Scouting Outline

PSUColonel · 06-01-2016, 11:08 PM

For those who have been on these boards over the years, you are more than likely aware of my pet peeve with the scouting system within OOTP. I would like to outline some ideas for the future here, and also get feedback and suggestions from other in hopes OOTPD might see a better way of doing things.

For me, a good realistic and fun scouting model, is the backbone of any good sports management simulation. The management side of OOTP needs a lot of love IMO. Historical teams, and leagues in outer space are fine for those who like it, but I feel OOTP needs to really start focusing on day to day GM management on a more detailed and intricate level.

This brings us to scouting...one of the biggies as far as this goes.

1. I like the ratings scale on the 20-80 scale, and wish we had an overall rating for each player based on the exact same scale. (20,25,30,35,40,45 etc..) I'd also like to see these scouted scores based solely on the scout's grades, and not anything to do with stats, while at the same time, having the AI evaluate the player using stats. So in other words, the ratings and overall grade are tied together and weighted as ratings, while the AI evaluation modifiers still have the capability to weight ratings and stats however the user wishes.

Scouting should NOT be automatic.

2. Multiple opinions. I feel having one opinion within your organization, and one OSA opinion, just isn't very realistic. It would be great to have a staff you can control through your director of scouting. Instructions go to him, and he then sends different scouts out to grade players as per your instructions. Multiple opinions come back on a scouting card. Now this brings me to another point, the more you scout a player, the more accurate the reports become. You would be able have your scouting department scout a league, team, or player. If you instruct your scouting director you want to go watch player X, you can tell him how many games you'd like to have the player scouted for, The more time you spend scouting a player, the more accurate the ratings. This means you can't just scout a players in the dead of winter...they actually have to be playing in games.

3. When giving instructions to your scouting director, you could also let him know you are looking for a particular type of player, and what priority it is. So if you really needed a lefty in your bullpen, you'd be able to tell your director that the scouting needs to find a LHP below the age of 26 with whatever other criteria you may want. I know we can do this now, but essentially, the scouting director would say, here's a list of players citing the criteria, would you like to have the player(s) scouted, and if so for how long...with an urgent priority, meaning this would go to the top of the task list.

4. Once a player is a member of your organization, scouts should really be out of it, and coaches should be the ones evaluating talent. This would help to give staff another meaningful purpose. They should play a heavier role in development, and their ability to judge talent would be the start of that process.

5. The amount of money you sink into scouting should still matter, and should affect the range of scouting (resources), and the number of opinions you might get.

These are some ideas I wanted to quickly jot down, as I am in a brainstorming mood right now. I am throwing spaghetti against the wall to see what others might think, and to hear other opinions as well. I have thought these out reasonably well, but I am sure there will be more things which pop into my head. Anyway, I just thought I'd get a conversation going.

dcd111 · 06-02-2016, 10:23 AM

I'll think about these things and give my opinion when I have time to do so, but my initial impressions:

I would also like to see improvements to the day-to-day GM-only experience, and refinements to the scouting system. I think more interaction between the GM and the staff would be beneficial, such as suggestions and requests back and forth between GM and manager, and the ability to request more specific info from the bench coach about morale issues rather than the vague, periodic updates. I also don't want to receive emails from players complaining about lineup issues I can't control (unless they are at the point of demanding a trade), although maybe some players could send an email to the GM to complain about the manager if they are the troublemaking type.

I like the idea of coaches evaluating players once they are in your organization, and I like eliminating evaluation changes in the off-season. It's always been annoying to me when an AI manager apparently uses off-season ratings changes to decide that a rookie should start over an established veteran on the first day of spring training.

I'm not sure about multiple opinions, the scouting info we get is often self-contradictory as it is, adding additional opinions might throw things into chaos for several versions of the game before settling down. I do think less automatic evaluation and more targeted scouting priorities could add some depth to the GM experience, though.

NoOne · 06-02-2016, 10:52 AM

sounds like a lot of busy work... hope there's an off switch.

PSUColonel · 06-02-2016, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne

sounds like a lot of busy work... hope there's an off switch.

It's not if you are communicating with your Head scout...he's basically managing the scouting staff after receiving directions from you. Why would this be considered busy work? This is what a general manager does. Are we trying to dumb OOTP down and not lift it up to be a great GM simulation?

06-01-2016, 11:08 PM	#1
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,139	Scouting Outline For those who have been on these boards over the years, you are more than likely aware of my pet peeve with the scouting system within OOTP. I would like to outline some ideas for the future here, and also get feedback and suggestions from other in hopes OOTPD might see a better way of doing things. For me, a good realistic and fun scouting model, is the backbone of any good sports management simulation. The management side of OOTP needs a lot of love IMO. Historical teams, and leagues in outer space are fine for those who like it, but I feel OOTP needs to really start focusing on day to day GM management on a more detailed and intricate level. This brings us to scouting...one of the biggies as far as this goes. 1. I like the ratings scale on the 20-80 scale, and wish we had an overall rating for each player based on the exact same scale. (20,25,30,35,40,45 etc..) I'd also like to see these scouted scores based solely on the scout's grades, and not anything to do with stats, while at the same time, having the AI evaluate the player using stats. So in other words, the ratings and overall grade are tied together and weighted as ratings, while the AI evaluation modifiers still have the capability to weight ratings and stats however the user wishes. Scouting should NOT be automatic. 2. Multiple opinions. I feel having one opinion within your organization, and one OSA opinion, just isn't very realistic. It would be great to have a staff you can control through your director of scouting. Instructions go to him, and he then sends different scouts out to grade players as per your instructions. Multiple opinions come back on a scouting card. Now this brings me to another point, the more you scout a player, the more accurate the reports become. You would be able have your scouting department scout a league, team, or player. If you instruct your scouting director you want to go watch player X, you can tell him how many games you'd like to have the player scouted for, The more time you spend scouting a player, the more accurate the ratings. This means you can't just scout a players in the dead of winter...they actually have to be playing in games. 3. When giving instructions to your scouting director, you could also let him know you are looking for a particular type of player, and what priority it is. So if you really needed a lefty in your bullpen, you'd be able to tell your director that the scouting needs to find a LHP below the age of 26 with whatever other criteria you may want. I know we can do this now, but essentially, the scouting director would say, here's a list of players citing the criteria, would you like to have the player(s) scouted, and if so for how long...with an urgent priority, meaning this would go to the top of the task list. 4. Once a player is a member of your organization, scouts should really be out of it, and coaches should be the ones evaluating talent. This would help to give staff another meaningful purpose. They should play a heavier role in development, and their ability to judge talent would be the start of that process. 5. The amount of money you sink into scouting should still matter, and should affect the range of scouting (resources), and the number of opinions you might get. These are some ideas I wanted to quickly jot down, as I am in a brainstorming mood right now. I am throwing spaghetti against the wall to see what others might think, and to hear other opinions as well. I have thought these out reasonably well, but I am sure there will be more things which pop into my head. Anyway, I just thought I'd get a conversation going.

06-02-2016, 10:23 AM	#2
dcd111 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 131	I'll think about these things and give my opinion when I have time to do so, but my initial impressions: I would also like to see improvements to the day-to-day GM-only experience, and refinements to the scouting system. I think more interaction between the GM and the staff would be beneficial, such as suggestions and requests back and forth between GM and manager, and the ability to request more specific info from the bench coach about morale issues rather than the vague, periodic updates. I also don't want to receive emails from players complaining about lineup issues I can't control (unless they are at the point of demanding a trade), although maybe some players could send an email to the GM to complain about the manager if they are the troublemaking type. I like the idea of coaches evaluating players once they are in your organization, and I like eliminating evaluation changes in the off-season. It's always been annoying to me when an AI manager apparently uses off-season ratings changes to decide that a rookie should start over an established veteran on the first day of spring training. I'm not sure about multiple opinions, the scouting info we get is often self-contradictory as it is, adding additional opinions might throw things into chaos for several versions of the game before settling down. I do think less automatic evaluation and more targeted scouting priorities could add some depth to the GM experience, though.

06-02-2016, 10:52 AM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	sounds like a lot of busy work... hope there's an off switch.