Best Trading Setting

PSUColonel · 05-17-2016, 02:21 PM

I am only going to include a few because I believe the most realistic setting is one of these.

PSUColonel · 05-17-2016, 08:33 PM

Bump

r0nster · 05-17-2016, 09:06 PM

I actually think it should be 2 different settings like one for offseason and july trading deadline setting for both would require different settings and obviously different interests at that time.

NCBeachBum · 05-18-2016, 12:21 AM

A few years ago, I'd have said "hard difficulty, heavily favour prospects." Now I'm down to merely "favour prospects," and wish there was a median setting between hard and average. The average has gotten a lot better than it used to be.

PSUColonel · 05-18-2016, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCBeachBum

A few years ago, I'd have said "hard difficulty, heavily favour prospects." Now I'm down to merely "favour prospects," and wish there was a median setting between hard and average. The average has gotten a lot better than it used to be.

I agree, and voted avg/neutral... I am curious to see what others think though.

texasmame · 05-18-2016, 01:00 PM

The trading feature, AI wise, in the game still needs a lot of work.

I was excited when I heard they were finally incorporating in "needs" as pertained to trades. But it seems that's only for the teams you control; all the computer controlled teams still approach trades rather generically, save for the blanket "favors prospects," etc. settings. Really not helpful, nor realistic.

Something as simple as tying "win now" status to that team favoring veterans and "rebuilding" status to favoring prospects (and trying to dump vets in last year of contracts) would be welcomed.

That said - neutral/hard selected.

Neutral because the blanket vets/prospects setting is simply silly and hard because "very hard" is just silly; turning down lopsided trades that are heavily in the AI's favor, just because to make it "very hard" to do trades. Blech.

NoOne · 05-18-2016, 01:13 PM

most people only have significant experience with one. i couldn't possibly give an answer due to lack of relative experience with the other settings.

i've always just stuck with default average/neutral. (no vote here, it would do harm). i've now seen 2 good trades offered - ever. the 2nd came recently, even though i didn't have interest, it was a solid offer. an actual position player was offered instead of some crappy RP.

the way i run my team, i get screwed by the AI looking at "need." my minors typically don't have a bunch of well-rated RP, some of them are merely listed as SP in the minors, and some will be converted SP once thy get to the mlb... so the AI always thinks i am desperate for RP prospects. that's my guess.

PSUColonel · 05-18-2016, 01:17 PM

Some may argue trades on "Hard" can be silly as well. It definitely seems when I attempt to use hard, I'm getting the short end of the stick, irregardless.

grmagne · 05-18-2016, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texasmame

The trading feature, AI wise, in the game still needs a lot of work.

I was excited when I heard they were finally incorporating in "needs" as pertained to trades. But it seems that's only for the teams you control; all the computer controlled teams still approach trades rather generically, save for the blanket "favors prospects," etc. settings. Really not helpful, nor realistic.

Something as simple as tying "win now" status to that team favoring veterans and "rebuilding" status to favoring prospects (and trying to dump vets in last year of contracts) would be welcomed.

That said - neutral/hard selected.

Neutral because the blanket vets/prospects setting is simply silly and hard because "very hard" is just silly; turning down lopsided trades that are heavily in the AI's favor, just because to make it "very hard" to do trades. Blech.

I also use Hard/Neutral so that the AI doesn't give me all it's top players too cheaply. But I'm surprised that no one has voted for Favors Veterans. In real life, teams throw away multiple top prospects to get a great veteran player. In OOTP, the AI goes the other way: it wants multiple all-stars in return for one top prospect.

Examples of real-life trades that would never happen in OOTP are:

The Diamondbacks traded Dansby Swanson, Aaron Blair and Ender Inciarte for Shelby Miller and Gabe Speier.

The A's traded Addison Russell, Billy McKinney and Dan Straily for Jason Hammel and Jeff Samardzjia.

The Blue Jays traded Noah Syndergaard, Travis d'Arnaud and Wuilmer Becerra for R.A. Dickey and Josh Thole.

PSUColonel · 05-18-2016, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grmagne

I also use Hard/Neutral so that the AI doesn't give me all it's top players too cheaply. But I'm surprised that no one has voted for Favors Veterans. In real life, teams throw away multiple top prospects to get a great veteran player. In OOTP, the AI goes the other way: it wants multiple all-stars in return for one top prospect.

Examples of real-life trades that would never happen in OOTP are:

The Diamondbacks traded Dansby Swanson, Aaron Blair and Ender Inciarte for Shelby Miller and Gabe Speier.

The A's traded Addison Russell, Billy McKinney and Dan Straily for Jason Hammel and Jeff Samardzjia.

The Blue Jays traded Noah Syndergaard, Travis d'Arnaud and Wuilmer Becerra for R.A. Dickey and Josh Thole.

Yup...it's tough to gauge....all GMs and team finances play a role...along with the depth of a farm system. OOTP took a a first step in an effort to mimic some of the variables this year by creating different GM personalities...obviously, there are more factors....I think Markus should start focusing on environmental factors for next year(money, roster strength, farm strength, ownership, team focus, etc)

PSUColonel · 05-18-2016, 01:45 PM

I haven't played around with hard and favor prospects...could be good, my only worry is bad contracts

PSUColonel · 05-19-2016, 11:57 AM

We need more than 41 votes!! ��

PSUColonel · 05-19-2016, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grmagne

I also use Hard/Neutral so that the AI doesn't give me all it's top players too cheaply. But I'm surprised that no one has voted for Favors Veterans. In real life, teams throw away multiple top prospects to get a great veteran player. In OOTP, the AI goes the other way: it wants multiple all-stars in return for one top prospect.

Examples of real-life trades that would never happen in OOTP are:

The Diamondbacks traded Dansby Swanson, Aaron Blair and Ender Inciarte for Shelby Miller and Gabe Speier.

The A's traded Addison Russell, Billy McKinney and Dan Straily for Jason Hammel and Jeff Samardzjia.

The Blue Jays traded Noah Syndergaard, Travis d'Arnaud and Wuilmer Becerra for R.A. Dickey and Josh Thole.

Fair doesn't necessarily equal cheaply

bly08 · 05-19-2016, 06:30 PM

I've always had trading on hard but have switched between neutral and favor prospects, haven't noticed significant differences either way.

PSUColonel · 05-19-2016, 07:50 PM

To me, average just seems the most realistic. With hard, it's impossible to do routine trades not involving highly rated players.

vladdy16 · 05-19-2016, 08:51 PM

Honestly, trading is way too easy no matter what the setting. I think the only way to make it realistic is to keep in mind how often trades actually happen, and limit yourself there, otherwise you can really overturn your roster advantageously over the course of a couple months.

Don't keep adding to the trade once you get an agreement, you can really take advantage there for some reason. (pretty much any time I get an agreement on a 1for1 trade, I could use slots 2-5 to trade 4 half star relievers for 4 great prospects)

Using shop a player only is another good way to limit yourself, but again, you can really get some steals if the timing is right, so try not to get carried away.

I'd like in the future for there to be a GM reputation feature, where other GM's can grow weary of you, and your activity level can have a drastic affect on player loyalty, FA desirability and owner and fan loyalty.

PSUColonel · 05-20-2016, 03:38 PM

Anyone else experiment with these combinations?

PSUColonel · 05-22-2016, 04:03 PM

I must admit, I'm a little surprised how many are choosing hard over neutral in this version.

r0nster · 05-22-2016, 05:24 PM

What bugs me the most is whenever I try to make a trade by shopping it predominately offers outfielders nearly 80% of the time. The other big thing that bugs me is how you goto initiate trade and you want a player maybe at 1 star and it will want a 5 star player in return. The reverse is true as well if I offer a 5 star player then it will only offer a 2 maybe 3 star player if lucky. Havent found a realistic setting yet.

Anyone · 05-22-2016, 09:02 PM

I used to do average/neutral, but now I do hard/neutral.

Average neutral seemed like it would accept a trade if the talent was no worse than balanced, even if the AI team didn't need what you were offering.

I found that I basically could reconfigure my talent for free (e.g. if I had a very good 3B and an average 3B but a hole at SS, so ideally I'd trade the average 3B for an average SS, it was easy to find a team willing to do that-- even if they didn't have a hole at 3B).

Now I can still get good value trades if the opponent has holes. I traded two solid prospects where I had players who were good enough and young enough I shouldn't need the prospects to replace them for a star SP who was only 23 (better already on my scout's 20-80 scale then either prospect's potential rating) and signed to a very reasonable multiyear contract. I was shocked the AI did it.

I then got several trade offers trying to get that SP from me until I set him to untouchable, plus he has pitched well on my team, so it wasn't my scout being way off (I also have scouting accuracy average, max scouting budget, and over 40% of that on major league scouting so my scout being way off would be very unusual, though with much less spending on minor league scouting maybe my scout undervalued one of the prospects).

That's the only "great" trade I've made on Hard...but it should be that way. The key is if I want any sort of decent value I have to offer a team something it needs, which seems right. If in the hypothetical case I want to turn one of the 3B into a SS I should have to offer a better 3B than the SS I'm getting unless the other team is desperate for a 3B and has a SS surplus.

At base the Hard setting seems to mean "the other team has to have a good reason to make the trade," which seems realistic. Average seems to accept any trade that's fair in value even if the AI team doesn't need what you're offering. It's been a couple of OOTP versions since I had trade difficulty on Average, so maybe it's improved since then, but that's how it was.

View Poll Results: Which combination yields the most realistic trading AI?
Avg Difficulty, neutral	35	24.48%
Avg Difficulty, favor prospects	20	13.99%
Avg Difficulty, favor Vets	6	4.20%
Hard difficulty, neutral	36	25.17%
Hard difficulty, favor prospects	44	30.77%
Hard difficulty, favor vets	2	1.40%
Voters: 143. You may not vote on this poll

05-17-2016, 02:21 PM	#1
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	Best Trading Setting I am only going to include a few because I believe the most realistic setting is one of these.

05-18-2016, 12:21 AM	#4
NCBeachBum All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Topsail Island, NC, USA Posts: 1,049	A few years ago, I'd have said "hard difficulty, heavily favour prospects." Now I'm down to merely "favour prospects," and wish there was a median setting between hard and average. The average has gotten a lot better than it used to be. __________________ And ain't that a shame, shame, shame Shame, shame, the way you do Oh, it's a shame, shame, shame Shame, shame on you

05-18-2016, 01:00 PM	#6
texasmame All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Planet Texas Posts: 1,726	The trading feature, AI wise, in the game still needs a lot of work. I was excited when I heard they were finally incorporating in "needs" as pertained to trades. But it seems that's only for the teams you control; all the computer controlled teams still approach trades rather generically, save for the blanket "favors prospects," etc. settings. Really not helpful, nor realistic. Something as simple as tying "win now" status to that team favoring veterans and "rebuilding" status to favoring prospects (and trying to dump vets in last year of contracts) would be welcomed. That said - neutral/hard selected. Neutral because the blanket vets/prospects setting is simply silly and hard because "very hard" is just silly; turning down lopsided trades that are heavily in the AI's favor, just because to make it "very hard" to do trades. Blech. __________________ Managing and rebuilding the 98-loss TOKYO THUNDER. 62-19 at the ALL-STAR BREAK. 11 game lead in the NL West.

05-18-2016, 01:13 PM	#7
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	most people only have significant experience with one. i couldn't possibly give an answer due to lack of relative experience with the other settings. i've always just stuck with default average/neutral. (no vote here, it would do harm). i've now seen 2 good trades offered - ever. the 2nd came recently, even though i didn't have interest, it was a solid offer. an actual position player was offered instead of some crappy RP. the way i run my team, i get screwed by the AI looking at "need." my minors typically don't have a bunch of well-rated RP, some of them are merely listed as SP in the minors, and some will be converted SP once thy get to the mlb... so the AI always thinks i am desperate for RP prospects. that's my guess. Last edited by NoOne; 05-18-2016 at 01:17 PM.

05-17-2016, 08:33 PM	#2
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	Bump

05-17-2016, 09:06 PM	#3
r0nster Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 3,083	I actually think it should be 2 different settings like one for offseason and july trading deadline setting for both would require different settings and obviously different interests at that time.

05-18-2016, 01:17 PM	#8
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	Some may argue trades on "Hard" can be silly as well. It definitely seems when I attempt to use hard, I'm getting the short end of the stick, irregardless.

05-18-2016, 01:45 PM	#11
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	I haven't played around with hard and favor prospects...could be good, my only worry is bad contracts

05-19-2016, 11:57 AM	#12
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	We need more than 41 votes!! ��

05-19-2016, 06:30 PM	#14
bly08 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 105	I've always had trading on hard but have switched between neutral and favor prospects, haven't noticed significant differences either way.

05-19-2016, 07:50 PM	#15
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	To me, average just seems the most realistic. With hard, it's impossible to do routine trades not involving highly rated players.

05-19-2016, 08:51 PM	#16
vladdy16 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 23	Honestly, trading is way too easy no matter what the setting. I think the only way to make it realistic is to keep in mind how often trades actually happen, and limit yourself there, otherwise you can really overturn your roster advantageously over the course of a couple months. Don't keep adding to the trade once you get an agreement, you can really take advantage there for some reason. (pretty much any time I get an agreement on a 1for1 trade, I could use slots 2-5 to trade 4 half star relievers for 4 great prospects) Using shop a player only is another good way to limit yourself, but again, you can really get some steals if the timing is right, so try not to get carried away. I'd like in the future for there to be a GM reputation feature, where other GM's can grow weary of you, and your activity level can have a drastic affect on player loyalty, FA desirability and owner and fan loyalty. Last edited by vladdy16; 05-19-2016 at 08:59 PM.

05-20-2016, 03:38 PM	#17
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	Anyone else experiment with these combinations?

05-22-2016, 04:03 PM	#18
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,144	I must admit, I'm a little surprised how many are choosing hard over neutral in this version.

05-22-2016, 05:24 PM	#19
r0nster Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 3,083	What bugs me the most is whenever I try to make a trade by shopping it predominately offers outfielders nearly 80% of the time. The other big thing that bugs me is how you goto initiate trade and you want a player maybe at 1 star and it will want a 5 star player in return. The reverse is true as well if I offer a 5 star player then it will only offer a 2 maybe 3 star player if lucky. Havent found a realistic setting yet.

05-22-2016, 09:02 PM	#20
Anyone Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 405	I used to do average/neutral, but now I do hard/neutral. Average neutral seemed like it would accept a trade if the talent was no worse than balanced, even if the AI team didn't need what you were offering. I found that I basically could reconfigure my talent for free (e.g. if I had a very good 3B and an average 3B but a hole at SS, so ideally I'd trade the average 3B for an average SS, it was easy to find a team willing to do that-- even if they didn't have a hole at 3B). Now I can still get good value trades if the opponent has holes. I traded two solid prospects where I had players who were good enough and young enough I shouldn't need the prospects to replace them for a star SP who was only 23 (better already on my scout's 20-80 scale then either prospect's potential rating) and signed to a very reasonable multiyear contract. I was shocked the AI did it. I then got several trade offers trying to get that SP from me until I set him to untouchable, plus he has pitched well on my team, so it wasn't my scout being way off (I also have scouting accuracy average, max scouting budget, and over 40% of that on major league scouting so my scout being way off would be very unusual, though with much less spending on minor league scouting maybe my scout undervalued one of the prospects). That's the only "great" trade I've made on Hard...but it should be that way. The key is if I want any sort of decent value I have to offer a team something it needs, which seems right. If in the hypothetical case I want to turn one of the 3B into a SS I should have to offer a better 3B than the SS I'm getting unless the other team is desperate for a 3B and has a SS surplus. At base the Hard setting seems to mean "the other team has to have a good reason to make the trade," which seems realistic. Average seems to accept any trade that's fair in value even if the AI team doesn't need what you're offering. It's been a couple of OOTP versions since I had trade difficulty on Average, so maybe it's improved since then, but that's how it was.