I have finally done my follow up on my first Dev Lab video

[twins_34]

So anyone that has watched my videos, this was my first shot at trying to figure out the Development Lab https://youtu.be/FWPpbO2Qnnk Spoiler: I did get some things wrong. Now this video was put out before I wrote the Official OOTP Wiki write up for the new Wiki. https://wiki.ootpdevelopments.com/in...evelopment_Lab

But, I have finally finished my follow-up video with corrected issues from my first video and even corrected info from my first Wiki write up. There are also tips and tricks that you will hear nowhere else! The NEW Video link is below! Enjoy!

------> https://youtu.be/4k9mMomKE94 <------ New Video Link!

[Bluenoser]

Thanks a ton for doing these, very helpful.

[kq76]

You might want to add chapter markers or whatever they're called. I see 36 minutes and I instantly think, "I don't have time for that!". But if it had chapters labels, I'd peruse them and if one caught my interest I'd probably watch that section. And if what I watched was good, then I might even watch the whole thing right then or make a mental note to watch it all later.

Regardless, thanks for doing these. While I might prefer to get most of my OOTP info from text (I think I like that with forums there's the opportunity for people to point out additional info or mistakes), I do know that for a lot of things I prefer to watch a short video on whatever the topic is so I'm sure these videos are great for some people.

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by kq76

You might want to add chapter markers or whatever they're called. I see 36 minutes and I instantly think, "I don't have time for that!". But if it had chapters labels, I'd peruse them and if one caught my interest I'd probably watch that section. And if what I watched was good, then I might even watch the whole thing right then or make a mental note to watch it all later.

Regardless, thanks for doing these. While I might prefer to get most of my OOTP info from text (I think I like that with forums there's the opportunity for people to point out additional info or mistakes), I do know that for a lot of things I prefer to watch a short video on whatever the topic is so I'm sure these videos are great for some people.

Done

[kq76]

Good stuff. I watched it.

So with regard to the player who had ratings at 1B and 3B, but higher at 1B, is there no way now to tell the lab to focus on his 3B? If so, that's bonkers! OOTP generates too many 1B-only players as it is. I want to train players at higher-skilled positions, which are usually positions they're not good at; I don't want to train them at lower-skilled positions that they're already good at. We should go to a system where we're training players at infield arm, infield range, etc. The whole great appeal of the dev lab to me was that we could finally choose what positions we wanted to train our players at.

I'm really surprised that an outstanding batting outcome results in a power boost. What do you think about that? Should it? If it's going to give out boosts to things we didn't train them at, I think it should be random what they get the boost to.

I noticed the wiki says, "If you have a pitcher that gets an Outstanding result will have a chance at a velocity boost." and yet your video seems to say that has changed to a random boost. I take it the video is more up to date when it comes to that point?

That's some good info about why some programs will show up for some players and not for others. That definitely clears up some confusion I had.

I found it interesting that you recommended putting prospects through the program that they were weakest at. Yeah, I can guess at your reasoning, but I'm thinking that increasing contact (or maybe power) might almost always get you the best bang for your buck. Or maybe leverage what they're already good at it? I mean, a player with a really bad K rate isn't going to be all that much more valuable if they have a slightly better K rate, but a player with good power probably would be a fair bit more valuable if they had great power. If a player is not good at something, does it increase the chances of the associated program's success?

I'm glad to hear good coaches are important as I've put a lot into them. I really think we should make it easier for the user to decide what coaches to go after though. I've got a fairly intricate spreadsheet that I export the data to as without it I found coach hiring decisions to be an incredibly frustrating exercise. I don't think we should expect our average user to go through that.

I was surprised to hear you say that personality types of other players affect a player's dev lab success. It sounds like a lot has to do with player morale/happiness and so if factors A, B, and C (personality, etc) affect morale, which affects development, then all of A, B, and C indirectly affect dev.

Thanks for putting that together. I learned a fair amount!

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by kq76

Good stuff. I watched it.

So with regard to the player who had ratings at 1B and 3B, but higher at 1B, is there no way now to tell the lab to focus on his 3B? If so, that's bonkers! OOTP generates too many 1B-only players as it is. I want to train players at higher-skilled positions, which are usually positions they're not good at; I don't want to train them at lower-skilled positions that they're already good at. We should go to a system where we're training players at infield arm, infield range, etc. The whole great appeal of the dev lab to me was that we could finally choose what positions we wanted to train our players at.

I'm really surprised that an outstanding batting outcome results in a power boost. What do you think about that? Should it? If it's going to give out boosts to things we didn't train them at, I think it should be random what they get the boost to.

I noticed the wiki says, "If you have a pitcher that gets an Outstanding result will have a chance at a velocity boost." and yet your video seems to say that has changed to a random boost. I take it the video is more up to date when it comes to that point?

What I meant by random is that it is no longer a 100% boost anymore. When I first tested the S&C program on both hitters and pitchers, the velo boost was 100% every outstanding outcome. Sometime between when the dev lab was release and my early tests to some time in, I wanna say July someone in one of my leagues said they didn't get a velo boost, and it confused me. So what I meant by random in my statement in the video is it is no longer 100% velo boost for a pitcher in the S&C program with an outstanding outcome.

Hitters it is sill 100% a potential power boost.

Originally Posted by kq76

That's some good info about why some programs will show up for some players and not for others. That definitely clears up some confusion I had.

Yep me too, didnt understand why some had them and some didnt so, I started playing with numbers until I figured it out. Took a few days to pinpoint everything but, when I did it made me happy.

Originally Posted by kq76

I found it interesting that you recommended putting prospects through the program that they were weakest at. Yeah, I can guess at your reasoning, but I'm thinking that increasing contact (or maybe power) might almost always get you the best bang for your buck. Or maybe leverage what they're already good at it? I mean, a player with a really bad K rate isn't going to be all that much more valuable if they have a slightly better K rate, but a player with good power probably would be a fair bit more valuable if they had great power. If a player is not good at something, does it increase the chances of the associated program's success?

Well, also remember you have the development focus sliders that can help with development in some of these ratings as well. So that gives you more freedom during the development lab to try and help with contact which avoid K does help with that. Then you can throw your development focus more on power and other hitting ratings to develop through the season with the Dev focus sliders.

Originally Posted by kq76

I'm glad to hear good coaches are important as I've put a lot into them. I really think we should make it easier for the user to decide what coaches to go after though. I've got a fairly intricate spreadsheet that I export the data to as without it I found coach hiring decisions to be an incredibly frustrating exercise. I don't think we should expect our average user to go through that.

I agree hiring coaches is a pain, but taking the time and getting the right ones makes a huge impact on your team in so many factors and not just the dev lab.

Originally Posted by kq76

I was surprised to hear you say that personality types of other players affect a player's dev lab success. It sounds like a lot has to do with player morale/happiness and so if factors A, B, and C (personality, etc) affect morale, which affects development, then all of A, B, and C indirectly affect dev.

Well I put that together because team captains, leaders, sparkplugs, pranksters, disruptive, outspoken, etc all mess with player morale. Like when you get rid of locker room cancer, like an outspoken player, and you get that email that says "Your players have expressed their happiness that so and so has been traded or released and has improved player morale" I don't know the exact words, but also remember that captains and leaders do off-set some of them negative players impacts, but, if you can avoid them and just keep the positive guys, that will help player morale and Will did say that player morale and other things do effect the development lab.

Originally Posted by kq76

Thanks for putting that together. I learned a fair amount!

I had fun doing it, not so much all the testing to try and figure everything out lol but, when you can give info and throw it in a video for people so that they can visualize what a person is talking about, I find that to be more powerful than what I wrote in the Wiki because I am able to show more of in game and able to say "This is what I am meaning but these numbers I typed about" and I dunno, I have always been one of them people that always did help files for games I played. I now find videos, way easier than making up writeups lol

Also thanks for the follow and post!

[brigmcneil]

Any insight on how BIG (slots), to make the Development Lab? The default is 6 but is there any risk/benefit of making it bigger? My worry is that teams could upset the weighting of player skills if too many players are in there. I thought the number could be determined by how much money teams put into player development - cost to pay staff or maintain facilities to allow X number of players each off season.

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by brigmcneil

Any insight on how BIG (slots), to make the Development Lab? The default is 6 but is there any risk/benefit of making it bigger? My worry is that teams could upset the weighting of player skills if too many players are in there. I thought the number could be determined by how much money teams put into player development - cost to pay staff or maintain facilities to allow X number of players each off season.

I use 10-12. 10 for historic games and 12 if I do a modern game.