The Annual Settings Thread

[jbergey22]

I hate having the current year stats weighted too high as it makes it too easy to lock up players having a poor start to long term contracts.

I tend to do something like
Ratings 40
Current Year 20
Prior Year 30
2 years ago 10

Kind of wish there was a way to have the weight change after the All Star break or something. Would like a way to have the weight of the current season higher without allowing the players ask for bargain contracts because of a slow start.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

And all of my experience says that all of that is bunk, except for scouting on very low. Have fun with your grudge.

Perhaps stats only is the most difficult to play and the most fun but that is an internal game issue more so than a "realstic" way to play. A MLB gm gets numerous scouting reports(some scouts he will value more than others) and have to decide which indicator, stats or scouting reports will give a more accurate picture of what is really going on with a player.

Fangraphs can paint a remarkable picture of current MLB players just by looking at stats but they struggle just like many MLB gms in trying to project future MLB prospects.

Also, I have tried stats only and I do think it is fun. The issues I have with it(as you have stated) is it doesnt work well with current rosters because you can rip off the computer at will and secondly I would like to participate in the drafting of my team and without any type of potential ratings you are limited in what you can do. I lose interest about the time the draft comes and I have no idea who to draft without using the computer recommendation. Also, that issue with being able to lock up players starting slow to long term contracts and a huge discount if you put too much weight in the current years stats.

Stats only has numerous issues and cheats as well.

Is there an actual way to have a reasonable draft "stats only" without using scout recommendations? Id imagine Id be taking players projected in the 20th round with my 1st round pick and set the farm system back for years.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by marc5477

Not this again... Look man, I actually coached sports for a while. I again will tell you that this is NOT how its done in real life until the journeyman/veteran levels in the sport. Before that, tools are used.

Also, as a fellow engineer, you will need to explain to me how removing a variable (like tools) makes decision more "tedious." Removing tools from the picture actually makes decisions EASIER because you have fewer variables to consider for your decision making process. Its not all or nothing.

And as explained previously by many many many times (and has been tested many many many times over the years), stats only effectively handicaps the AI. The AI will be clueless when running their minors and your league will lose tons of good to great players this way and the funny part is, you will never know it and you will actually believe all is ok when it really is not.

>> Stats only does not solve the problem, it simply covers it up. <<

This is not how it is in real life and if you do it this way, the minor leagues become become less effective. Folks like Roy Santana, Halladay and Sabathia would have never made it in a stats only league.

Your 1st year playing in the minors becomes all or nothing (unless you get lucky with tons of long term injuries at your position). Either you are at least average in the minors your 1st year or, odds are, you will never see enough playing time and are never able to prove yourself (unless you create all minor league lineups yourself and have players alternate every game to give them all playing time). Hence, you will lose a lot of great players this way and yes, I verified this many times using historical leagues with recalc turned on. I followed late bloomers and sure enough, most (if not all... i dont recall) ended up not making it in the majors or riding the bench their entire career (Jose Bautista comes to mind, he basically didnt play in the simulation).

I did a lot of testing a couple of years ago and here is what I found to be the most realistic of all settings:

Scouting Accuracy: Very Low
- This is by far the most important, and realistic setting. It creates a very wide variation in ratings between scouts and the OSA (as it is in real life). Results of this, after hundreds of seasons played, created the most realistic results. At this setting, you at least get a glimpse of potential however you will find that it is wrong 95% of the time. Most of the 70 to 80 potential guys end up being average or below average, which is actually how it is in real life. Many dont make it at all but some become stars, and once in a blue moon, a super stars (about 1 every 10 seasons). But at least with this setting on, the AI has a chance to select and keep these guys and not just throw them away if they dont perform right away in R league or Low A.

Player Evaluation AI Setting: Default (40/30/20/10) or (30/30/25/15)
- Yes the developers know what they are doing. With this, you are basically 40% tools and 60% stats. Not bad. If you see a lot of 1 year wonder contracts, use the 2nd setting but beware, you might end up with over paid end of life (declining) players. Both work fine.

Trade Favoribility: Favor Prospects
Trade Difficulty: Hard
Trade Frequency: Low

do you really feel trading settings need to be touched? I think they are pretty good on defaults this time around.

[mmarra82]

Morale system...yes or no?

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by mmarra82

Morale system...yes or no?

Do you like it or do you dislike it? Personal choice.

[mmarra82]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Do you like it or do you dislike it? Personal choice.

Not a fan, was curious what others thought, and since this is about settings, thought it was a good place.

Love stats only!

[bababui]

Originally Posted by marc5477

Same old song eh? You think its everyone else who holds some sort of grudge. At some point you will need to realize that its just you.



Who is "us." Youre pretty much the entire sounding board for your claims. No one else claims its more realistic. Some prefer it which is fine, but you go the extra distance and actually claim things that simply are not true of reality or even the game. I think its funny which is why i never report you. I actually like people like you, because you make things less boring. Kind of like why I liked Dr House.

Do you actual have competitive sports experience of any kind? Were you any good?

Don't let him get to you. It's the Aspergers talking.

[jpeters1734]

my scout using the 2-8 scale on a very low setting is just as inaccurate as any real life scout. Also, most scouts don't look at stats anyway. So how the hell is stats only more realistic?

[shipfb21]

i dont believe stats only is more reslistic than using ratings. in real life, scouts, gms n anyone else can see a player with their own eyes. they are not just skimming through the boxscores and judging players off stats. they can judge a batters eye, his swing, power, etc. thats why scouts in all sports grade players. using stats only doesnt allow for this. all ur doing is looking at his numbers on paper without seeing a player play. i know we dont actually see them play, but u get my drift. i would even argue that using ratings makes it more difficult. it makes more variables to consider instead of just looking at his stats. a few examples would be looking at a player rated with good contact and a good eye struggle to hit .250 for 2 seasons. is he still maturing as a hitter, is he overrated, on the decline? judging this player using stats only, u would b ready to turn the page on him or u may have never even given him a chance. another example would be when i extended one of my younger, highly rated players to a large extension. judging by his stats, he should not b making as much as he is. but unfortunately for my payroll, I fell in love with his ratings. needless to say, despite his good ratings, he is a mediocre player that i overpaid and am stuck with... in my opinion stats only makes the game easier because u are looking at less variables.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

my scout using the 2-8 scale on a very low setting is just as inaccurate as any real life scout. Also, most scouts don't look at stats anyway. So how the hell is stats only more realistic?

I would even argue very low accuracy may be unrealistic...way too many overrated prospects. Normal accuracy appears to be in line with what you would really find in terms of realistic scouted talent distribution.

[PSUColonel]

It's my feeling being a MLB GM is nowhere near as difficult as being in charge of football operations in the NFL or a soccer team. The truth is, it's hard to evaluate certain players in those sports, whereas in baseball, all players can be defined through stats and scouting.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

"Imagine (tangent incoming) if titles like XCOM 2 had their statistics masked, from health through to hit chance. People would play the game completely differently...I’d quite like to play that game – it would feel unfair, but to be honest, life is unfair, and combat is always a risk. It would become a game of tactical awareness, common sense, and controlled caution." - Dann Sullivan, inadvertently explaining the appeal and correct approach to stats-only

That's an analogy that must come from someone who think the members of the military are mindless drones. The truth is, every rating in xcom directly ties into what is actually known about a soldier. how well does he shoot? how fast can he run? how durable is he? what is his state of mind? A good military leader knows everything about their soldiers in order to keep them alive. nice try though.

[Lockdog]

Originally Posted by shipfb21

i dont believe stats only is more reslistic than using ratings. in real life, scouts, gms n anyone else can see a player with their own eyes. they are not just skimming through the boxscores and judging players off stats. they can judge a batters eye, his swing, power, etc. thats why scouts in all sports grade players. using stats only doesnt allow for this.

That is the importance of written scouting reports. When playing with ratings off the scouting text is meant to describe a player's skill set, looking beyond stats. The only problem is the current reports do not give the user enough information about a player's skills, thus making drafting and other tasks difficult to do without being able to see ratings.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by Lockdog

That is the importance of written scouting reports. When playing with ratings off the scouting text is meant to describe a player's skill set, looking beyond stats. The only problem is the current reports do not give the user enough information about a player's skills, thus making drafting and other tasks difficult to do without being able to see ratings.

scouting reports have ratings on it though.Real GM's see ratings as in numbers. To take something away that a real GM sees and call it more realistic is laughable.

Look, we all have our favorite way to play. But I'm really getting sick and tired of certain members berating and belittling others, only because they don't agree with their way of playing. Play how you want, but stop saying it's more realistic because it's not.

[Lockdog]

Originally Posted by mmarra82

Morale system...yes or no?

I like the system except for how it affects minor league players. Many of these guys get upset over losing records, demotions, and such. Seems to me guys should be happy just to be apart of an organization.

[Lockdog]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

scouting reports have ratings on it though.Real GM's see ratings as in numbers. To take something away that a real GM sees and call it more realistic is laughable.

Look, we all have our favorite way to play. But I'm really getting sick and tired of certain members berating and belittling others, only because they don't agree with their way of playing. Play how you want, but stop saying it's more realistic because it's not.

I am all for displaying ratings within the scouting reports. I would even say it is a necessity, especially for grading a pitcher's repertoire. The colored bars and how each of the ratings are split up on the player screen is not how scouting reports look like in real life, even if it helps new users get accustomed to the game.

[BigRed75]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

Look, we all have our favorite way to play. But I'm really getting sick and tired of certain members berating and belittling others, only because they don't agree with their way of playing. Play how you want, but stop saying it's more realistic because it's not.

This. Why do some people give a toss if other people play the game a different way? How does that detract from your enjoyment of the game. I mean, I hate the automatic expansion function, but I would never tell anyone that they were wrong if they used it. They simply might not care as much as I do that the AI automatically expanded and put an Eastern League team in Lodi, California. That's their choice.

What was that OOTP slogan again?

[Lockdog]

Originally Posted by BigRed75

This. Why do some people give a toss if other people play the game a different way? How does that detract from your enjoyment of the game. I mean, I hate the automatic expansion function, but I would never tell anyone that they were wrong if they used it. They simply might not care as much as I do that the AI automatically expanded and put an Eastern League team in Lodi, California. That's their choice.

What was that OOTP slogan again?

I do not have a problem with those who play the game with ratings turned on. I do have a problem with a lack of support for stats-only.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Lockdog

I am all for displaying ratings within the scouting reports. I would even say it is a necessity, especially for grading a pitcher's repertoire. The colored bars and how each of the ratings are split up on the player screen is not how scouting reports look like in real life, even if it helps new users get accustomed to the game.

rather than a stuff rating, actual scouts grade each individually...but stuff is the culmination of the quality of those pitches.

[BigRed75]

Originally Posted by Lockdog

I do not have a problem with those who play the game with ratings turned on. I do have a problem with a lack of support for stats-only.

Lack of support from whom? If it's lack of support from fellow players, there is always going to be one mode of play that is more popular than another.

If it's lack of support from the company, they have a varied customer base. I can see why they would want to appear agnostic on the issue.