My entire lineup lost a whole star?

[Bahnzo]

I don't understand. I started the season, played a couple games and everything was fine. Loaded the third game of the season and noticed my line up looked different. And sure enough every batter on my 25 man roster was showing they lost a whole star of overall rating. WTF?

[TuckerDuckson]

Originally Posted by Bahnzo

I don't understand. I started the season, played a couple games and everything was fine. Loaded the third game of the season and noticed my line up looked different. And sure enough every batter on my 25 man roster was showing they lost a whole star of overall rating. WTF?

Was it perhaps a dramatic Player Development change?

[Bahnzo]

Originally Posted by TuckerDuckson

Was it perhaps a dramatic Player Development change?

No idea, but it's every single batter on the team. No pitcher affected.

[MrBojangles]

New Scouting Director?

[Hoiles]

This typically happens with me as well. Perhaps it has to do with sending players to minors after spring training, making the star ratings lower as the player pool they're being compared to is relatively better? Just as veteran OOTPers say, don't take too much stock into the star ratings, they don't work the same way as EA ratings. As long as the individual skill ratings didn't decrease as well your team should still be as good.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Hoiles

This typically happens with me as well. Perhaps it has to do with sending players to minors after spring training, making the star ratings lower as the player pool they're being compared to is relatively better? Just as veteran OOTPers say, don't take too much stock into the star ratings, they don't work the same way as EA ratings. As long as the individual skill ratings didn't decrease as well your team should still be as good.

This x 1,000! Star ratings are extremely deceiving and can get you into trouble when you base your evaluation of a player based on stars. Like you said, it's the individual ratings that matter and really determine what type of player a guy is or becomes. Personally, my enjoyment of the game (and ability to evaluate players) increased dramatically when I turned the overall ratings off a few years ago.

[NoOne]

Hoiles is on to something...

i don't see this because my ratings aren't relative to anything, nor position.

but, if this wasn't accompanied by a 'bump' when ST began, it couldn't be the same effect.

i also don't use stars, so rounding is very significant with those... even so, a solid -1 across 13 players isn't typical of that effect either. can't rule it out... although no pitchers being affected is throwing a wrench in that thought too... starts to be too rare to be likely in that particular configuration, lol.

like he said, as long as contact, power, eye, stuff etc all changed due to development only changes you can see in scouting reports, that's all good.

[Hoiles]

I think the star ratings are quite complicated, I assume they're not absolute (i.e. they aren't being compared to anyone else). Doing a quick test and erasing all the MLB players, the best AAA players then become rated 4-5 stars once opening day rolls around.

I still like using stars because it's a quick (and lazy) way to filter good players from bad players, but in OOTP it's not a very reliable way to determine which player is better than another player.

[NoOne]

you may find the filtering is a bit more relevant with just a slight more resolution.

since the stars use halves, it's no different than 1-10. a 1-20 might give a bit more resolution, but still keep it simple.

the main difference is just when coincidentally a scouting inaccuracy also exagerates a rounding of the rating in that small resolution. otherwise it's no different.

no matter how high you turn over/pot it's still just used for exactly how you are using it with stars it's more precise, but you still can't use it outside of filtering. it makes those filtered lists smaller, though -- you are lazy? try it! you can look through 20 players instead of 50 to find that needle, when you use a higher resolution for overall.

[Painmantle]

Originally Posted by Hoiles

I think the star ratings are quite complicated, I assume they're not absolute (i.e. they aren't being compared to anyone else). Doing a quick test and erasing all the MLB players, the best AAA players then become rated 4-5 stars once opening day rolls around.

I still like using stars because it's a quick (and lazy) way to filter good players from bad players, but in OOTP it's not a very reliable way to determine which player is better than another player.

The first part is relative to your settings (Both Global and AI Settings) And you are correct, the Bottom line is Star's aren't really good for much other than sorting. If someone is spending a lot of time worrying about "what the Stars say" That time would be better spent learning the intricacies of the actual ratings.

[Hoiles]

Originally Posted by NoOne

you may find the filtering is a bit more relevant with just a slight more resolution.

since the stars use halves, it's no different than 1-10. a 1-20 might give a bit more resolution, but still keep it simple.

the main difference is just when coincidentally a scouting inaccuracy also exagerates a rounding of the rating in that small resolution. otherwise it's no different.

no matter how high you turn over/pot it's still just used for exactly how you are using it with stars it's more precise, but you still can't use it outside of filtering. it makes those filtered lists smaller, though -- you are lazy? try it! you can look through 20 players instead of 50 to find that needle, when you use a higher resolution for overall.

I meant lazy, in a good way, just describing myself .

For example, if I need a decent starting SS, I might ignore any SS rated below 2.0 stars as I don't want to look through all players. I won't, though, automatically choose a 4.0 star player over a 3.0 star player without looking at the whole package, as it doesn't necessarily mean the 4.0 star player is "better". The differences in star ratings are even less relevant when comparing players from different positions.

[Bahnzo]

Well, everything returned to normal after a week or so simmed. So basically a glitch/bug. AFAIK there were no ratings decreases in any of the players.