well balanced. Anything higher than that, I feel, lead to too many veterans losing ability for no reason. I use to always set my TCR to 200 for every game I created, I create many saves just to long-sim, and I found that very few players, if any, would reach the 3000 hit, 500 hr, or 2500 K milestones. And I'm talking sims going anywhere from 50-100 years.

Once I stopped changing the TCR, players started hitting those milestones again. From what I can tell, TCR affects established players more.
Interesting, I always assumed it affected ratings early in a player's career when there's still a large disparity between current and potential ratings, but once a player is established, aging and what not accounts for most randomness. Would be cool if a developer could weigh in.
Doc_Giggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 06:20 PM   #11
darkcloud4579
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,659
We had it at 200 in our league for a while where we also have pretty high talent inflation (by design) and it was pretty cool at times. One of the best pitchers of the decade was a guy picked in the 20th round, an expansion team won a title because a bunch of their draft picks all panned out and none of them seemed exceptions per drafting.

The real problem is what TCR did to elite players, seemed to make their arcs a lot smaller and so we had to lower it because it wasn't as fun, but this league was the first time I'd ever seen it work (TCR) that well, so I think it might have more to do with talent levels and having enough good talent to where elite players pan out or don't, which feels more realistic to me than this model where everyone has finite talent that they can't even improve/grow, because real life isn't like that.
darkcloud4579 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 06:53 PM   #12
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734 View Post
Personally, I think the default 100 is already well balanced. Anything higher than that, I feel, lead to too many veterans losing ability for no reason. I use to always set my TCR to 200 for every game I created, I create many saves just to long-sim, and I found that very few players, if any, would reach the 3000 hit, 500 hr, or 2500 K milestones. And I'm talking sims going anywhere from 50-100 years.

Once I stopped changing the TCR, players started hitting those milestones again. From what I can tell, TCR affects established players more.
Yep, this is exactly why I also flattened out the aging curves in my save. Randomness causes regression to the mean.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2021, 06:58 PM   #13
jpeters1734
Hall Of Famer
 
jpeters1734's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Juust a bit outside...
Posts: 6,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc_Giggle View Post
Interesting, I always assumed it affected ratings early in a player's career when there's still a large disparity between current and potential ratings, but once a player is established, aging and what not accounts for most randomness. Would be cool if a developer could weigh in.
oh no, i didnt mean to imply at all that it doesnt affect young players. It certainly does. What I was saying is that the effects are more noticeable in established players because you'll notice a guy on a HOF path all the sudden regress where when a prospect regresses, you'd mostly attribute it to the natural volatility of development
__________________
"Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!!

Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com

An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21

Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet
jpeters1734 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 06:49 AM   #14
Doc_Giggle
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734 View Post
oh no, i didnt mean to imply at all that it doesnt affect young players. It certainly does. What I was saying is that the effects are more noticeable in established players because you'll notice a guy on a HOF path all the sudden regress where when a prospect regresses, you'd mostly attribute it to the natural volatility of development
So I spent the entire night crunching the numbers. My league has spanned from 1967 to 2005 so far with a TCR of 145 throughout, and this is the breakdown by number of players who made it to the majors by draft round, followed by the top 3 career WARs from players in that round:

1: 854 -- 162.8, 99.1, 91.2
2: 633 -- 71.6, 69.9, 63.3
3: 402 -- 85.2, 78.3, 71.9
4: 388 -- 64.6, 62.6, 51.3
5: 283 -- 49.6, 49.6, 35.5
6: 271 -- 51.5, 45.2, 33.4
7: 218 -- 36.1, 30.5, 23.5
8: 187 -- 72.2, 69.9, 34.2
9: 155 -- 77.5, 63.2, 51.7
10: 133 -- 61.2, 29.8, 24.8
11: 117 -- 87.1, 76.3, 45.3
12: 96 -- 42.6, 22.2, 14.6
13: 96 -- 65.3, 34.9, 32.8
14: 69 -- 58.8, 28.7, 26.5
15: 64 -- 30.3, 16.2, 14.2
16: 46 -- 31.8, 13.2, 12.5
17: 49 -- 43.9, 24.8, 24.6
18: 33 -- 20.7, 14.7, 9.9
19: 35 -- 37.1, 19.2, 13.1
20: 24 -- 24.8, 23.0, 10.8
21: 23 -- 14.0, 8.2, 8.1
22: 23 -- 19.3, 7.9, 3.3
23: 17 -- 28.7, 1.7, 0.8
24: 11 -- 33.3, 2.1, 1.8
25: 7 -- 12.9, 0.8, 0.3

Now here is Major League Baseball's draft results from 1981-2019 (same length of time, though my league hasn't expanded at the exact same time so there are a different number of teams represented throughout, but you get the jist.. also I double-counted players who were drafted twice cuz I cranked all this out by hand, but the WAR figures are from the round when the player signed).

1: 1021 -- 162.8, 139.2, 117.5
2: 548 -- 106.6, 101.1, 80.7
3: 416 -- 69.2, 62.3, 58.1
4: 346 -- 79.9, 56.5, 51.7
5: 341 -- 45.6, 45.4, 44.3
6: 294 -- 57.9, 49.8, 47.3
7: 334 -- 60.4, 44.4, 39.8
8: 206 -- 45.4, 45.1, 35.4
9: 207 -- 52.6, 50.6, 38.1
10: 197 -- 35.0, 34.7, 25.8
11: 181 -- 82.8, 44.2, 34.5
12: 154 -- 23.1, 20.0, 19.2
13: 165 -- 100.7, 72.9, 28.3
14: 138 -- 19.8, 17.0, 15.1
15: 120 -- 42.4, 39.2, 23.9
16: 127 -- 31.0, 20.9, 16.5
17: 129 -- 68.4, 55.2, 51.1
18: 114 -- 46.7, 16.3, 16.3
19: 126 -- 58.9, 41.9, 24.9
20: 124 -- 55.4, 36.7, 24.9
21: 95 -- 15.4, 13.2, 11.9
22: 89 -- 69.0, 60.2, 24.7
23: 95 -- 50.0, 27.1, 11.5
24: 93 -- 42.7, 18.2, 18.0
25: 88 -- 18.7, 17.8, 10.5

Now I don't know exactly what this means. Top 3 WAR definitely represents outliers in the latter rounds, as things dive off quickly after the top three. But it does appear that MLB has a more gradual slope as the draft goes on than a fictional league with a 145 TCR. I'm thinking hiking up the TCR, but lowering the aging speed more so that you can extend the glory period of productive players chasing milestones might be the most realistic setting? But my methodology might be totally cuckoo bananas lol.
Doc_Giggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 09:11 AM   #15
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
I think that yes, if you have TCR cranked up you should also flatten out your aging (also development); chaos like this has the effect of an overall regression to the mean and a flattened out aging/development will keep good players (including the ones who got talent bumps) good for longer, which should mitigate that effect. At the same time I don’t know how the AI handles old players suddenly getting good.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 04:29 PM   #16
Doc_Giggle
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift View Post
I think that yes, if you have TCR cranked up you should also flatten out your aging (also development); chaos like this has the effect of an overall regression to the mean and a flattened out aging/development will keep good players (including the ones who got talent bumps) good for longer, which should mitigate that effect. At the same time I don’t know how the AI handles old players suddenly getting good.
Hmm never considering tinkering with development speed. What do you have your aging and development set to?
Doc_Giggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2023, 09:59 AM   #17
roberto257
Bat Boy
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Posts: 1
Does a higher TCR mean that a player, for example Juan Soto, is more likely to experience a random drop off in overall?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
roberto257 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2023, 10:52 AM   #18
Syd Thrift
Hall Of Famer
 
Syd Thrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc_Giggle View Post
Hmm never considering tinkering with development speed. What do you have your aging and development set to?
I have it way flattened out; I just closed OOTP but I think it's 1.2 on development and 0.8 on aging (maybe even more extreme). In this setting IMO the AI sticks with vets for too long and also there might have been a few too many similarly-talented players at one time because there are a lot of guys with good numbers who were career part-timers, but now that I'm past creating history this works for me personally because I set all the lineups and make those decisions anyway.

The other thing I've noticed, and I'm not sure how you fix this except manually and ad hoc, is that in career sims that "High - Realistic Modern Day" setting is an absolute killer for great pitchers. I have 25 years of history now, including all of the 50s and 60s, and the top pitcher of all time has I believe 239 wins. I like the frequency of injuries generally but it does seem like great pitchers pretty much inevitably miss an entire season at some point in their careers and then become so prone that they can't consistently start (like they'll average 5 innings or fewer by suffering some injury or other every other start).
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
You bastard....
The Great American Baseball Thrift Book - Like reading the Sporting News from back in the day, only with fake players. REAL LIFE DRAMA THOUGH maybe not
Syd Thrift is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22 PM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2024 Out of the Park Developments