Aging - does this still apply?

[soxfan34]

For those of you familiar with this thread: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...lb-league.html

Do you think this applies as much in OOTP14? I tested it with an MLB league and it seemed guys weren't developing as quick and there were quite a few players still playing in their early 40s. It could have been just my experience, but I wanted to get everyone's thoughts.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by soxfan34

For those of you familiar with this thread: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...lb-league.html

Do you think this applies as much in OOTP14? I tested it with an MLB league and it seemed guys weren't developing as quick and there were quite a few players still playing in their early 40s. It could have been just my experience, but I wanted to get everyone's thoughts.

I'd start at 1 and go from there. Remember aging and development takes a couple of seasons to have an effect (developing new draft classes) so you don't want to make big changes until you have some data.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by soxfan34

For those of you familiar with this thread: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...lb-league.html

Do you think this applies as much in OOTP14? I tested it with an MLB league and it seemed guys weren't developing as quick and there were quite a few players still playing in their early 40s. It could have been just my experience, but I wanted to get everyone's thoughts.

I personally use 1.000 for both developing and .250 for both aging after testing.

Default settings were good but I still felt like guys were aging a lil too quickly for my liking.

But I think other settings will have an effect on how your league turns out. Even though I have players staying productive longer, I am not experiencing a lot of prospects stuck in the minors because they are blocked. If I didn't have AI evaluation setup like the way I do, then that may have been a problem.

[sc_superstar]

I use the same ones that I used from 13 and have even better results

.285 (Hitter Age)
1 (Hitter Dev)

.325 (Pitcher age)
.975 (Pitcher dev)

TCR 67

Most batters hit the majors by 23-26
SP's by 24-27
and MR's by 23-26

You get some players who are productive past 35
You get some who are shells of themselves after 35
and you get some who fizzle early

I found a nice variety of players so orginizational depth is key

[soxfan34]

Originally Posted by sc_superstar

I use the same ones that I used from 13 and have even better results

.285 (Hitter Age)
1 (Hitter Dev)

.325 (Pitcher age)
.975 (Pitcher dev)

TCR 67

Most batters hit the majors by 23-26
SP's by 24-27
and MR's by 23-26

You get some players who are productive past 35
You get some who are shells of themselves after 35
and you get some who fizzle early

I found a nice variety of players so orginizational depth is key

I don't have stats to back this up but don't most good SPs hit the majors pre-24(ish)?

[sc_superstar]

Unfortunately for OOTP users, very few specs could be ready before that unless you cranked up the development so they were coming out of the draft MLB ready

College players come in at 21-22 and need a season or two
HS players come in at 18-19 and need an extra year or two than college

[waitwut]

My TCR is at like 150. Hmmmm. I have noticed fluctuations in player talent change, but not huge. Its kind of even, but seemingly random. Would lowering it make it so a talent change would likely occur when a player is playing well or bad? For instance, I had a guy have his best month, but he ended up losing some contact and power while when he was playing horribly it was the opposite. Scouting is on medium, so maybe the ratings aren't even that accurate :/

[sc_superstar]

Its all random, so lowering it would make it less random, but still random.

ex. on 150 you might see a guy go from 5* potential to 1* to 3*

at 50 your more likely to see him go from 5* to 3*