Suggestions for 23

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by DRays_Jim

-- Player Expectations need to be examined from contracts being signed to promotions and the roles expectations & how they fit into the team. There has to be some common sense.

I've had this problem with expectations ever since they were introduced to the game.

All the scenarios you mention as well.

It's even worse when the player signs with you knowing you have the stud...like...you KNEW I had the stud 4-hole hitter or ace closer or starter...if you want that role for yourself, maybe you should have looked at another club.

[Clovidequano Dovatha]

kriscolic, people can normally set their amateur first-year player draft dates to any time they want on the calendar, it seems to me, if they so desire. That has been possible for several years now, at least dating back to version 18. I know this quite well from personal experience. I usually set my first-year player drafts to December 15, instead of the default date of on or around June 5, and I'm sure many players set their drafts to happen during the offseason as well. Not all, but many do, no doubt. CD out.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by KBLover

I've had this problem with expectations ever since they were introduced to the game.

All the scenarios you mention as well.

It's even worse when the player signs with you knowing you have the stud...like...you KNEW I had the stud 4-hole hitter or ace closer or starter...if you want that role for yourself, maybe you should have looked at another club.

Yeah... at the very least I'd love it if it were set up like FM, where you can assign/promise a role during contract negotiation and that's in large part what gets implemented for the player (though perhaps if a guy gets better / worse over time they'll adjust those expectations - even at that, I'd want more "upping if he gets better" than "tempering if he gets worse", as it's really common to have to trade / release someone you'd otherwise have to reduce a role for because athletes tend to refuse to believe that they've taken a step back until they're out of the game, and even then many think they could still play several years out). Then if you promise a guy he's a cleanup hitter and you hit him 8th every day, he gets mad... and the rest of the team gets mad, too, because you're breaking promises. And of course in turn a guy turning down a larger contract in order to play for someone who will give them a larger role on the team can/should be a thing you have to consider.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

Yeah... at the very least I'd love it if it were set up like FM, where you can assign/promise a role during contract negotiation and that's in large part what gets implemented for the player (though perhaps if a guy gets better / worse over time they'll adjust those expectations - even at that, I'd want more "upping if he gets better" than "tempering if he gets worse", as it's really common to have to trade / release someone you'd otherwise have to reduce a role for because athletes tend to refuse to believe that they've taken a step back until they're out of the game, and even then many think they could still play several years out). Then if you promise a guy he's a cleanup hitter and you hit him 8th every day, he gets mad... and the rest of the team gets mad, too, because you're breaking promises. And of course in turn a guy turning down a larger contract in order to play for someone who will give them a larger role on the team can/should be a thing you have to consider.

Yes, Yes, Yes...I have always thought this should have been implemented into OOTP. Hopefully the powers that be are listening/watching. Haven't really heard much from the guys lately. The next release is about 2 months away though.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Yes, Yes, Yes...I have always thought this should have been implemented into OOTP. Hopefully the powers that be are listening/watching. Haven't really heard much from the guys lately. The next release is about 2 months away though.

TBH if I were in their shoes I’d be heads down at work on 23. The last patch is out, they have, I’m sure, a list of features they want to add now that they’ve compiled over the years, and, well, going into 5e forums and listening to yahoos like me (can’t speak for you! But probably also you) asking for even more stuff… well, this is how scope creep happens.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

TBH if I were in their shoes I’d be heads down at work on 23. The last patch is out, they have, I’m sure, a list of features they want to add now that they’ve compiled over the years, and, well, going into 5e forums and listening to yahoos like me (can’t speak for you! But probably also you) asking for even more stuff… well, this is how scope creep happens.

yes, we have all had a lot of requests over the years for sure. It does sadden/disappoint me that a lot of the great idea people on this forum no longer come around anymore. I don't know if it's because they don't trust the development team after PT & the sale to Com2US or what..but I suspect it may have played a role in some of those people's departure. I kind of just miss the interactive brainstorming threads we used to have with them on a frequent basis, whether here on the main forum, or in BETA. You are correct though sir, I am sure they are working diligently on 23 at this point with just a couple of months to go until spring release.

[Mat]

- Pitcher rotation setting '1x/2x/3x/4x/ through the order' before removed
- Up/Down arrow to scroll through my teams (to scroll through pitching tabs for example)

[fuzzy_patters]

Originally Posted by kriscolic

In Historical Mode, with real players:

Please fix the amateur draft. Please put it in June where it belongs rather than during the winter. Please make sure that the draft pool is historically accurate for the given year. Please add an option for players to be drafted in the order that they actually were in real life. Please add an option to include (or not include) players who were drafted but did not sign. Please use Baseball America records to match bonus demands to historically accurate bonus demands. Please do not put players who were signed as amateur free agents (international or otherwise) into the draft pool (unless, of course, they were in fact draft eligible). Please place international amateur free agents into a historically accurate class (July 2nd class).

Almost all of this data is available to be mined on BRef. It's exhausting to do so on one's own.

I’m not sure it’s doable. Some guys were drafted and didn’t sign and then were redrafted in a following year. Which year should they enter your game? Other guys were drafted and never signed. How do you rate them if they have no stats?

[Syd Thrift]

More to the point, you can just use the Spritze / Garlon DB for that. I think most people want to draft and start using players the year they debut in the majors and not have to wait for them to develop through the minors but, well, there are a variety of ways to play the game.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

More to the point, you can just use the Spritze / Garlon DB for that. I think most people want to draft and start using players the year they debut in the majors and not have to wait for them to develop through the minors but, well, there are a variety of ways to play the game.

I wonder what happens if one changes the draft date to in season when using Historical Minors? But, count me as someone that wants the draft in December with player entering the year they debut.

[Brad K]

Following applies to games with historic players.

• Fix the stolen base percentage problem for prolific base stealers
  
• Fix the distribution of output so various talent levels perform appropriately.
  
• Allow players a reasonable chance to achieve historical peak performance without significantly exceeding outlier years.
  
• Make the game run without the LTM system. The LTM system boosts or hinders players when the talent pool doesn't match the historical season.

These are significant problems with the basic functioning of the game which should be fixed first. Before 3D enhancements, before rotation tweaks, etc.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Following applies to games with historic players.

• Fix the stolen base percentage problem for prolific base stealers
  
• Fix the distribution of output so various talent levels perform appropriately.
  
• Allow players a reasonable chance to achieve historical peak performance without significantly exceeding outlier years.
  
• Make the game run without the LTM system. The LTM system boosts or hinders players when the talent pool doesn't match the historical season.

These are significant problems with the basic functioning of the game which should be fixed first. Before 3D enhancements, before rotation tweaks, etc.

Speaking of rotation tweaks. Historical really needs a way for us to play the game minus rotations altogether. Early baseball didn't use rotations. Let us set a pitching staff of say 5 to 8 pitchers and have all pitchers available to start when called upon. All pitchers available to pitch in relief as well. Using always start the highest rested should assure the top 2 pitchers get the meat of the starts with the rest spread over the remaining pitchers.

I just had to text my nephew about your LTM's request. He has been telling me that same thing for several years now.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Speaking of rotation tweaks.

I wasn't.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I just had to text my nephew about your LTM's request. He has been telling me that same thing for several years now.

He's right. Thanks for texting him.

What I'd like to know is how bad is the rating system that they need a heavy handed LTM routine to get overall decent results (note "overall" because it still doesn't get results by talent group correct).

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Brad K

I wasn't.

Yeah, I know, but it gave me a chance to plead for something I really want the game to adopt.

[Brad K]

Not picking on you. The thread is full of special interest requests. I'm not saying they shouldn't be addressed - they should - but not at the top of the list.

As you say starting pitching doesn't work right for a few decades early in baseball history. And yes, that should be fixed. But the things I mentioned don't work right for all 150 years of baseball history. Clearly they should be prioritized over every thing else in this thread.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Following applies to games with historic players.

• Fix the stolen base percentage problem for prolific base stealers
  
• Fix the distribution of output so various talent levels perform appropriately.
  
• Allow players a reasonable chance to achieve historical peak performance without significantly exceeding outlier years.
  
• Make the game run without the LTM system. The LTM system boosts or hinders players when the talent pool doesn't match the historical season.

These are significant problems with the basic functioning of the game which should be fixed first. Before 3D enhancements, before rotation tweaks, etc.

I have no idea how you’d make the 3rd thing work given the facts of standard distribution and probability, and #4 doesn’t make a great deal of sense to me either - you can literally just run a league with everything set to 1, although the totals will be funky, and if you do allow the game to adjust LTMs they will have the same effects on all players. I don’t understand what it’s asking.

[Brad K]

So now that you've provided a reason not to work on two of them, would you support prioritizing the other two?

[Bobbyraz49]

I'd like to see a corner outfielder make a catch in foul territory on occasion.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Brad K

So now that you've provided a reason not to work on two of them, would you support prioritizing the other two?

I didn't address the other two because no offense, they're kind of vague. The 2nd one in particular, what is "appropriate", what are "different levels of talent", and... yeah, that kind of sums it up. For the first one, is the issue that good stealers get caught too often? I can understand how frustrating that is when what should be a big plus for a player seems like a net negative but if we're talking about historical play (which, again, stuff's vague) and you go back far enough, a. people had different ideas as to what constituted a success rate, and b. arguably you needed a lower percentage of success to break even due to the fact that you could force more errors by running a lot.

One thing that'd I'd consider adding is to increase caught stealings on hit and run plays and then figure out a way (I don't have an answer to how) to goose steal rates otherwise. Back when the hit and run was used a lot there were (probably) guys with bad looking percentages (we don't have good CS stats before like 1950) because they were left out to dry on hit and runs a lot. Even going into the 70s and 80s there were a few players on the Indians in the 70s and I specifically remember Will Clark going like 4-21 one season for similar reasons.

I *think* the game could handle that, essentially, by increasing the chances that hit and runs end in missed swings and near-automatic CSes and then just allow the LTM engine to do its job with leaguewide stealing percentages. I *think* that would also have a (possibly small) upward effect on stealing percentages for faster players, as you'd have essentially a baseline rate of getting caught which would result in fewer CSes per total attempts for good players than for bad ones.