League evolution - Min. Service years for FA

5pectacular · 04-15-2021, 10:54 PM

Just out of curiosity, if league evolution was turned on in the game you're playing and the min svc years for FA goes from 6 to 7 and the Svc years required for arbitration goes from 3 to 4, would you manually revert it back or let it run it's course?

I am debating between the two thoughts. On one hand, it would allow teams with a lower budget to keep their good younger players longer, but would also inflate every team's $$$ overall, I think? Just curious what other people would do.

pgjocki · 04-16-2021, 01:06 PM

I actually like to reduce the time in my leagues to stop teams from hording prospects but you could end up teams winning multiple championships with a controlled roster.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

crowhop · 04-16-2021, 01:52 PM

I don't mind the AI making suggestions, but mine is the only vote that counts, ha. I like keeping league evolution on, if only to see what kinds of weird things come up.

I tend to shift the league to an increasingly open market and more financial parity.

Knowing the CBA is changing for 2022, I start making changes then. And for the most part, every increase for the players also comes with an increase for the owners.

My latest idea is players being Arbitration eligible after their first season, so they'll always get paid in some way relative to their worth. But I gradually get there, and usually only after expansion to give a sudden influx of cash (national media rights) to make it more palatable.

2022 - Expand playoffs to 7 teams per league. Increase national media money to $75m. Move arb eligible year to 2. Kill the Super 2 rule. Universal DH. Drop luxury tax to 160%. Bump league minimum $100k.

~2025-2040 - Expand to Monterrey Mexico and Montreal/Las Vegas/Portland. Increase national media money to $100m. Drop luxury tax to 150%. Drop Free Agent year to 5. Bump league minimum $100k.

-2025-2040 - Relocate two teams in bad markets to Montreal/Vegas/Nashville/Portland. Realignment. Expand playoffs. Increase national media money to $125m. Drop arb eligible year to 1, minor league FA to 4. Bump league minimum $100k.

All the while I'm tinkering with market sizes and other revenue streams, roster sizes, international money, etc alongside those big changes.

Matt Arnold · 04-16-2021, 01:57 PM

I like to play with what it gives me, and try to adjust my strategy around the changes. Overall, teams still have the same amounts to spend, but obviously the FA settings will shift how they pay out.

On the other hand, my dad came to me a couple days ago asking how to change it back, since in his game they tried to shift from 6 years to FA down to 5. So, to each their own

oldfatbaldguy · 04-17-2021, 07:59 PM

I also like to play with what it gives me. Which is why I have league evolution set to allow everything except the introduction of the DH.

The tweaks can be weird. I had a league once that went to a 17-day DL. Why would you do that? But it created some interesting dilemmas that I kind of enjoyed. "Mr. Trainer, would you say that 1-2 weeks is leaning toward 1, or 2?"

bwburke94 · 04-17-2021, 09:14 PM

I keep league evolution off, specifically because of these nonsensical changes.

OrangeP47 · 04-17-2021, 09:25 PM

It depends on what I'm in the mood for. I have a save where I'm completely in control and I do a write-up on that, but I also have a "for fun" save where I just started at modern day and turned on AI evolution and decided to mostly stick with what it gave me, only changing things where absolutely needed. It was my first game with AI evolution and at first I thought the feature was broken, because no changes occurred in the first 10 or so years, but then a flurry of changes all happened at once. It gave me a team name change one year (Marlins to Tincaps... odd but I created a rationalization for it), then 2 team expansion the next year... it's suggestions were El Paso and Austin and I decided to leave it because 4 Texas teams sounds like a hoot, though I did change what the nicknames were to match some excellent graphics provided here on the forums (Blackbirds and Violets). If those teams get a future name change I'll let it be though. Then the year after that active roster went from 26 to 27. I'm not sure if that's a good change for baseball or not, but it *does* make my job a lot easier, so I'm not going to think about it too hard. I did manually change the September expanded roster from 28 to 29 when that happened because an expanded roster of just 1 additional spot didn't seem to make sense (though with the schedule pack I'm using for 32 teams, there's only about 2 1/2 weeks of regular season in September).

04-15-2021, 10:54 PM	#1
5pectacular Bat Boy Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 5	League evolution - Min. Service years for FA Just out of curiosity, if league evolution was turned on in the game you're playing and the min svc years for FA goes from 6 to 7 and the Svc years required for arbitration goes from 3 to 4, would you manually revert it back or let it run it's course? I am debating between the two thoughts. On one hand, it would allow teams with a lower budget to keep their good younger players longer, but would also inflate every team's $$$ overall, I think? Just curious what other people would do.

04-16-2021, 01:06 PM	#2
pgjocki All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Maryland - just outside DC Posts: 1,596	I actually like to reduce the time in my leagues to stop teams from hording prospects but you could end up teams winning multiple championships with a controlled roster. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk __________________ - - - World Series championships: 1926, 1931, 1934, 1942, 1944, 1946, 1964, 1967, 1982, 2006, 2011

04-16-2021, 01:52 PM	#3
crowhop Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jun 2018 Posts: 220	I don't mind the AI making suggestions, but mine is the only vote that counts, ha. I like keeping league evolution on, if only to see what kinds of weird things come up. I tend to shift the league to an increasingly open market and more financial parity. Knowing the CBA is changing for 2022, I start making changes then. And for the most part, every increase for the players also comes with an increase for the owners. My latest idea is players being Arbitration eligible after their first season, so they'll always get paid in some way relative to their worth. But I gradually get there, and usually only after expansion to give a sudden influx of cash (national media rights) to make it more palatable. 2022 - Expand playoffs to 7 teams per league. Increase national media money to $75m. Move arb eligible year to 2. Kill the Super 2 rule. Universal DH. Drop luxury tax to 160%. Bump league minimum $100k. ~2025-2040 - Expand to Monterrey Mexico and Montreal/Las Vegas/Portland. Increase national media money to $100m. Drop luxury tax to 150%. Drop Free Agent year to 5. Bump league minimum $100k. -2025-2040 - Relocate two teams in bad markets to Montreal/Vegas/Nashville/Portland. Realignment. Expand playoffs. Increase national media money to $125m. Drop arb eligible year to 1, minor league FA to 4. Bump league minimum $100k. All the while I'm tinkering with market sizes and other revenue streams, roster sizes, international money, etc alongside those big changes.

04-16-2021, 01:57 PM	#4
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 15,871	I like to play with what it gives me, and try to adjust my strategy around the changes. Overall, teams still have the same amounts to spend, but obviously the FA settings will shift how they pay out. On the other hand, my dad came to me a couple days ago asking how to change it back, since in his game they tried to shift from 6 years to FA down to 5. So, to each their own

04-17-2021, 07:59 PM	#5
oldfatbaldguy Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2020 Posts: 393	I also like to play with what it gives me. Which is why I have league evolution set to allow everything except the introduction of the DH. The tweaks can be weird. I had a league once that went to a 17-day DL. Why would you do that? But it created some interesting dilemmas that I kind of enjoyed. "Mr. Trainer, would you say that 1-2 weeks is leaning toward 1, or 2?"

04-17-2021, 09:14 PM	#6
bwburke94 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Belchertown, MA, USA Posts: 4,507	I keep league evolution off, specifically because of these nonsensical changes.

04-17-2021, 09:25 PM	#7
OrangeP47 All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2020 Posts: 805	It depends on what I'm in the mood for. I have a save where I'm completely in control and I do a write-up on that, but I also have a "for fun" save where I just started at modern day and turned on AI evolution and decided to mostly stick with what it gave me, only changing things where absolutely needed. It was my first game with AI evolution and at first I thought the feature was broken, because no changes occurred in the first 10 or so years, but then a flurry of changes all happened at once. It gave me a team name change one year (Marlins to Tincaps... odd but I created a rationalization for it), then 2 team expansion the next year... it's suggestions were El Paso and Austin and I decided to leave it because 4 Texas teams sounds like a hoot, though I did change what the nicknames were to match some excellent graphics provided here on the forums (Blackbirds and Violets). If those teams get a future name change I'll let it be though. Then the year after that active roster went from 26 to 27. I'm not sure if that's a good change for baseball or not, but it does make my job a lot easier, so I'm not going to think about it too hard. I did manually change the September expanded roster from 28 to 29 when that happened because an expanded roster of just 1 additional spot didn't seem to make sense (though with the schedule pack I'm using for 32 teams, there's only about 2 1/2 weeks of regular season in September).