Way to turn off Predetermined league totals?

[Samueltbaum]

Hi all,

I have received a lot of great feedback that has helped me learn more about the game. Props to all that have helped!

I understand there are modifiers that generate the totals of H, HR, BB, etc, in a year. I can adjust those to previous years, or simply change the numbers myself to increase or decrease total output from the league for the season.

That said. Is there a way to shut that off modifiers completely, and just let the stats for the league be open ended. Ratings vs. Ratings produce the resulting stats.

If no, I'm not trying to add something new for the developers to create. It may be very complicated to create something like this.

If it is yes, I would love to know how to do.

Thanks for reading all!

[OutS|der]

Nope no way to do so. Ratings vs ratings is a long way off if ever.
It would also not be doable with historical play as totals vary widely throughout history.

[David Watts]

What if you were to uncheck the box for adjust modifiers for accuracy and then edit/set all modifiers to 1.000 across the board? Still going to go off of league totals, but it might be closer to what you're looking for.

[Sweed]

As David Watts said, making all LTM's 1.000 and not running autocalc would be using the League Totals without any modification. If you do that good luck with the output. Extreme results could come in either or all directions.


I think what you need to do is..
1. set your League Totals to whatever you want to get they type of stats you want for your league.

2.Run autocalc and get League Total Modifiers for the first season to set the baseline.

3. Make sure the box to run autocalc is not checked.

Your first season will come out close to the autocalced stats. Over the first season and then off-season players will develop, ie the "ratings pool" as a whole will change. In season 2, if you don't autocalc/change your LTM's your stats will start to drift as the "new" ratings will now be used to determine output.

Each following season will continue to drift as the underlying ratings continue to change while the LTM's stay the same. With this method you start with realistic output and stats can drift from that baseline.

If you start with all LTM"s at 1.000 you will probably end up with an unrealistic baseline for your league to drift from. There's no reason to start with LTM's at 1.000. The game isn't designed to work that way, ie 1.000 is not a true default meant to work with provided League Totals.

The discussions don't seem to come up here as they used to, but years ago there would be posts from users that DID NOT autocalc every season. Instead they would autocalc season 1, let the league go x number of seasons to get some drift, then make adjustments from there. Ie after three seasons of "stat drift" they might take the latest stat output, input that as the new League Total, autocalc to get a new baseline, then rinse and repeat.

End result is a league with realistic stat output that drifts with rating changes (I think that is what you want?). It also leaves you a way to adjust every "x years" if you think output is getting out of hand, and if you never autocalc it may eventually do that. If you get to the point you need to reign in, or bump up, the output you can autocalc back to the original baseline. Or you can input new League Totals (based on your "drifting output" or whatever trips your trigger) to set a new baseline.

I hope that all makes sense and is helpful.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Sweed

As David Watts said, making all LTM's 1.000 and not running autocalc would be using the League Totals without any modification. If you do that good luck with the output. Extreme results could come in either or all directions.


I think what you need to do is..
1. set your League Totals to whatever you want to get they type of stats you want for your league.

2.Run autocalc and get League Total Modifiers for the first season to set the baseline.

3. Make sure the box to run autocalc is not checked.

Your first season will come out close to the autocalced stats. Over the first season and then off-season players will develop, ie the "ratings pool" as a whole will change. In season 2, if you don't autocalc/change your LTM's your stats will start to drift as the "new" ratings will now be used to determine output.

Each following season will continue to drift as the underlying ratings continue to change while the LTM's stay the same. With this method you start with realistic output and stats can drift from that baseline.

If you start with all LTM"s at 1.000 you will probably end up with an unrealistic baseline for your league to drift from. There's no reason to start with LTM's at 1.000. The game isn't designed to work that way, ie 1.000 is not a true default meant to work with provided League Totals.

The discussions don't seem to come up here as they used to, but years ago there would be posts from users that DID NOT autocalc every season. Instead they would autocalc season 1, let the league go x number of seasons to get some drift, then make adjustments from there. Ie after three seasons of "stat drift" they might take the latest stat output, input that as the new League Total, autocalc to get a new baseline, then rinse and repeat.

End result is a league with realistic stat output that drifts with rating changes (I think that is what you want?). It also leaves you a way to adjust every "x years" if you think output is getting out of hand, and if you never autocalc it may eventually do that. If you get to the point you need to reign in, or bump up, the output you can autocalc back to the original baseline. Or you can input new League Totals (based on your "drifting output" or whatever trips your trigger) to set a new baseline.

I hope that all makes sense and is helpful.

I agree with this 100%. My suggestion was simply based on reading some of the super team thread. Cool thing is you can always run tests to try and determine what's works best in terms of meeting your expectations.

[Rain King]

Was starting to write up a response but DW and Sweed have you covered.

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by David Watts

What if you were to uncheck the box for adjust modifiers for accuracy and then edit/set all modifiers to 1.000 across the board? Still going to go off of league totals, but it might be closer to what you're looking for.

Thanks for this, I'm not sure I've heard this one before. I shall try and report!

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

Nope no way to do so. Ratings vs ratings is a long way off if ever.
It would also not be doable with historical play as totals vary widely throughout history.

hmmm... I don't play historic seasons, so I can't give much for thought. I personally like to keep the history, history. I appreciate input though!

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by Sweed

As David Watts said, making all LTM's 1.000 and not running autocalc would be using the League Totals without any modification. If you do that good luck with the output. Extreme results could come in either or all directions.

I think what you need to do is..
1. set your League Totals to whatever you want to get they type of stats you want for your league.

2.Run autocalc and get League Total Modifiers for the first season to set the baseline.

3. Make sure the box to run autocalc is not checked.

Your first season will come out close to the autocalced stats. Over the first season and then off-season players will develop, ie the "ratings pool" as a whole will change. In season 2, if you don't autocalc/change your LTM's your stats will start to drift as the "new" ratings will now be used to determine output.

Each following season will continue to drift as the underlying ratings continue to change while the LTM's stay the same. With this method you start with realistic output and stats can drift from that baseline.

If you start with all LTM"s at 1.000 you will probably end up with an unrealistic baseline for your league to drift from. There's no reason to start with LTM's at 1.000. The game isn't designed to work that way, ie 1.000 is not a true default meant to work with provided League Totals.

The discussions don't seem to come up here as they used to, but years ago there would be posts from users that DID NOT autocalc every season. Instead they would autocalc season 1, let the league go x number of seasons to get some drift, then make adjustments from there. Ie after three seasons of "stat drift" they might take the latest stat output, input that as the new League Total, autocalc to get a new baseline, then rinse and repeat.

End result is a league with realistic stat output that drifts with rating changes (I think that is what you want?). It also leaves you a way to adjust every "x years" if you think output is getting out of hand, and if you never autocalc it may eventually do that. If you get to the point you need to reign in, or bump up, the output you can autocalc back to the original baseline. Or you can input new League Totals (based on your "drifting output" or whatever trips your trigger) to set a new baseline.

I hope that all makes sense and is helpful.

Would love extreme results if it meant ratings reflected stats better. A 112 contact/HR (I like to use stats larger than max) may hit .400/70HR, and a 25 player may hit .150/6, but that would seem more realistic to me, rather than a 60 contact/HR winning batting title batting/hr crown .330/45, where a 112 hitter bats .250/25.

I shall try. Thank you for this!

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Samueltbaum

Would love extreme results if it meant ratings reflected stats better. A 112 contact/HR (I like to use stats larger than max) may hit .400/70HR, and a 25 player may hit .150/6, but that would seem more realistic to me, rather than a 60 contact/HR winning batting title batting/hr crown .330/45, where a 112 hitter bats .250/25.

I shall try. Thank you for this!

Not sure what all you are doing but if you push things past the max maybe they just break things like balance? The game runs skills/ratings through the engine, with probabilities and random chance determining outcome. There is no scale where rating x will result in stat y. There is only chance that rating x "should" result in a stat "around" y.

Not sure how leaving LTM's at 1.000 changes any of that other than maybe having extreme outcomes. IE 112 contact and 60 contact will produce the extremem outcomes in the way they already have. It won't make 112 "better" and 60 "worse".

Could also be I'm not getting what you are trying to do?

In any case good luck.

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Not sure what all you are doing but if you push things past the max maybe they just break things like balance? The game runs skills/ratings through the engine, with probabilities and random chance determining outcome. There is no scale where rating x will result in stat y. There is only chance that rating x "should" result in a stat "around" y.

Not sure how leaving LTM's at 1.000 changes any of that other than maybe having extreme outcomes. IE 112 contact and 60 contact will produce the extremem outcomes in the way they already have. It won't make 112 "better" and 60 "worse".

Could also be I'm not getting what you are trying to do?

In any case good luck.

Thanks for the good luck. At some point I'd love to figure this out, so that I can help people in the future that may have the same interests. Knowledge is power.

I'm trying to create a league where all players live up to their ratings, Juan Soto wouldn't turn into a yearly .300 OBP player in the prime of his career simply because he got put on a team filled with other .400 OBP players. I haven't tried yet any of the proposals from this post, it may work.

There are settings in the game that limit league totals on what a team can do, I've heard some say that there is no floor or ceiling in this game. I'm trying to learn the settings to make this true.

The Los Angeles Dodger in 2022 won 111 games. Throw Aaron Judge, Acuna, Alvarez, Goldy, soto on that team (with no injuries) it would go down as the greatest offensive statistic team of all time. Not get shut out by the Oakland A's 2 out of three games, and lose the 5 out of 6 games against them in a season. When they destroy the best pitchers in baseball.

[rudel.dietrich]

If you try this, please let us know the results. This would be an interest test of the games engine

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Samueltbaum

The Los Angeles Dodger in 2022 won 111 games. Throw Aaron Judge, Acuna, Alvarez, Goldy, soto on that team (with no injuries) it would go down as the greatest offensive statistic team of all time. Not get shut out by the Oakland A's 2 out of three games, and lose the 5 out of 6 games against them in a season. When they destroy the best pitchers in baseball.

I'm your huckelberry.

[snepp]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I'm your huckelberry.

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I'm your huckelberry.

Hahahahaha. Thanks for this. Is this with all of the settings adjusted? Or regular number? That is more wins in a season in OOTP than I have had with more loaded teams. Yes this!!!!! Did the team get beat up by weaker competition? Is this 24?

Here are 4 pictures, prior to me attempting what has been posted as guidance here.

4 pictures.
1. My best OOTP 24 offensive team stats. with same league totals as 21 (lower overall output, even with better ratings, almost the whole team had +90 Eye).
2. My history of wins per season. It jumped 10 wins once I adjusted the modifiers to match my OOTP 21 numbers (still 10+ wins off regularly 24 totals).
3+4 same as 1+2 just OOTP 21, along with my 22 team. My final 3 in OOTP 21 pitcher 122, 126, 130, all had 1-3 aging stars, to help pad their stats for the HOF.

Now 129 wins is nothing to joke about, and I'd be esctatic hitting that in OOTP 24. But it still trails 21 wins. Did your team have go 1-6 against the worst team in the league? Then have a 20 game winning streak against all teams above .500?

I haven't played a new season yet today, so I have personally tested the new theory, but my huckelberry may have already done so. Thank you for this!

[Samueltbaum]

Photos didn't attach

[Samueltbaum]

My 22 Dodgers (ootp 21) You can see almost my entire team has RBI's of over 100. Almost every year my 21 teams have all players 100 RBI, it doesn't matter who you face in the lineup, the will drive a lot of guys in, while always keeping runs scored to 1100-1300 every runs every year.

In ootp 24, I would have similar results as Rain King did where maybe 4 or 5 players have 100 RBI, while the team's RBI's range from 900-1100 on good years.

Again this is all relative specifically to the offense. The ERA for my staff, tends to be the same for both 21 and 24.

[Samueltbaum]

Originally Posted by Sweed

As David Watts said, making all LTM's 1.000 and not running autocalc would be using the League Totals without any modification. If you do that good luck with the output. Extreme results could come in either or all directions.


I think what you need to do is..
1. set your League Totals to whatever you want to get they type of stats you want for your league.

2.Run autocalc and get League Total Modifiers for the first season to set the baseline.

3. Make sure the box to run autocalc is not checked.

Your first season will come out close to the autocalced stats. Over the first season and then off-season players will develop, ie the "ratings pool" as a whole will change. In season 2, if you don't autocalc/change your LTM's your stats will start to drift as the "new" ratings will now be used to determine output.

Each following season will continue to drift as the underlying ratings continue to change while the LTM's stay the same. With this method you start with realistic output and stats can drift from that baseline.

If you start with all LTM"s at 1.000 you will probably end up with an unrealistic baseline for your league to drift from. There's no reason to start with LTM's at 1.000. The game isn't designed to work that way, ie 1.000 is not a true default meant to work with provided League Totals.

The discussions don't seem to come up here as they used to, but years ago there would be posts from users that DID NOT autocalc every season. Instead they would autocalc season 1, let the league go x number of seasons to get some drift, then make adjustments from there. Ie after three seasons of "stat drift" they might take the latest stat output, input that as the new League Total, autocalc to get a new baseline, then rinse and repeat.

End result is a league with realistic stat output that drifts with rating

changes (I think that is what you want?). It also leaves you a way to adjust every "x years" if you think output is getting out of hand, and if you never autocalc it may eventually do that. If you get to the point you need to reign in, or bump up, the output you can autocalc back to the original baseline. Or you can input new League Totals (based on your "drifting output" or whatever trips your trigger) to set a new baseline.

I hope that all makes sense and is helpful.

I'm trying today.

[Samueltbaum]

I tried 3 seasons. On the third season I cloned Juan Soto to see if it would help increase stats. I won 125, 115, 129 (third seasons with cloned Juan Soto). First two seasons under 1050 runs. 3rd seasons 1150.

3rd season I got excited as with one month remaining as I had a 137 win pace .850. In the last month I got swept by 3 teams who where under .500 (up to that point no sweeps at all in the season).

The sweeps all came to teams under .500. Prior to the last month, I only lost 3 series, all to teams that were under .500, two of which were close to 100 losses at seasons end. I did win every game in the month of June, that was cool. I don't think there was a single 100 loss team in any of the seasons.

1st two seasons I won the world series. 3rd season I went to the world series, and lost to an the AZ team with 86 wins that had the 23 best era in the league and 10th most runs scored. 3 different SPs on AZ with overall rating less than 50 season and eras over 5.00, one was 5.69, completely stopped my offense that averaged over 7 runs a game during the season. The AZ team as a whole during the season had a 4.91 ERA. My monster team that had the most runs/least runs given up by alot on each lost the world series in 6 games to a mediocre team.

If my team wasn't a team a historic monster of a team that mopped the floor with the entire league, I wouldn't think very much about it. Underdogs can surprise, a terrible pitching staff that destroys the greatest offense in the history of the game.
Does not compute for me, other than OOTP 24 allows more randomness than 21 does.

To go along with this, I looked at AZ's route the the world series. Their terrible pitchers, completely shut out the 2nd and 3rd best offenses in the league as well. So in one playoff, a team that likely wouldn't normally be in the playoffs statistically or ratings wise, completely went on a tear with terrible pitchers to shut down the top 3 offenses in the game.

I get that Underdogs do happen in real life... The real life 2023 Diamondbacks (personally think one of if not the worst teams ever to make it to the world series) got hot at the right time, and were fortunate to have the current wildcard structure. Props to them for having the grit and grind to make it happen! But put that team up against a team with the best all of the best players in the game, its hard to see them winning a series.

I've spent a great deal of time with OOTP 24 on this with help from the OOTP community.. Thank you all for you time and efforts, and keeping posts civil (some people get very agitated) thus far. I appreciate it greatly!

In the 3 other previous versions of the game I've played every version at some point I create a team full of the best players in the game and have fun destroying the league, winning 20+ world series in a row. Never once messed with settings before since my teams would always score 1300 runs, and 125 wins was a terrible year (normally aging players I try to pad HOF stats).

There is simply a random factor to 24 that I never experienced before in any of the 10+ baseball games I've ever played. All games I've played before win 20 straight World series 130+ wins was the norm, once I create a jacked up offense. Regardless of all of the help I've received, regardless of the settings I've played with the game seems to disregard ratings, statistic and each series may have a random outcome. I would have immense joy if anyone can disprove this, but until that happens I just know that if I want to create monster teams that destroy the league OOTP 24 isn't the one to do it.

That all said, that's only 1 way I play the game. Every other aspect of the game I think is phenomenal, and I hope OOTP continues to step up their game every year!

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by Samueltbaum

I tried 3 seasons. On the third season I cloned Juan Soto to see if it would help increase stats. I won 125, 115, 129 (third seasons with cloned Juan Soto). First two seasons under 1050 runs. 3rd seasons 1150.

3rd season I got excited as with one month remaining as I had a 137 win pace .850. In the last month I got swept by 3 teams who where under .500 (up to that point no sweeps at all in the season).

The sweeps all came to teams under .500. Prior to the last month, I only lost 3 series, all to teams that were under .500, two of which were close to 100 losses at seasons end. I did win every game in the month of June, that was cool. I don't think there was a single 100 loss team in any of the seasons.

1st two seasons I won the world series. 3rd season I went to the world series, and lost to an the AZ team with 86 wins that had the 23 best era in the league and 10th most runs scored. 3 different SPs on AZ with overall rating less than 50 season and eras over 5.00, one was 5.69, completely stopped my offense that averaged over 7 runs a game during the season. The AZ team as a whole during the season had a 4.91 ERA. My monster team that had the most runs/least runs given up by alot on each lost the world series in 6 games to a mediocre team.

If my team wasn't a team a historic monster of a team that mopped the floor with the entire league, I wouldn't think very much about it. Underdogs can surprise, a terrible pitching staff that destroys the greatest offense in the history of the game.
Does not compute for me, other than OOTP 24 allows more randomness than 21 does.

To go along with this, I looked at AZ's route the the world series. Their terrible pitchers, completely shut out the 2nd and 3rd best offenses in the league as well. So in one playoff, a team that likely wouldn't normally be in the playoffs statistically or ratings wise, completely went on a tear with terrible pitchers to shut down the top 3 offenses in the game.

I get that Underdogs do happen in real life... The real life 2023 Diamondbacks (personally think one of if not the worst teams ever to make it to the world series) got hot at the right time, and were fortunate to have the current wildcard structure. Props to them for having the grit and grind to make it happen! But put that team up against a team with the best all of the best players in the game, its hard to see them winning a series.

I've spent a great deal of time with OOTP 24 on this with help from the OOTP community.. Thank you all for you time and efforts, and keeping posts civil (some people get very agitated) thus far. I appreciate it greatly!

In the 3 other previous versions of the game I've played every version at some point I create a team full of the best players in the game and have fun destroying the league, winning 20+ world series in a row. Never once messed with settings before since my teams would always score 1300 runs, and 125 wins was a terrible year (normally aging players I try to pad HOF stats).

There is simply a random factor to 24 that I never experienced before in any of the 10+ baseball games I've ever played. All games I've played before win 20 straight World series 130+ wins was the norm, once I create a jacked up offense. Regardless of all of the help I've received, regardless of the settings I've played with the game seems to disregard ratings, statistic and each series may have a random outcome. I would have immense joy if anyone can disprove this, but until that happens I just know that if I want to create monster teams that destroy the league OOTP 24 isn't the one to do it.

That all said, that's only 1 way I play the game. Every other aspect of the game I think is phenomenal, and I hope OOTP continues to step up their game every year!

Just because your team mopped the floor with the league in the regular season doesn't mean they will win the WS. That's why they have a playoffs rather then giving the best team the award. If the best players never lost then what would be the point of even playing the game.