Update on the patch/update

[Sweed]

I understand clarnzz's concerns. Whenever something like this is done great care has to be taken to not throw things out of balance. We as humans understand a player like Bichette has inflated numbers from playing in Colorado. My concern is will the AI know it too?

Even with my concerns I do think basing some of it on stats is a good idea and needs to be done, the key of course IMHO will be finding a good balance. So as has been said by others let's just wait and see what Markus has come up with

[Joe Canadian]

I've got a few questions about the financial coefficient. As far as I know this is to allow historical leagues with finances on, to have realistic salaries.

1) Will the financial coefficient apply to coaches, or will it just be applied to players.

2) Can you turn these "new" finances on during modern leagues. For example if I were to run a "2003 and beyond" small-market league, could I trun this option on so I wouldn't have players getting paid $12 million a year.

Update sounds great.

And sorry if these questions have been asked before.

[NYJuggalo45]

clarnzz...voice your opinion all you want buddy...but why not wait until AFTER the patch comes out? Markus gave us about 5 sentences of what was going to be in the patch, and a very vague 5 sentences in that. What if salaries take into effect everything? Stats, Ratings, potential, etc.
If the patch comes out and you don't like something that has been changed, then you paid your $35 same as me, you have every right to complain all you want. But doing it now seems a little off to me (and others) and also disrespects the hard work Markus is doing...give the guy a chance, he might surprise ya. Just my 2 cents...I won't say another word

[clarnzz]

Your taking what Im saying as complaining rather than me having concerns.

Maybe these concerns causes someone on the beta team to take a harder look at it and play around with some contracts to see the degree of it, and if there is an advantage to be had. Maybe it has been extensively tested and is working perfectly as we all hope and dream. I have no idea, thats why Im expressing my concerns.

If you think Im an OOTP hater thats just looking for something to complain about, you have mistaken me for someone else.

[BillyBuck]

This is the type of discussion that my mother always warned me to stay out of....

[mad0die]

There is a fine line between concerns and complaints, but I would not certainly not consider clarnzz's comments as complaints. He is expressing concern over a proposed change. His arguments have been reasonable and thoughtful. It's sad to see fanboys jump on a guy for caring enough about the game to be concerned when a fundamental change such as this is proposed.

While I think the majority of us like the idea of contracts being "more" tied to performance, the implementation of this idea certainly raises some concerns about how that will change things.

I do believe that Markus has made a number of programming decisions based on info and feedback from this board...

[John C]

I like this news. I do have one question, however.

Has the ability to add amateur draft players been added back into the game? That's the big one for me. Thanks for any information you can provide.

-John

[NYJuggalo45]

while i originally said i would not say another word...i changed my mind when i was called a fanboy. not sure who you think your talking to mad0die, but calling someone a fanboy who has 3 times as many posts as you seems a bit idiotic. also jumping into a conversation, inwhich i never insulted clarnzz nor him insult me, and then you take a shot at me seems equally idiotic.
i standby my post. i think it is unfair to express concerns, complain, etc about something until you see it in action. if, after testing it, playing it, etc, concerns arise, then you have every right to state them, complain, bash, do whatever. but wait til the friggin thing comes out rather than speculate and assume.
im done with this, waste of time

[mad0die]

Originally posted by NYJuggalo45
not sure who you think your talking to mad0die, but calling someone a fanboy who has 3 times as many posts as you seems a bit idiotic

It doesn't matter "who" I'm talking to. I wasn't talking to "you", I was expressing my opinion as you have similarly done.

Altho, "you" did jump in on reasoned discussion and steer it in this not so good direction.

I apologize for contributing to that steerage and will depart.

BTW, fanboy-ism has nothing to do with post totals...

[Johnny Slick]

Originally posted by Alan T
Don't get me wrong however, you don't want the AI to give a flash in the pan or one year wonder a huge contract for no reason,

Why not? Real life GMs do it all the time (think: Bret Boone's 3-year $36M deal last offseason, or for that matter Sammy Sosa's mega-deal in the mid-90s, before he'd shown definitively that he was, in fact, a superstar and not the scrub he was in Texas). One of the challenges of a game like this *should* be to decide whether or not the guy who just went from average to MVP is really as good as he looked.

but I do like the idea that if a player has a poor season in his free agency year, he shouldnt get superstar money. A nice balance between statistical output from the player (based over the past year and past several years to avoid the one year wonders), mixed in with player potential (younger players who should be expected to contribute more) is good for the contract extentions/negotiations, etc.

Well... I wouldn't want too much to be read into the past 3 seasons either. I mean, a guy who hit .300/.400/.500 5 years ago but who has slumped to a .240/.320/.400 level the last 3 years probably isn't going to be expecting a megadeal.

Anyway, the "based on stats" thing is great news; once it gets implemented into manager AI, it will allow teams to replace players midseason, even if their slump is the result of nothing more than bad luck. I don't think any manager in baseball would stick with a first baseman who's giving them .170/.260/.330 for a whole season, no matter how good his scouts say he is.

John Craven

[Steve Kuffrey]

The AI "has" to offer bigtime deals to some "one year wonders", if not then it is not realistic. You know that there are guys being overpaid now because teams have made poor decisions, the key is that this not be overdone.

[kq76]

Regarding the financial coefficients, do they increase by say 3 or 4% (the usual historical inflation rate) every year? For example, if you start a league in 1900 and a player is making 1K$ (these are totally rough #s I'm throwing out here), will a similarly skilled player be making say 10M$ by 2000, or will he still be making 1K$?

[BillyBuck]

My God this board is addicting....

[Steve Kuffrey]

Originally posted by kq76
Regarding the financial coefficients, do they increase by say 3 or 4% (the usual historical inflation rate) every year? For example, if you start a league in 1900 and a player is making 1K$ (these are totally rough #s I'm throwing out here), will a similarly skilled player be making say 10M$ by 2000, or will he still be making 1K$?

The only person with the patch is Markus, I have no idea...sorry.

[Alan T]

Originally posted by Johnny Slick
Why not? Real life GMs do it all the time (think: Bret Boone's 3-year $36M deal last offseason, or for that matter Sammy Sosa's mega-deal in the mid-90s, before he'd shown definitively that he was, in fact, a superstar and not the scrub he was in Texas). One of the challenges of a game like this *should* be to decide whether or not the guy who just went from average to MVP is really as good as he looked.

but I do like the idea that if a player has a poor season in his free agency year, he shouldnt get superstar money. A nice balance between statistical output from the player (based over the past year and past several years to avoid the one year wonders), mixed in with player potential (younger players who should be expected to contribute more) is good for the contract extentions/negotiations, etc.

Well... I wouldn't want too much to be read into the past 3 seasons either. I mean, a guy who hit .300/.400/.500 5 years ago but who has slumped to a .240/.320/.400 level the last 3 years probably isn't going to be expecting a megadeal.

Anyway, the "based on stats" thing is great news; once it gets implemented into manager AI, it will allow teams to replace players midseason, even if their slump is the result of nothing more than bad luck. I don't think any manager in baseball would stick with a first baseman who's giving them .170/.260/.330 for a whole season, no matter how good his scouts say he is.

John Craven

I was mainly generalizing. I even mentioned in an earlier post Mo vaughn's name as he is someone very overpaid... People get overpaid for all kinds of reasons.. I was just generalizing that a person with one great year even if a MVP year that year, shouldnt suddenly get paid the most in baseball ie: A-rod money.

I was simply trying to say the ideal system would be one that took a look at stats both one year, three year, career wise, and then combined it with other factors such as potential, position, supply & demand, etc.

I have no idea how to program it to do this since I am a network architect, so I am looking forward to seeing the changes Marcus makes. I just dont like it the way it is currently is all

[Joe Canadian]

Could someone comment on my questions I posted earlier?

Thanks

[Scott Vibert]

Originally posted by Joe Canadian
Could someone comment on my questions I posted earlier?

As Steve has mentioned Markus is the only one with the patch at the moment, so he's the only one that can answer your question until it hits the beta team.

[StorminZ]

Now show me another game producer/publisher that fixes all the reported bugs AND on top of that, comes out with some new additions to the game? Like, these guys are too sureal for the computer gaming industry ... like, others should take lessons in customer service! Attaboy, Mark! And enjoy that well-deserved vacation!!!!!

StorminZ

[Draft Dodger]

Originally posted by Joe Canadian
Could someone comment on my questions I posted earlier?

Thanks

they sucked. hope that helped.

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally posted by Draft Dodger
they sucked. hope that helped.

Best post of the day.