Free Agency Too Easy

majesty95 · 05-02-2015, 01:52 PM

I'm posting this while I try to figure out my crashing issue but is something I notcied in my game when I went from reserve era to free agency. The first year of free agency (84-85 offseason) I was able to land both Dale Murphy and Dennis Eckersley, essentially the top 2 free agents. The next year my team went from 93-110 wins. Is this typical? Is there a way to make free agency more difficult without imposing a cap? Surely all historicals aren't that easy are they?

Biggio509 · 05-02-2015, 08:05 PM

Typically what I see is that the reserve clause era builds up a lot of extra cash. So if the first free agency pool is small and you have a lot of budget you can win the bidding war. The problem is the wages take a couple of rounds to start soaking up the extra cash that were in budgets from RC era. The problem is really more with how budgets rise well above costs in the RC era you could buy 2 or 3 teams in the RC era. When free agency kicks in the bidding up of salaries and the contracts staying constant rather than reverting to the performance bands under RC will fix the problem.

That being said the first round or two of free agency can be a little unchallenging with a budget big enough to outbid anyone. Larger free agency pools and being stuck with bigger contracts because you outbid everyone should eventually fix this.

majesty95 · 05-05-2015, 02:39 AM

Well, if your larger contracts give you 2-3 pieces that bring you 100-110 wins every year, that extra revenue would offset that. My game died before I could test this more, but it took exactly one free agency cycle to go from 93 to 110 wins. I know it wouldn't always be that dominant, but it was far too easy. Not sure the CPU teams were competitive enough...

TribeFanInNC · 05-05-2015, 09:01 AM

In historicals, you always have the advantage that you know Dale Murphy is Dale Murphy and not Sixto Lezcano or Joe Charbonneau. I find it hard to play around that. I typically just don't sign guys like that.

I don't think it is that FA is too easy, per se. I think the user is just able to better differentiate the Eck from Wayne Garland or Rick Wise.

The Game · 05-05-2015, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by majesty95

Well, if your larger contracts give you 2-3 pieces that bring you 100-110 wins every year, that extra revenue would offset that. My game died before I could test this more, but it took exactly one free agency cycle to go from 93 to 110 wins. I know it wouldn't always be that dominant, but it was far too easy. Not sure the CPU teams were competitive enough...

It would make sense that the AI should have been more aggressive with a smaller FA pool, especially for 2 guys that probably put up HOF #'s in your league.

Matt Arnold · 05-05-2015, 09:08 AM

Some years it will be easy. Other years I've had tons of money to spend but some *&@! AI team always either outbids me, or forces my competitive nature to a contract that I later regret.

majesty95 · 05-05-2015, 02:43 PM

It could just be small sample sixe. Eckersely is somewhat understandable as he had not yet become the Eck (two years away from being turned into a reliever). However, he did turn in a Cy Young performance that first season after signing.

Murphy still had three good years left and was playing at an MVP level. .However, that could have been due to his potential based on remaining career vs remaining peak. Maybe remaining peak would have made him look much more appealing...

05-02-2015, 01:52 PM	#1
majesty95 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 1,790	Free Agency Too Easy I'm posting this while I try to figure out my crashing issue but is something I notcied in my game when I went from reserve era to free agency. The first year of free agency (84-85 offseason) I was able to land both Dale Murphy and Dennis Eckersley, essentially the top 2 free agents. The next year my team went from 93-110 wins. Is this typical? Is there a way to make free agency more difficult without imposing a cap? Surely all historicals aren't that easy are they? __________________ College Football Sim League

05-05-2015, 02:39 AM	#3
majesty95 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 1,790	Well, if your larger contracts give you 2-3 pieces that bring you 100-110 wins every year, that extra revenue would offset that. My game died before I could test this more, but it took exactly one free agency cycle to go from 93 to 110 wins. I know it wouldn't always be that dominant, but it was far too easy. Not sure the CPU teams were competitive enough... __________________ College Football Sim League

05-05-2015, 02:43 PM	#7
majesty95 All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 1,790	It could just be small sample sixe. Eckersely is somewhat understandable as he had not yet become the Eck (two years away from being turned into a reliever). However, he did turn in a Cy Young performance that first season after signing. Murphy still had three good years left and was playing at an MVP level. .However, that could have been due to his potential based on remaining career vs remaining peak. Maybe remaining peak would have made him look much more appealing... __________________ College Football Sim League

05-02-2015, 08:05 PM	#2
Biggio509 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,027	Typically what I see is that the reserve clause era builds up a lot of extra cash. So if the first free agency pool is small and you have a lot of budget you can win the bidding war. The problem is the wages take a couple of rounds to start soaking up the extra cash that were in budgets from RC era. The problem is really more with how budgets rise well above costs in the RC era you could buy 2 or 3 teams in the RC era. When free agency kicks in the bidding up of salaries and the contracts staying constant rather than reverting to the performance bands under RC will fix the problem. That being said the first round or two of free agency can be a little unchallenging with a budget big enough to outbid anyone. Larger free agency pools and being stuck with bigger contracts because you outbid everyone should eventually fix this.

05-05-2015, 09:01 AM	#4
TribeFanInNC Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,019	In historicals, you always have the advantage that you know Dale Murphy is Dale Murphy and not Sixto Lezcano or Joe Charbonneau. I find it hard to play around that. I typically just don't sign guys like that. I don't think it is that FA is too easy, per se. I think the user is just able to better differentiate the Eck from Wayne Garland or Rick Wise.

05-05-2015, 09:08 AM	#6
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 16,274	Some years it will be easy. Other years I've had tons of money to spend but some *&@! AI team always either outbids me, or forces my competitive nature to a contract that I later regret.