Fictional Save: Where are my 3000 H, 300 W?

[cavebutter]

Still doing testing for my long term fictional save, and I have noticed that over 2 60-year tests, I have only gotten 1 or 2 3000 H careers and no 300 Win careers. My first run, I played from 1900-1960 with out of the box settings and auto-adjusting league totals and PCMs. My second run, I reduced batter and pitcher aging to .900 and talent change randomness to 105.



One thing I am looking into is that PA seems low season over season. My PA leaders top out at less than 700 every season. In real-life, the years that single season H records were set, the leaders' PAs were well over 700, so I am going to play with fatigue settings next.



Anyone else notice this in their fictional saves? No Cobbs, Ichirios, Roses, Youngs, Matthewsons, etc?

[Rain King]

Can you provide more information on what you mean by "out of the box" settings?

Are you just starting a fictional league with modern settings in 1900 or are you somehow applying historical League Totals?

[cavebutter]

I set settings and strategies to 1900 via the pulldown in-game and selected the option to automatically update pcms, strategies, and financials every year.

[ayaghmour2]

Originally Posted by cavebutter

Still doing testing for my long term fictional save, and I have noticed that over 2 60-year tests, I have only gotten 1 or 2 3000 H careers and no 300 Win careers. My first run, I played from 1900-1960 with out of the box settings and auto-adjusting league totals and PCMs. My second run, I reduced batter and pitcher aging to .900 and talent change randomness to 105.



One thing I am looking into is that PA seems low season over season. My PA leaders top out at less than 700 every season. In real-life, the years that single season H records were set, the leaders' PAs were well over 700, so I am going to play with fatigue settings next.



Anyone else notice this in their fictional saves? No Cobbs, Ichirios, Roses, Youngs, Matthewsons, etc?

I think we need more information to understand what is going wrong. Here is what I found, as I'm currently testing a sim from 1901 to 2000. Here is what I did:

Create Game > Historical > Default
I added fictional minors (AAA, AA, A, SA, R) to keep file size manageable, but the major league teams still import as they did in history. Same for financials and strategy/stats settings. I deleted all historical players, filled teams with fictional players (rookie twice), and then ran a fantasy draft. Amateur draft of 20 rounds, generate 47 rounds. Defaults for International Amateur, Established, Discoveries, and Independent.

Here's what I got through 1920:



A lot of 300 winners, even a 3,000 hitter in just 20 seasons. Will report back when I finish, but my best guess is your league is not generating enough players, though there are plenty of other things that could be causing.

[sprague]

I have found that with this version if you want longer careers you have to tweek the aging modifiers


My development is at 1.200
Aging is a .750


I play with a very low TCR 25 or 30


I do get players with careers that give overall numbers like you might expect with those

[ayaghmour2]

Originally Posted by ayaghmour2

I think we need more information to understand what is going wrong. Here is what I found, as I'm currently testing a sim from 1901 to 2000. Here is what I did:

Create Game > Historical > Default
I added fictional minors (AAA, AA, A, SA, R) to keep file size manageable, but the major league teams still import as they did in history. Same for financials and strategy/stats settings. I deleted all historical players, filled teams with fictional players (rookie twice), and then ran a fantasy draft. Amateur draft of 20 rounds, generate 47 rounds. Defaults for International Amateur, Established, Discoveries, and Independent.

Here's what I got through 1920:
Attachment 1009890
Attachment 1009891

A lot of 300 winners, even a 3,000 hitter in just 20 seasons. Will report back when I finish, but my best guess is your league is not generating enough players, though there are plenty of other things that could be causing.

Computer did updates overnight, so it only got through 1972, but here's what I saw:




Not really seeing what you saw. 1 guy with 500 wins, 9 with 400, and 29 with 300. Then 1 guy with 4,000 hits and 34 with 3,000. But as the guy mentioned above me, lowering aging setting can lengthen careers.

[Hrycaj]

Originally Posted by ayaghmour2

Computer did updates overnight, so it only got through 1972, but here's what I saw:

Attachment 1009934
Attachment 1009935

Not really seeing what you saw. 1 guy with 500 wins, 9 with 400, and 29 with 300. Then 1 guy with 4,000 hits and 34 with 3,000. But as the guy mentioned above me, lowering aging setting can lengthen careers.

My guess is you aren't seeing this because you added in international signings. In the historical default these are turned off. So if you run it like the OP ran his tests you get those results. I ran one last night from 1901-1956 with a 20 round draft and full minors. I had 1 .400 hitter, 1 400 W pitcher and 1 player eclipse 3000 hits. Looking at your leaderboards I will make a wild leap here and say that it is your international discoveries that are coming closer to the end of their development giving them the leg up on the players created for the draft. Also, you just don't see any players with real power until the 1950's.

I have spent months tinkering with things using a fictional build to get it to act close to how things did historically. I got burnt out on it and haven't touched it in weeks. When I read this thread I was interested to see it myself in a historical start with fictional players. I was surprised to see it act essentially the same. As for what sprague said about development and aging is somewhat true but I found that even with those adjustments you get too many dominate pitchers. (Guys throwing 8000 innings in a career and multiple 500 game winners) and hitters hanging around to their late 40's. So essentially these guys are compilers and not outliers.

The biggest game changer that I have been able to uncover so far is the injury setting. If you have it at normal or higher you very rarely see guys get to 3000 hits. It just doesn't happen. Drop it down to very low and you get a better chance. I would be very interested in hearing more input on the topic.

[ayaghmour2]

Originally Posted by Hrycaj

My guess is you aren't seeing this because you added in international signings. In the historical default these are turned off. So if you run it like the OP ran his tests you get those results. I ran one last night from 1901-1956 with a 20 round draft and full minors. I had 1 .400 hitter, 1 400 W pitcher and 1 player eclipse 3000 hits. Looking at your leaderboards I will make a wild leap here and say that it is your international discoveries that are coming closer to the end of their development giving them the leg up on the players created for the draft. Also, you just don't see any players with real power until the 1950's.

I have spent months tinkering with things using a fictional build to get it to act close to how things did historically. I got burnt out on it and haven't touched it in weeks. When I read this thread I was interested to see it myself in a historical start with fictional players. I was surprised to see it act essentially the same. As for what sprague said about development and aging is somewhat true but I found that even with those adjustments you get too many dominate pitchers. (Guys throwing 8000 innings in a career and multiple 500 game winners) and hitters hanging around to their late 40's. So essentially these guys are compilers and not outliers.

The biggest game changer that I have been able to uncover so far is the injury setting. If you have it at normal or higher you very rarely see guys get to 3000 hits. It just doesn't happen. Drop it down to very low and you get a better chance. I would be very interested in hearing more input on the topic.

One thing I'm noticing is a lot of players retiring at 45. Sort of interesting. Here's the breakdown though, and it's not International amateur guys driving it:

Of the 300 winners:
Independent League: 13
International Established: 11
Default Players: 9
Draftees: 6

The independent leagues which generate less then ten players per year is absolutely blowing all other pitchers out of the water. In fact, no international discoveries made it to 300, though the established ones have had some success.

Of the 3,000 hitters:
Independent League: 17
International Established: 12
Default Players: 8
Draftees: 1

So I guess the moral of the story is that the independent free agents are quite overpowered!

In terms of .400 hitters, there were a lot too! 48 seasons! Multiple per decade which is not what I expected

[ayaghmour2]

Even with just drafted players I'm still seeing a lot of 3,000 hitters and 300 winners. The only weird thing is a lot of people are retiring at 45. I'm not sure what's causing that. As of 1/1/70 I have 21 3,000 hitters and 37 300 winners. Even 7 .400 hitters

[Brad K]

Is it reasonable to except outcomes that mirror historical ones while using fictional players?

Does OOTP create a pool of fictional players whose talent matches historical?

[snepp]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Is it reasonable to except outcomes that mirror historical ones while using fictional players?

Does OOTP create a pool of fictional players whose talent matches historical?

Aren't there historical PCM's that get used when using the automatically import settings by year functions? Or is it just the LTM's and strategies?

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by snepp

Aren't there historical PCM's that get used when using the automatically import settings by year functions? Or is it just the LTM's and strategies?

Yes. It defaults to ON.

cavebutter, did you disable the auto import of historical player creation modifiers? I assumed by your original statement "out of the box" you didn't.

So snepp, if he disabled them we don't know if they work but if he didn't we know they don't work.

Actually I don't think they work even if they do. What I mean is if they adjust every created player by the percentage shown then it would still need a historically balanced database of created players to work with.