Draft pool low quality of players?

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

Is anyone else noticing a really low quality of draft eligible players? In my imported game from 14, I'm at the 2022 draft and I've noticed that only 35 of the available 1050 players have more than 1 star potential. 13 of them having more than 2 star potential. I have one of the best scouting directors in the game.

So, is this normal? Have the quality of the draft classes been lowered this year?

Originally Posted by sjshaw

We're having to crank up the player creation modifiers in the FOBL to get roughly the same draft pool quality.

Originally Posted by sjshaw

We know what we're doing, but thanks for your thoughts. We have our own independent financial system outside the game and suffered through a paucity of talent about halfway through our 50-year history that almost killed the league. It's hard to get excited about playing against 31 other people when everybody's best player is a 6/5/6/5/6 on a 1-10 scale.

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Their "mess" is different than your "mess" though, which is the point I was trying to make.

Looks like it's the same to me - the new way is for the FAC to create a bunch of identical players in the draft pool.

[Subby]

Seriously though - if I want some expert help with single player roster making I will absolutely snapchat you.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Check out the game credits for where I'm listed

Hmmmmm...trying to figure out how being 1/8 of the MLB default roster set team qualifies someone as an expert on fictional MP leagues...

*shurg*

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Hmmmmm...trying to figure out how being 1/8 of the MLB default roster set team qualifies someone as an expert on fictional MP leagues...

*shurg*

Check the top of the screen.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Habsfan18

Is anyone else noticing a really low quality of draft eligible players? In my imported game from 14, I'm at the 2022 draft and I've noticed that only 35 of the available 1050 players have more than 1 star potential. 13 of them having more than 2 star potential. I have one of the best scouting directors in the game.

So, is this normal? Have the quality of the draft classes been lowered this year?

Original problem: a low quality of draft eligible players seem to be available in the new game.

Originally Posted by lukasberger

They were lowered last year. This is working as intended.

There's something like 20 pages of discussion of this on the forums dating back to last year if you feel like searching for it.

Reply to OP: WORKING AS INTENDED. So, quit griping and go search the damned forums.

Originally Posted by sjshaw

We're having to crank up the player creation modifiers in the FOBL to get roughly the same draft pool quality.

Response to the problem posed in the original post: Why yes, we have also run into this problem in our testing. We think that adjusting settings might help with the issue.

Originally Posted by lukasberger;3684470[B

]It's your league[/B] and your choice to make but that absolutely will lead to major problems in the future. Your star players won't perform how you expect them to and the overall talent level in your league will look great on paper, but actually be really, really flat statistically.

You'll also possibly have contracts get out of control as guys with huge ratings but relatively poor performance demand elite contracts.

It's so bizarre to me that folks would rather have something look how they expect it to but get worse results in the long term.

Why not just trust that Markus knows what he's doing with stuff like this, understands the game, tests thoroughly, and is doing it for a real reason, not just out of a random desire to make changes?

The dismissive reply: The suggested possible solution may be tried, but a) it won't work and b) I don't even know why you'd bother to attempt that. Because TRUST MARKUS.

But yes, the FOBLer ignored the initial issue.

[Jythier]

So, uh... what does potential rating even mean if it's not what the person's potential is?

[Doc_Brown]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Do you actually want me to start pulling the "do you know who I am" crap you're all so fond of?

Snip

Unknown dude trying to write "War and Peace" or something

Who are you?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Check the top of the screen.

I just noticed that my OOTP15 credit screen says OOTP14, so maybe you've done something new for just this version that got updated in a recent release that I haven't grabbed yet? Still not sure how it qualifies you to talk down to guys like RonCo in particular.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

My credit screen says OOTP14, so maybe you've done something new for just this version that got updated in a recent release that I haven't grabbed yet? Still not sure how it qualifies you to talk down to guys like RonCo in particular.

I haven't once talked down to RonCo. He's been great. We disagree on some stuff, but that's fine. He's been a gentleman about it and contributed some excellent thoughts and data points.

The problems have come from all the other FOBL folks in this thread, with the honorable exception of cuervo72, who've talked down to everyone that's had a comment in this thread and contributed nothing useful except for some of the worst attitudes seen on this forum in a while.

The talking down has not originated with me, that's not my thing and never has been.

I only got to the point where I did that when I and most of the other folks in this thread had been goaded beyond endurance by some of these guys.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I just noticed that my OOTP15 credit screen says OOTP14, so maybe you've done something new for just this version that got updated in a recent release that I haven't grabbed yet? Still not sure how it qualifies you to talk down to guys like RonCo in particular.

The credits should've been the same throughout all versions of 15.

Anyhow, it doesn't actually matter and I wouldn't have ever brought it up had it not been for the tone of a lot of the folks involved here as well as their constant harping on how "important" and "knowledgeable" they are and how no one else knows anything, even while they're asking for help.

[HolyCow98]

Attitude was what eventually killed my participation on these forums many years ago. Well, with the exception of visiting the mod forums to get some much appreciated community created content.

[Subby]

snipped.

[tejdog1]

[snipped]

[Walsh06]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

Looks like it's the same to me - the new way is for the FAC to create a bunch of identical players in the draft pool.

They are different because he is talking just about draft day while ye are talking about long term development. This has been said multiple times. They are different issues.

[Jythier]

Originally Posted by HolyCow98

Attitude was what eventually killed my participation on these forums many years ago. Well, with the exception of visiting the mod forums to get some much appreciated community created content.

For me it's lack of responsiveness from anyone about big scary setup questions, particularly for online leagues and financials.

But whatever, I'll figure it out.

Anyway, this thread has been very helpful to me in that I don't want my draft pools to be boring so I might need to change some things.

How do you set up feeder leagues to create different sorts of players? There are settings to change that? That's so cool. So those are by league, I can just go in and play around until I'm getting the quality of players I want from each league? I can have a great pitching league, a fielding league, a batting league? :P

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Rain King

So, I decided to try this with and see what it looked like. I created a fictional MLB setup and simmed to the draft and then counted the number of players with each star potential while looking through the relative eyes of MLB, AAA and AA. Here are the results.

MLB

5.0: 1
4.5: 2
4.0: 9
3.5: 13
3.0: 22
2.5: 106
2.0: 356
1.5: 178
1.0: 26
0.5: 220

AAA

5.0: 175
4.5: 29
4.0: 56
3.5: 53
3.0: 61
2.5: 117
2.0: 116
1.5: 82
1.0: 24
0.5: 220

AA

5.0: 270
4.5: 52
4.0: 86
3.5: 87
3.0: 85
2.5: 100
2.0: 58
1.5: 85
1.0: 32
0.5: 78


Next, I'm thinking I'll sim 20 years and see what the star ratings for that draft class looks like through each level's eyes.

So, this is a bit concerning. Here are the results after simming for 20 years.


ML

5.0: 0
4.5: 1
4.0: 2
3.5: 5
3.0: 7
2.5: 46
2.0: 137
1.5: 305
1.0: 160
0.5: 267


AAA

5.0: 17
4.5: 12
4.0: 28
3.5: 25
3.0: 31
2.5: 73
2.0: 138
1.5: 228
1.0: 94
0.5: 284


AA

5.0: 25
4.5: 26
4.0: 39
3.5: 32
3.0: 41
2.5: 168
2.0: 314
1.5: 212
1.0: 29
0.5: 44


Now, I did these use the OSA scouts and I'm thinking I probably should have turned scouting off and gone with pure ratings, but I shouldn't think that would make a huge difference, but the draft is relatively much weaker 20 years later than on the initial year.

[Ryan S]

[snipped]

[Doc_Brown]

Originally Posted by Subby

Okay, but does this mean you will stop posting in this thread so someone who actually knows what they are talking about can help?

So if Lukas stopped posting in this thread and "someone who actually knows what they are talking about" posted and gave the same answers that already have been given, would you show them more respect than you have to Lukas?

[jaysdailydose]

Originally Posted by Subby

Appreciate all of your help, but I think we are looking for someone with a little more OOTP experience for this one.

Wow.

For what? Apparently you guys run the most base of settings and can't deviate from the defaults, so...

This thread has turned into nothing but a troll fest, and pretty much everyone that has represented your league since yesterday makes it just about impossible to even want to try to help you.

[jaysdailydose]

Originally Posted by Subby

Okay, but does this mean you will stop posting in this thread so someone who actually knows what they are talking about can help?

Lots of people know what they are talking about. You guys are just trying to be brutally offensive.