Will there be ghost players in the minors?

[PSUColonel]

Listen they're gone, that al there is to it. Once you play the game, I'm sure you'l agree it's a good thing.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Listen they're gone, that al there is to it. Once you play the game, I'm sure you'l agree it's a good thing.

Doesn't mean it wouldn't be a good thing in the future to have the option of having them or not having them. I really don't see how eliminating the minor leagues from historical sims would be considered a "good thing". The best solution (i.e. the one that could make everyone happy) would be to have the choice.

[Zitofan75]

Well, whatever the reasons are for liking or not liking them we're going to find out whether that was truly a good thing in about a month and a half from now. Odds are there'll probably still be disagreement on the topic, maybe some people will change their opinions one way or another, but since it seems ghost players are inconsistent of having each minor league team be complete and playable then there's probably not much more to say. I mean, it's not as if this is a brand new revelation.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Zitofan75

Well, whatever the reasons are for liking or not liking them we're going to find out whether that was truly a good thing in about a month and a half from now. Odds are there'll probably still be disagreement on the topic, maybe some people will change their opinions one way or another, but since it seems ghost players are inconsistent of having each minor league team be complete and playable then there's probably not much more to say. I mean, it's not as if this is a brand new revelation.

Exactly, my only point is when you try to make a game al things to all people, the game (usually) ends up falling down all together. As I said before, OOTP is primarily a career simulation, not a historical one. How can you have ghost players vs. non ghost players as an option without screwing up the way the game creates players? You would almost seem to need two seperate "modes" of play (In ohter words almost two seperate games) to accomplish this. If you don't want to micromanage in the new version, just ask your assistant to handle these duties...at leat that way there won't be any ghost payers.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Exactly, my only point is when you try to make a game al things to all people, the game (usually) ends up falling down all together. As I said before, OOTP is primarily a career simulation, not a historical one. How can you have ghost players vs. non ghost players as an option without screwing up the way the game creates players? You would almost seem to need two seperate "modes" of play (In ohter words almost two seperate games) to accomplish this. If you don't want to micromanage in the new version, just ask your assistant to handle these duties...at leat that way there won't be any ghost payers.

And how can you be a manager of a minor league team if half your roster doesn't exist? That's the simplest, clearest, more important reason why ghost players are gone. Calling it an option tot urn off is great and all until you try and figure out how to actually play those games. Do you want to see a play by play that says "now batting, Ghost?"

[silvam14]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Exactly, my only point is when you try to make a game al things to all people, the game (usually) ends up falling down all together. As I said before, OOTP is primarily a career simulation, not a historical one. How can you have ghost players vs. non ghost players as an option without screwing up the way the game creates players? You would almost seem to need two seperate "modes" of play (In ohter words almost two seperate games) to accomplish this. If you don't want to micromanage in the new version, just ask your assistant to handle these duties...at leat that way there won't be any ghost payers.

I agree, but historical simmers can all take solace that they can still play OOTP with ghost players, just not OOTP2006

[Le Grande Orange]

Seems to me if you want to play a historical league with minors, then you're not really playing a historical league anymore because there is no database of minor league players.

If there was, it wouldn't be an issue. Heck, even if there was a database just for AAA level minor league players, that'd still be a great advance. But the prospects for a database of minor league players coming anywhere close to the Lahman database for major league players is a long way off.

There's also the question of how historical you'd want your minors to be. At times, the minors were vast, with a ton of leagues and teams. All of which changed somewhat frequently.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Seems to me if you want to play a historical league with minors, then you're not really playing a historical league anymore because there is no database of minor league players.

If there was, it wouldn't be an issue. Heck, even if there was a database just for AAA level minor league players, that'd still be a great advance. But the prospects for a database of minor league players coming anywhere close to the Lahman database for major league players is a long way off.

There's also the question of how historical you'd want your minors to be. At times, the minors were vast, with a ton of leagues and teams. All of which changed somewhat frequently.

I had the same feeling which is why I suggested the idea that someone compile a year database not just for the majors but for every club in existence, majors and their minor affiliates. It was pointed out (and I readily admitted) that this was quite an ambitious project that would require much time and effort to do but if you really want to be truly historic that's the way to go. AND, you could do that with the new version of the game better than in the current game (assuming of course you could find all that data). As LGO points out, the number of minor league teams is variable over history yet with the current version of OOTP you only get three. Modern clubs have more than that.

[Gorilla Shakespeare]

Originally Posted by Kemp

Why I liked ghost players
* I like to have small leagues where I “know” most of the players. I don’t need hundreds of placeholder minor leaguers to give myself the illusion of realism/depth.
* I don’t like to have to make a lot of roster moves to ensure my actual “prospects” are getting the right playing time.
* I highly customize my leagues. I like 19 man rosters with 3 man rotations. That’s about 12 active position players per team which means that the players need to be very versatile. In previous versions I’ve had to manually give players ratings at different positions so that my league didn’t turn into an error-fest the first time 2 shortstops or catchers went down in a month. Without ghost players I really won’t be able to manually edit players like that because there will simply be too many. Honestly, not even sure I’ll need to with the new defensive ratings but that remains to be seen.

Ultimately I get what you guys are saying and I’m sure I’ll adjust. However, it’s not quite as cut and dried as you’re making it out to be. To me, eliminating ghost players was unnecessary because it had no impact on people who didn’t like to use them! Ghost players were simply AVERAGE minor leaguers for that level.

To your last point, it looks like the new game is going to have fielding work a lot more like it should work. With all the separate arm and range and hands ratings, you should be able to work in utility infielders without having to "train" them for a season in the minors or manually edit their ratings to keep them from committing 40 errors in a season.

I also don't think it's realistic to know in advance who your "real" prospects are and are not. I think my first test league is going to have the majors and then about a jillion unaffiliated minor leagues so that I can pick and choose who to take when the time comes. This is more or less how things really were situated at the turn of the century, which is also when those 19-man rosters and 3-man rotations were popular.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Seems to me if you want to play a historical league with minors, then you're not really playing a historical league anymore because there is no database of minor league players.

Since that isn't possible, though, I think it is reasonable for them to want to have something more than a reserve roster for players which doesn't give any feedback on the player. Once the player is in the game...it is no longer Joe Dimaggio. It is player#xxxx to the game. Because of that I would think there needs to be a way to evaluate the player in all different types of game setups. It is a historical sim, not a historical replay.

[f.montoya]

Knowing how the minor league system works in the new game, I can say that there are some additional workarounds for historical simmers. I think most historical simmers are not "replay" simmers but are like myself in that they want to import real rookies every season with a minor league system to develop and guage performance. We would also like to prevent the fictional players from being promoted by the A.I. teams and/or online league GM's.

In a poll I ran on www.allsimbaseball.com several months ago, I found that 49% of those polled preferred fictional online leagues. 51% preferred real players only leagues, either historical or current rosters. Now that's a big chunk of customers who want recognizable players so it'd probably be in the best interest for sales to include some sort of better option for these customers rather than only Reserves List or Fictional Players.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by f.montoya

In a poll I ran on www.allsimbaseball.com several months ago, I found that 49% of those polled preferred fictional online leagues. 51% preferred real players only leagues, either historical or current rosters. Now that's a big chunk of customers who want recognizable players so it'd probably be in the best interest for sales to include some sort of better option for these customers rather than only Reserves List or Fictional Players.

Of course internet polls are well known for their scientific bearing and weight. Sorry, couldn't resist. I do like your flagging concept, so long as I can turn it off.

It's a new game, it will be different, for both the fictional and historic players. That always means adaptation. It's not really the same old OOTP anymore and I think there will a steep learning curve for all of us.

Anyhow, those people who like to play with current/historical rosters and sim from there tend to find themselves in a fictional game after not too long. They might find they like these features. Oh well, we'll all know in another 44 days or so won't we?

[AnthonyGiacalone]

I'm very interested in this also since I am an historical simmer (not historical replay). I want to draft players when they were signed in real life and watch them develop (or not develop).

I understand why the old way doesn't work with the new new game engine and why fictional simmers would want to create an new "universe." This doesn't interest me, but I think that some of them new changes are really great ideas. For example, I think it's fantastic that the game will penalize teams for over-stocking certain levels or certain positions. This a fantastic change the completely mirrors real life. Kudos.

However, there is nothing stopping the game from giving us the option of "stocking teams with randomly generated players." If I could distinguish these players (simply naming them all generic1, generic2 . . . would do it) then I would be very happy. If that's not possible, then I guess I could simply create tons of extra players named "I. Bite" with tremendously crappy ratings and let the computer dole them out to each team.

I do think that it's important to remember though that the key to OOTPs success has been that it gave you the freedom to do as much or as little as you wished in running your team. I'd like to see that continue.

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by Zitofan75

Oh well, we'll all know in another 44 days or so won't we?

We sure will. Yet I don't think this is an issue where the "Fictional" simmers are going to be able to convince(nor should they try) the "Historical" simmers to embrace fictional players or settle for a reserve list. The bottom line is the bottom line...sales. Will S.I. and Markus be losing some of the market share by not including an option to appease this portion of customers? The answer is undebatably, yes.

Edit: I'm not in favor of ghost players. I'm in favor of options which protect the purity of a MLB Historical league. This "purity" should not be confused with "accuracy".

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by f.montoya

We sure will. Yet I don't think this is an issue where the "Fictional" simmers are going to be able to convince(nor should they try) the "Historical" simmers to embrace fictional players or settle for a reserve list. The bottom line is the bottom line...sales. Will S.I. and Markus be losing some of the market share by not including an option to appease this portion of customers? The answer is undebatably, yes.

Edit: I'm not in favor of ghost players. I'm in favor of options which protect the purity of a MLB Historical league. This "purity" should not be confused with "accuracy".

actually I doubt they'd lose that much. What is their alternative? They could go to Pure Sim, but it's no where close to being as deep as OOTP.

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

actually I doubt they'd lose that much. What is their alternative? They could go to Pure Sim, but it's no where close to being as deep as OOTP.

Nah, not that much, only about 30%-40% of the market share. But hey, it's only money. Just keep on truckin' with 6.51, 6 and the free 5.

[BaseballMan]

Instead of creating a database of real minor league players, would it be possible to maybe clone the major leaguers for each minor league level. I guess you could just take all debuts and clone by 3.
But i dont know if that will mess up stats too much. If you just did an eaxct clone of every player the database might still be the same as far as talent but you may end up with 3 Babe Ruths in the majors and i for one wouldnt want that.
I think you might have to keep in mind the league totals would be for the majors and the minors. So you would have to even out the talent. I mean you couldnt make an eaxct clone of Ty Cobb because then you would probably have two career .330 + hitters and in the end you might end up with a league of only superstar players. But if there is way to import a 2nd Ty Cobb into the game that might be good enough to be a top player in AAA but still not as good as an avg player in the big leagues. However i dont know if that would mess up the database or not.

[PSUColonel]

Oh no, I realize maybe there is 30-40 percent who are historical players, but wat I'm saying is, even though that may be the case, I still think al those historical simmers stilll buy OOTP, even of they can't quite do what they want when it comes to thier niche.

[Malleus Dei]

This games disrespects historical simmers enough as it is. This will just be another kick in the butt.

[ragnaar15]

I'm confused. Are ghost players the same thing as the randomly generated players in 6.5? Or are they invisible "filler" for W/L records that makes up the last two spots in the rotation if I only have 3 real prospects assigned, for example?