When are you going to fix this game?

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by refgewr3

The problem with this is that late bloomers aren't random, and that the current stats aren't sufficient to understand how good a player is. You'd need stuff like exit velo, launch angle, etc to approximate real life decision making. Otherwise going just by stats is way too random.

Also, there's way too much of an emphasis on tedious busywork in place of actually engaging decision making. Some examples:

1) I play with draft pick trading on, and I have to go through every team to find which team's offering the highest pick. More generally it's a chore to go through a bunch of bad offers to get to the decent ones. There should be more advanced filtering mechanics in the shop player menu (ie potential greater than 3 stars, or whatever), plus the ability to get draft picks offered or offer draft picks.

2) As I understand it the make deal work now button deliberately excludes some players from being shown who would singlehandedly make an offer work, specifically those who are the fringiest at getting the deal across. This is apparently to force you to put in the effort to get the best offer. But this just amounts to scrolling through your prospects and offering them one by one to see if anything sticks, possibly to no benefit. It's awful, and a waste of time. There's already interesting skill involved in constructing trade offers while giving up the least value possible, this is just tedious.

3) There should be an option to see what players in the other org could be added to any deal, with the same 100% accuracy. As it stands it's just annoying to go one by one through an org's 2.5 star players seeing if anything sticks. There's no skill involved in doing this, it's just wasting your time.

To each their own on how they play and enjoy the game, but man I don't put anywhere near the type of effort you do in trying to make trades. Counting the sand pebbles on a beach one by one sounds like more fun. Please don't take that as an insult, it's not. We all have our ways and all that matters is we enjoy the game "our way".

My minimalist approach, when compared to your detailed one, doesn't make trading hard even in hard mode. Before the new hard mode I offered fair trades and if the AI accepted I followed through and completed the deal. Nothing much has changed in the way I play. With my method I feel like I've been successful in trading whether going after prospects with vets, vets for prospects, or anything in between. I know the skills of the player I want to trade and make what I think are fair offers to move them. I know the skills I am looking for in any position of need and look for areas of strength in my organization that I can offer to bring in the players that fill my needs.

If they were to add all of the things you bring up in this post I doubt I'd use any of them. To me it's more fun to target a few players (usually 2 or 3) and go from there. I'm looking for a SS I'll find two or three (many times off of my shortlist**) that I'd be happy with, rate them most wanted to least, and proceed from there. If the team with the guy I like most wants too much I move on to team two. I may offer less for the second option or I may not obviously dependent on how I value them.

** I keep a shortlist of potential trade targets even though I have no interest in making a trade now. I'll see players in a newsfeed, selected by another team in the draft, showing up on the daily "all transaction" report etc. and if they have skills I value they go on the list. To me it's much more fun than having the game give me a list of "make this work now" players. Hey, it works for me

[jcard]

Originally Posted by Sweed

With regard to the two bolded parts..
1. "real life general managers also make lousy trades".
Yes they do, and yes the LOL posters do miss the point. So yeah, some of the posts are about AI to AI trades where the "GMs make lousy trades" argument applies. Then there are the "users that make trades that fleece the AI" because they can and blame that on the developer because they shouldn't have to use house rules. The "I want a realistic game but won't/can't control myself in any way" users, ie "they" shouldn't have to. I think it's silly, they think they are right.
Hard trading, from what I have seen this year on the boards seems to have pretty much done away with posts from the "because I can" crowd.

2. "It's not perfect, but"..
I totally agree and would add it gets better every year. Some users will disagree and that's fine, but I'd note I've never seen one post a game that does it better. Their argument seems to be "it doesn't matter how it does compared to other games", it should be as real as real life. The trouble is it's computer code and it will always have it's flaws.

I'd add that in v24, in my first two seasons I examined every trade** and even made some detailed posts in the early release days of v24. Over the two seasons (early trades documented in my posts, later ones not)there were some "GMs make lousy trades", as there should be, but overall the balance of the trades was damn good. I'll admit I didn't investigate every trade to see the needs of the teams at the positions traded for, but if a SP(or whatever position) prospect was traded by team A it almost always got a fair return be it a prospect CF(or whatever position) of equal value or a MLB player of value that helped their team in the current season. Most trades are good, some are "huh?", while keeping in mind I only see these trades/players through my scout's eyes. Some of those "huh" trades may make sense in another scout's eyes.

** I play slowly, playing out every inning of every game. With this style I have always gone through the "all transactions" report daily and reviewed all trades made on a daily basis. This isn't something I've only done in v24. Doing this from version to version allows one to see how much the game's trading module has improved over the years. It's never been prefect and it never will be, but it continues to build a better module version to version.

As for bad trades in real life:

Actually, there are rarely trades that are undeniably egregious at the time of the deal. Retrospective clairvoyance of the ultimate verdict on a trade is not the same as an indefensible decision.

Like FPSs where lobotomies enemies are more of a challenge because they can now take fifteen headshots or racing games with rubber-band AI catch-up mechanics, “hard mode” is not synonymous with “smart mode”.

[MathBandit]

I would argue there was a trade made 12 hours ago that's worse than any I've seen done in OOTP in a long time. Hardly the only such example (looking at you, Rockies) but just a topical one.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by jcard

As for bad trades in real life:

Actually, there are rarely trades that are undeniably egregious at the time of the deal. Retrospective clairvoyance of the ultimate verdict on a trade is not the same as an indefensible decision.

Like FPSs where lobotomies enemies are more of a challenge because they can now take fifteen headshots or racing games with rubber-band AI catch-up mechanics, “hard mode” is not synonymous with “smart mode”.

Yeah, they may be more rare in real life. Here we are talking about a computer game and trying to code in a way that mimics reality as best they can. As I said in an earlier post "I'm not holding my breath for actual "realism".

So in OOTP I may see a trade as bad from the get go because I only see the ratings through my scouts eyes from his latest reports. Is that realistic? Probably not, but it is possible in a real life situation, behind closed doors, a GM's reaction is "god that's a horrible deal for team "x". Of course he's not coming out in an interview or to a reporter and say it out loud.

Sure that's only speculation or maybe "back story justification in my mind" to make a narrative that fits what just happened in OOTP. The in game argument for the indefensible trade that I see immediately through my scout's eyes is the two AI GMs involved must have seen it as defensible through their eyes. I think that's ok as we do that type of thing many times over in probably every sports title we play. Actual realism, if it ever comes, is a long way off. In the meantime developers will continue to try to give us the illusion of real life as best they can. Some will do it better than others.

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

I would argue there was a trade made 12 hours ago that's worse than any I've seen done in OOTP in a long time. Hardly the only such example (looking at you, Rockies) but just a topical one.

Not sure if this is the one you allude to, but the Braves absolutely fleeced Seattle, in getting Kelenic. Atlanta’s magic (voodoo?) in turning mediocre prospects (Strider, Freid) and washed-up veterans (Morton, Ozuna) into productive players is uncanny. And Kelenic is not in either category, having been as high as #4 overall prospect, and having hit like crazy to start last year. Marco Gonzalez also a canny get for a team lacking SP depth. Evan White, not so much. Why would Seattle do that deal, anyway? Apparently they think that Phillips and Kowar are Freid and Strider). If the AI did this deal in my sim, I would seriously consider voiding it as Commissioner.

[mschinner]

Originally Posted by Pelican

Not sure if this is the one you allude to, but the Braves absolutely fleeced Seattle, in getting Kelenic. Atlanta’s magic (voodoo?) in turning mediocre prospects (Strider, Freid) and washed-up veterans (Morton, Ozuna) into productive players is uncanny. And Kelenic is not in either category, having been as high as #4 overall prospect, and having hit like crazy to start last year. Marco Gonzalez also a canny get for a team lacking SP depth. Evan White, not so much. Why would Seattle do that deal, anyway? Apparently they think that Phillips and Kowar are Freid and Strider). If the AI did this deal in my sim, I would seriously consider voiding it as Commissioner.

I think we need to give it some time before we can judge. Seattle was able to move 2 bad contracts at the expense of a player that has shown glimpses of upside, but still has not put it altogether. Kelenic could still develop into something, but he may not. Seattle may use that freed up money to target a proven player via trade or free agency. It would not surprise me if Atlanta flipped Kelenic to the White Sox as part of a package for Cease.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

I would argue there was a trade made 12 hours ago that's worse than any I've seen done in OOTP in a long time. Hardly the only such example (looking at you, Rockies) but just a topical one.

Oh man I was about to argue about how Jarred Kelenic is trash but YOU SAVED YOURSELF.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Pelican

Not sure if this is the one you allude to, but the Braves absolutely fleeced Seattle, in getting Kelenic. Atlanta’s magic (voodoo?) in turning mediocre prospects (Strider, Freid) and washed-up veterans (Morton, Ozuna) into productive players is uncanny. And Kelenic is not in either category, having been as high as #4 overall prospect, and having hit like crazy to start last year. Marco Gonzalez also a canny get for a team lacking SP depth. Evan White, not so much. Why would Seattle do that deal, anyway? Apparently they think that Phillips and Kowar are Freid and Strider). If the AI did this deal in my sim, I would seriously consider voiding it as Commissioner.

WELP

The upside is that Kelenic is still 24 so technically he could still improve. The downside is… basically everything else. He’s had one outstanding month in his career, he got into one of his patented long slumps last year that only ended when he punched a wall and went on the DL, and otherwise that pretty average year was propped up by an unstustainable .360 BABIP.

At this point, even if you assume last year was real, he’s basically Glenn Wilson in 2024 but without the gun for an arm (he’s a solid outfielder). I personally think he’ll BABIP around league average, which with the power he displayed last year (lots of it in April but then pitchers in the AL figured him out so “middling” is where I’d put it) which makes him a roughly replacement level hitter. Yeah, he’s cost controlled too but whoop de do. And of course, at worst he strikes out almost a third of the time and has a career BA of .204 even with last year.

[BaseballReplayJournal]

Originally Posted by sdw1000

Sometimes I agree with your videos, sometimes I don't. But they are always interesting. Glad to see you on the forums now.

Thanks! Glad to hear that it's providing you at least some enjoyment. I've been meaning to be more active on these forums for a while now.

[Thegman0492]

I restarted my OOTP 24 campaign and put on overall and potential overall ratings but kept the more descriptive ratings off. I now go by stats and overall ratings. It has actually made the game a little bit easier and I am having a blast. I am in my second season and am hoping to improve. Thank you all for the advice and I will continue to need advise because there is so much content that I have no idea what it means.

Thanks again
Nathan

[MikeS21]

I've said it before but I just don't see the issues with the trading AI that many of you seem to have. I never feel as if I can scam the AI. In fact, most of the time, the AI refuses 99% of my trade proposals, and only accepts the 1% where I have to give up my best player for a bench player.

Honestly, it really doesn't bother me if two AI controlled teams complete a trade that appears lopsided. It's not my circus and not my monkees. I rarely even look at the transaction wire save my own organization.

The only "suggestion" I would have is to improve the Assistant GM AI to be a little more helpful than "I wouldn't do that, Boss."

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by MikeS21

I've said it before but I just don't see the issues with the trading AI that many of you seem to have. I never feel as if I can scam the AI. In fact, most of the time, the AI refuses 99% of my trade proposals, and only accepts the 1% where I have to give up my best player for a bench player.

Honestly, it really doesn't bother me if two AI controlled teams complete a trade that appears lopsided. It's not my circus and not my monkees. I rarely even look at the transaction wire save my own organization.

The only "suggestion" I would have is to improve the Assistant GM AI to be a little more helpful than "I wouldn't do that, Boss."

This is honestly people playing this game for thousands of hours over several iterations. I agree; it's really not super easy to "scam" the game. You basically have to keep adding and subtracting players until you reach a point where you think the AI will just barely accept your deal, then keep adding and subtracting to make the move slightly and slightly better. With "hard mode" on, you get dinged every time you submit a deal so that pretty much puts the kibosh on that method; beyond that, it's kind of just knowing what the AI values and doesn't value although that's not perfect by any stretch either.

I'm not saying there's no room for improvement; I'm just saying, stuff's hard. Also it's not reeeeeally AI, it's just an algorithm the game employs with a given deal where if the end result is over an internal threshold it says "OK I will do this". But then, that's also how ChatGPT works and people - the creators included - seem to have no problem calling that "AI" too, so...

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by MikeS21

I've said it before but I just don't see the issues with the trading AI that many of you seem to have. I never feel as if I can scam the AI. In fact, most of the time, the AI refuses 99% of my trade proposals, and only accepts the 1% where I have to give up my best player for a bench player.

Honestly, it really doesn't bother me if two AI controlled teams complete a trade that appears lopsided. It's not my circus and not my monkees. I rarely even look at the transaction wire save my own organization.

The only "suggestion" I would have is to improve the Assistant GM AI to be a little more helpful than "I wouldn't do that, Boss."

I find the same to be true with my trade proposals but I also use mostly ratings in the AI evaluation and also have trading difficulty maxed out. So I think it may depend on settings to some degree also.


I for one am. Dry happy with the trading AI. It’s better than any other sports management game I have come across…so long as the “make this work now” button remains gone.

[Thegman0492]

So I created a team in Bridgeport Connecticut so it is the smallest market yet I am getting really good money for free agents. I mean, I could have signed Ohetani if I really wanted to. It seems higher than previous games.

Also, has anyone else lost like 20 straight before? I felt like I had a good team, chemistry was good, and I thought my staff is good. They just kept losing. On the other hand, the other team I created, the Montreal Expos, controlled by the computer, are doing just fine. Losing record but not as bad as me. Is there a secret formula to actually improve your team?

[MikeS21]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I find the same to be true with my trade proposals but I also use mostly ratings in the AI evaluation and also have trading difficulty maxed out. So I think it may depend on settings to some degree also.


I for one am. Dry happy with the trading AI. It’s better than any other sports management game I have come across…so long as the “make this work now” button remains gone.

I actually don't mind the "Make this work now" button. It usually only asks for my best player anyway, which I almost always decline. It doesn't frustrate me or take away from my experience.



I guess I understand the frustration of most folks, but I keep reminding myself that it's just a game, based on complex mathematics and dozens of variables, most of which I don't even know exist. I majored in physics in college and took several years of advanced calculus, and even I can't begin to understand some of the complex calculations that make up the trade AI. And I certainly don't expect it to act 100% like a human.


Although the AI sometimes makes silly decisions ... and so do real live humans.

[rudel.dietrich]

I also think the make it work button is realistic. Once trade negotiations have progressed far enough along in real life, I am sure there have been lots of negotiations where one GM will ask another what piece will push the trade 'over the line'

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I also think the make it work button is realistic. Once trade negotiations have progressed far enough along in real life, I am sure there have been lots of negotiations where one GM will ask another what piece will push the trade 'over the line'

This is true…but the problem is that in OOTP the AI GM is willing to accept absolute garbage and you can then start the “nickel & dime” process with the AI. Without the button, I have to offers players I consider reasonable as opposed to the junk the AI would actually accept if I knew.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is true…but the problem is that in OOTP the AI GM is willing to accept absolute garbage and you can then start the “nickel & dime” process with the AI. Without the button, I have to offers players I consider reasonable as opposed to the junk the AI would actually accept if I knew.

Well, I would say this is more of a problem with the AI than the function itself.

As I have said twice now, the 'trade hard' mode was not a new feature.
It was a bandage feature to paper over how bad the trade AI is and them throwing their hands up that they are unable to solve it.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Well, I would say this is more of a problem with the AI than the function itself.

As I have said twice now, the 'trade hard' mode was not a new feature.
It was a bandage feature to paper over how bad the trade AI is and them throwing their hands up that they are unable to solve it.

Saying it twice doesn't make you any more right.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Well, I would say this is more of a problem with the AI than the function itself.

As I have said twice now, the 'trade hard' mode was not a new feature.
It was a bandage feature to paper over how bad the trade AI is and them throwing their hands up that they are unable to solve it.

Agreed...you are correct that it is not an improvement to the overall trade AI...but IMHO it does at least take away a lot of the exploitation. I often have said it would be nice that in lieu of the "make this work now" button the opposing GM might submit a list of players for every team in the league with his top 10 players of interest for every organization. You could even break it down further by having a top 10 overall list, but also a top 10 prospects list and a top 10 veterans list. The team direction (rebuilding, win now etc) should then dictate which the AI GM would be more interested in. This way you have a starting point, but it doesn't allow you to nickel & Dime the AI to death either.