The Longevity Factor: The Key to Unlocking the Aging Curve

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by RonCo

I'm still interested in where Markus said a longevity code existed...not that I don't trust anyone, but it would be interesting to parse his comments myself.

Sorry. I didn't say anything about there being a longevity code. I merely said that there are(will be) hidden ratings such as work ethic which could be coded to affect longevity. Whether it's in Markus' plan or not, remains to be seen.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally Posted by swampdragon

The cliff is one of the worst features of OOTP6. I would echo the desire to do something about it in the 2006 release.

"

I think kq gets at the problem rather well: right now, it appears that the rare player who's still around at age 38 or 39 has just gotten lucky on a lot of his coin flips. But in reality, while the average player probably does age in a similar pattern to what the game models, there are players who start declining much earlier and the occasional ones who keep their skills well into their 40s.

Ideally, what I'd like to see is a hidden rating for longevity, but with clues given in-game about "Player X is really working hard on his off-season workout regimen" or something like that. If you had occasional text clues to a player's work ethic tied to longevity that's probably about the closest we can get. The text clues would have to be somewhat random, like injuries, so that there's always the risk that you're trading that 33-year-old who's just gotten a message that normally indicates low longevity, but this was only a blip on the radar and he'll end up being productive until 40.

That's how I'd try to solve the aging issue.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by RonCo

If a player has a rating for "work ethic" and it's being used to prolong careers, then one can say that the game _does_ recognize those players.

If being the key word. You're talking about the future ver of the game.
I'm talking about the present ver of the game.

If a rating for work ethic is included and if it is assigned properly to the correct players. How you would do that I'm not sure, but it seems to me you'd either have to add a rating column to the Lahman DB and assign these "ratings" prior to importing or go and edit this "rating" for each individual player after he was imported. Regardless, the game still won't recognize a name, only the ratings like it does now.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by f.montoya

Sorry. I didn't say anything about there being a longevity code. I merely said that there are(will be) hidden ratings such as work ethic which could be coded to affect longevity. Whether it's in Markus' plan or not, remains to be seen.

Ok. When you said "now' in an earlier post, I interpreted that to mean "in games currently in existence."

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by BruceM

If being the key word. You're talking about the future ver of the game.
I'm talking about the present ver of the game.

If a rating for work ethic is included and if it is assigned properly to the correct players. How you would do that I'm not sure, but it seems to me you'd either have to add a rating column to the Lahman DB and assign these "ratings" prior to importing or go and edit this "rating" for each individual player after he was imported. Regardless, the game still won't recognize a name, only the ratings like it does now.

Let me be clear. I'm not particularly for the idea of such hidden ratings, I'm merely suggesting that if they exist for the purposes of extending careers that historical simmers would (I expect) be interested in using them to "properly" extend the right ones. In fact, I'm not for a hidden work ethic rating at all. If there is a work ethic parameter, then I would want it to be open and manageable as an option. Realistically, a player's work ethic is far more visible than his "clutchness" or his loyalty or any of those kinds of things, so what the heck.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Let me be clear. I'm not particularly for the idea of such hidden ratings, I'm merely suggesting that if they exist for the purposes of extending careers that historical simmers would (I expect) be interested in using them to "properly" extend the right ones. In fact, I'm not for a hidden work ethic rating at all. If there is a work ethic parameter, then I would want it to be open and manageable as an option. Realistically, a player's work ethic is far more visible than his "clutchness" or his loyalty or any of those kinds of things, so what the heck.

You miss the point, though. This game isn't mean to be a replay, where you know how a player's future will play out. This is a simulation that allows you to drop historical players names into the game and watch an alternative history take place. Holding some sort of knowledge or control over the player's longevity is similar to holding control over the players development and/or injury chances. It isn't likely to be included in OOTP and I don't see why it should be.

Roger Clemens is an extreme case of being able to play as long as he has. It would make sense that if brought into the game in his mid-30's that he would only last a few more years the majority of the time because that is the case for most pitchers. The main problem with the game currently is that the drop occurs too quickly in-season (i.e. the cliff). Hopefully that is being improved in the new version.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by andymac

You miss the point, though. This game isn't mean to be a replay, where you know how a player's future will play out. This is a simulation that allows you to drop historical players names into the game and watch an alternative history take place. Holding some sort of knowledge or control over the player's longevity is similar to holding control over the players development and/or injury chances. It isn't likely to be included in OOTP and I don't see why it should be.

Roger Clemens is an extreme case of being able to play as long as he has. It would make sense that if brought into the game in his mid-30's that he would only last a few more years the majority of the time because that is the case for most pitchers. The main problem with the game currently is that the drop occurs too quickly in-season (i.e. the cliff). Hopefully that is being improved in the new version.

Either I'm not speaking very clearly or you're the one not getting my point. I'm certain it's me who is at fault. I agree with the following statements:

1. The OOTP cliff at 36 is a bad thing.
2. Players as a general rule should begin degrading earlier than they do in the OOTP world
3. Younger players should find their way into major league rosters more often in OOTP environments.
4. I play fictional leagues and have no interest in replay leagues whatsoever, that said, I acknowledge that some people like them, and want to be able to play them. Some of these people aare complaining about Roger Clemens falling off the 36-year-old cliff.
5. I do not want to know in advance who is going to have long careers.
6. If work ethic is a parameter included in the game, then I think it should be visible, since you can tell guys who have good work ethic from guys who don't. If the game includes work ethic as a parameter of whether the palyer will have a longer career, then owners woud be provided a clue into which player might have longer careers and which wouldn't. This shouldn't be a guarantee, however.

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Ok. When you said "now' in an earlier post, I interpreted that to mean "in games currently in existence."

Being that this is a forum for OOTPB 2006, and a feature wish list at that, I was referring to OOTPB 2006 and saying that Markus has made the potential solution to this issue a posibility in the new game and, if he hasn't already implemented it, there is now something coded that could be used to bring it to life.

[Dreslough]

Originally Posted by andymac

You miss the point, though. This game isn't mean to be a replay, where you know how a player's future will play out. This is a simulation that allows you to drop historical players names into the game and watch an alternative history take place.

I have found there are two types of players, and you are only describing the preferences of the first type.

The first type of player wants each historical sim to be fresh where Roger Clemens might flame out at 33 or he might win a Cy Young at 43.

The second type of player wants player careers to more closely match their real-life career pathes.

Its like playing with the "real earth" or a "random earth" in Civilization. With a real earth your knowledge of the real earth gives you an unfair advantage but it's also a fun way to play having that upper hand.

If Markus decides to target the game at the first group that's a design decision. But I think he's missing half the players out there. In Mogul we support both groups by providing a unique career path for each player. You can choose to have these generated randomly and hidden from view. Or you can make each career path match the actual career progression, and you can view the slope and peak of their careers in the Player Editor.

In my opinion it is incredibly important for each player's career path to be different. The idea of everyone hitting a "cliff" at the same age can only be described as a bug in the simulation and I think it's more than likely that Markus fixed this when he re-wrote the game for this year's version.

Clay

[DougWyatt]

Originally Posted by f.montoya

that there are(will be) hidden ratings such as work ethic which could be coded to affect longevity. Whether it's in Markus' plan or not, remains to be seen.

I am sure work ethic is a contributer to alot of players success. Both in prolonging their careers, and in developement. Probably more for the "bubble" players in the developement department, as some guys just have crazy talent and would be successful if all they did was drink beer, eat hot dogs, and chase women (can't think of anyone like that offhand lol).

I have always thought this should be intregrated into the game, and glad to see it is.

Problem : It should NOT be hidden. I think work ethic is a VERY viewable characteristic. Spend a season, hell even a month with someone - and you will have a pretty good idea. Certainly more identifiable then whether or not a player with a current 3 rating in control can have a 10 talent.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by Dreslough

Clay

What, no P.S.?

[Ktulu]

Has anyone thought of including statistical performance into the decline decision making process? One of the worst aspects of the "cliff" is that you can have a 35+ guy cruising along and putting up great numbers and all of a sudden he gets a rating hit and can't hit or pitch his way out of a wet paper bag.

It would be a lot less frustrating if a player struggles and then takes the hit. Including performance in the equation might also increase the frequency or at least the possibility of a Roger Clemons type. Obviously you'd have to find the right balance, but I think it's worth considering.

[kageboshi]

I don't think that making that work ethic thing visible would be a good idea if it has a big influence in the aging curve of a player. In real life you can't tell a player is going to have a long career just by looking at his work ethic; if it was that easy the Red Sox wouldn't have given up on Clemens.

And also I don't see what's the point of playing an historical league if you already know which players are going to be good as they become older and which aren't; that would be like... cheating .

[DougWyatt]

I don't either, but I would if it was part of the developement process. I've got a sneaky suspicion alot of young bucks get traded in RL because their superiors feel they don't work hard enough to reach their potential.

[Vinny P.]

funny, i was just watchin a thing on comcast sportsnet the other night when they were talking about old pitchers from the 90s who are still extremely effective (eg: maddux, glavine, smoltz, clemens). they were showing clemens workout regimen over this past offseason, and during the interview, he was saying he had to work much harder than in the past to keep his old form. it showed him doing what are called "mt. climbers" (which pretty much can kick your butt after about 10 minutes, but is extremely effective in improving stamina/lower body strength)

i suppose my point is, a work ethic rating would be completely realistic in helping to prolong, and possibly actually IMPROVE an aging player, but a high rating should be quite rare, considering that an enormous amount of players DO just "drop off a cliff"

[Prodigal Son]

Originally Posted by dodgecharger1968

One thing that's bugged me, and I'd like to know if anyone has numbers on this, but when guys decline, isn't their eye/patience the last thing to go? For that matter, isn't this something that correlates with age (maturity, experience, umpire respect, pitcher respect, more pivotal lineup position...) as much as any "natural" talent? I don't know, it just seems kinda funny to be looking at 2 17 year-old kids with a 12 in eye, and saying this one's got an 8 talent there, and that one'll never improve much.

Eye never goes. It keeps getting better with age, something that OOTP algorithms screw the pooch on. That's not to say that some players can't decline in it, but that's really rare, and as a whole, players take more walks per PA as they get older until the days they retire. OOTP screws the pooch on a lot of development. Stealing is wayyyyyyyy too static for another. Stealing should start declining by 26 and be around 75% on average of peak value by age 30 (IIRC). The lack of aging affecting defensive range with any sort of consistency that shows a regression model is alarming, too.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by Prodigal Son

Eye never goes. It keeps getting better with age, something that OOTP algorithms screw the pooch on. That's not to say that some players can't decline in it, but that's really rare, and as a whole, players take more walks per PA as they get older until the days they retire. OOTP screws the pooch on a lot of development. Stealing is wayyyyyyyy too static for another. Stealing should start declining by 26 and be around 75% on average of peak value by age 30 (IIRC). The lack of aging affecting defensive range with any sort of consistency that shows a regression model is alarming, too.

Yea, I am really hoping this was addressed in the new version since Markus was re-building the code anyway. We will see soon enough, I guess.

[Prodigal Son]

Originally Posted by andymac

Yea, I am really hoping this was addressed in the new version since Markus was re-building the code anyway. We will see soon enough, I guess.

I'm really hoping too. I haven't ordered the game yet, and whether or not I do so is contingent on two things: how well the bugs are worked out and if the aging is fixed to mirror the research that is available on it.