How big is your OOTP2006 Universe?

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by enuttage

I'm guessing I'm looking at several hundred teams (including minors) once I'm done.

We'll see how the ol' 'puter handles it.

Fun thread topic.

And I thought *I* was ambitious! I hope your 'puter is not that ol'!

I'd be interested in your final layout if you want to post it some day. Also, whether you encounter that "race of supermen" phenomenon that I fear may happen with too many players in the universe.

Ditto on your last comment.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by enuttage

Right now I'm working on creating a 'New World League'. The goal is to represent every country in the Western Hemisphere that has at least three cities (actually CMAs - though I have to cheat this in some thickly populated countries) with more than 100,000 inhabitants. And then go on to other baseball playing countries and represent them in the same manner (based on population). So Japan, et al, in Asia will be represented.

Each country has it's own International League. And if the country is big enough, it'll have a couple subleagues and even a minor league system. For instance, Canada has eight teams and one level of minors. Mexico has two levels of minors. While Honduras only has four teams altogether. It's fascinating to watch the game automatically assign MLEs to each country. I can't wait till we can control individual teams' percentage of foreigners (which would allow for a full Central American League, obviously).

Leagues are allowed a 1% foreigner intake at the bottom, but are allowed as many foreigners as they want on the team. Cross-league FA is allowed. Finances are set up to mimic real-world spending power. This'll make for an interesting progression regarding where FAs end up. Players will be groomed in their home countries, but can move as soon as they're eligible for FA.

I'm guessing I'm looking at several hundred teams (including minors) once I'm done.

We'll see how the ol' 'puter handles it.

Fun thread topic.

Make sure to save those templates & quick saves. There might be, um, people asking you for them when they are done.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

Yep, summer and winter. Basically the only thing I eliminated was the Japanese Ni-Gun; everything else that came up on the default new game screen I went for, cities, stadiums, logos and all. Then, I had this "great" idea about a mammoth Independent League (I got lazy - one league setup instead of eight), because I thought it would be more realistic to have them in the game as they are in real baseball, playing at an AA level with a few players lucky and good enough to get back to the "show."

Since you asked about my levels of play, here's what I did based on things I found in Wikipedia and Baseball Almanac (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/birthplace.php).

I based MLE on the historical numbers of players from foreign countries in MLB:

"At the start of the 2000 season, there were 71 major league players from the Dominican Republic, 33 from Puerto Rico, 31 from Venezuela, 14 from Mexico, 9 from Cuba, 8 from Panama, 2 from Colombia, and 1 from Nicaragua. Thus, of some 1,200 players in the major leagues, 169 (about 15 percent) were from Latin America."

All-Time Historical Players/MLE (same number for all categories)
Dominican Republic 412/.900
Puerto Rico 215/.875
Venezuela 182/.850
Cuba 149/.850
Mexico 99/.825
Japan 32/.800
Korea 12/.775
Taiwan 4/.750

Now, I'm not saying that baseball in Taiwan stinks. There are many other influences impossible to reflect in the game; cultural inhibitions against immigration, political oppression (there could have been a lot more Cubans in MLB otherwise), etc. I was thinking that if I allocated MLE's in this way, I would get realistic results as far as the amount of players each country produces that end up in MLB.

I think this all fits in well with my MLE array for the minors (same number for all categories):
AAA / .900
AA / .825
A / .750
A, SS / .675
R / .600

As far as independent baseball, the MLE is that of AA baseball: .825.


I'm glad I stopped lurking around and decided to start participating. My enjoyment of the game, and my knowledge of it, have gone up as a result. Sometimes I wonder whether I'm having more fun talking about the game than playing it! (J/K )

Interesting way to go about the MLE's. I am workng on a universe where I am developing the MLE's based on Clay Davenport's team ratings for the World Baseball Classic.

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

I hope your 'puter is not that ol'!

Roffle.

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

I'd be interested in your final layout if you want to post it some day. Also, whether you encounter that "race of supermen" phenomenon that I fear may happen with too many players in the universe.

Ditto on your last comment.

I'd be happy to post it once I've got thing under control. And I'll definitely let you know what happens regarding player creation/movement.

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by andymac

Make sure to save those templates & quick saves. There might be, um, people asking you for them when they are done.

No problem. I save compulsively (pretty much after I add each country). The template save function is top notch.

I'll post it up once I'm done. It may be another week or so, depending on how quickly I can get the research done.

Still debating whether I want to try and incorporate elevation into park factors and whether it'll make much of a difference (revisiting the old game and all the complications that arise with park factors).

I'll also be adding area specific nicknames to each team. e.g., Cuidad de Mexico Aguilas, etc.

I'm also trying to be as specific in accent marks/local spellings as I can. e.g., Roma would be used instead of Rome.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by enuttage

No problem. I save compulsively (pretty much after I add each country). The template save function is top notch.

I'll post it up once I'm done. It may be another week or so, depending on how quickly I can get the research done.

Still debating whether I want to try and incorporate elevation into park factors and whether it'll make much of a difference (revisiting the old game and all the complications that arise with park factors).

I'll also be adding area specific nicknames to each team. e.g., Cuidad de Mexico Aguilas, etc.

I'm also trying to be as specific in accent marks/local spellings as I can. e.g., Roma would be used instead of Rome.

Sounds good. I'll be keeping my eyes open.

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by andymac

Sounds good. I'll be keeping my eyes open.

Have any thoughts on elevation and park factors, andy? You are one of a small handful of experts in that regard around here.

Some of the Central and South American teams are 7,000+ ft. up.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by enuttage

Have any thoughts on elevation and park factors, andy? You are one of a small handful of experts in that regard around here.

Some of the Central and South American teams are 7,000+ ft. up.

It depends on how you want to go about it. Remember that you can effect league totals 2 ways. By adjusting the actual league modifiers or by having your league ballparks average to be over or under 1.000. Are you planning on having the teams play other teams from outside of their league at all? If that is the case, for high elevation countries you may want to go ahead and create most parks to have high park factors. In that way you are sort of creating a mid-range park factor for your entire universe instead of just your league.

As for specific park factors for the high elevation parks, you may want to take a look at and make them similar to Colorado.

[Can of Corn]

a 32 team ML with AAA and A+ (a mix of AA and A)
a 8 team independent INT in Canada
a 32 team independent AA
a 60 team independent Rookie league NCAA

[Raidergoo]

http://profhorn.meteor.wisc.edu/wxwi...l/homerun.html

Fun little java applet.

Watch what happens when you play at Pike's Peak.

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by andymac

It depends on how you want to go about it. Remember that you can effect league totals 2 ways. By adjusting the actual league modifiers or by having your league ballparks average to be over or under 1.000. Are you planning on having the teams play other teams from outside of their league at all? If that is the case, for high elevation countries you may want to go ahead and create most parks to have high park factors. In that way you are sort of creating a mid-range park factor for your entire universe instead of just your league.

As for specific park factors for the high elevation parks, you may want to take a look at and make them similar to Colorado.

Can teams play teams from outside their league? As it stands now, they'll only be playing teams from within their own country. No interleague play within that country (if it's even big enough to warrant a second subleague).

A good example might be the aforementioned Honduras, where Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula are at around 3K feet, while La Ceiba and El Progreso are basically at sea level (though in valleys where peaks around them can reach 6K feet). Same with Mexico, where the City is at 7K+ and Acapulco is at sea level.

I think my answer here is (after reading your post again) 'yes', it's worth adjusting the individual park factors, as they will make a difference in statistical output of a given park as opposed to other parks in a country and versus the rest of the universe.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by enuttage

I think my answer here is (after reading your post again) 'yes', it's worth adjusting the individual park factors, as they will make a difference in statistical output of a given park as opposed to other parks in a country and versus the rest of the universe.

That is basically what I am getting at. What you have to decide is whether your "base" is at the universe level or the league level. If you have it at the league level you could have two identical parks with the exact same elevation and they should have different park factors because the factors would only depend on the rest of the parks in the league. However, if you decide to base your factors over the entire universe, then those parks would have factors that are the same because every park would need to be considered.

Teams can play teams from other leagues in exhibition mode if you so choose. If you planned on doing that at any time you would probably want to design your factors over the entire universe. Otherwise it won't really matter, you could do it either way.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

I was just wondering are the leagues that are being made a reflection on how we would like to see baseball really played, reason I ask is that it seem's alot of small regionalised independent leagues are being made.

Hmm...a good question and one that has me thinking. I've always made small leagues, even in the BBPro days I would stick to 14 team leagues.

That said, the idea of being in a HUGE league world like the one '98 Yanks has is also intriguing. So big you could get lost in it, a lot of the challenge would be keeping up with what's going on!

Perhaps both visions are ways I could like to see baseball go in.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

http://profhorn.meteor.wisc.edu/wxwi...l/homerun.html

Fun little java applet.

Watch what happens when you play at Pike's Peak.

That was funny - hitting moonshots that go 500+ feet. I bet those would be fun to watch, unless you're the opposing pitcher, heh.

About the only balls that didn't go out in that park when hit with major power are popups (and then those take forever to come back down)!

[CBL-Commish]

I've finally finished setting up my universe and just started simming the 2006 preseason, but here's how it looks:

MLB (with rosters imported from Cubby/Rolen)
Fictional Continental League (imported from v6.5, league in operation since 1988 on various games, currently 20 teams)
All of the real minors (again, from Cubby/Rolen)
Three levels of Continental League minors
Mexican League
Japanese League (w/minors. Players imported from the Nippon roster project)
Australian League (based on Claxon Shield, longer schedule)
German baseball Bundesliga
Dutch League
Italian Seire A
Frontier League
American Association
Northern League
Golden League
CanAm League
Atlantic League
Fictional Timberline Indy League (all stadiums in high-altitude towns in the Rockies)
Fictional Far North Indy League with teams in the Yukon, NWT, northern Alberta and BC.
Fictional Southern Maryland Indy League
Fictional Portland, Oregon Municipal Indy League
Dominican/Mexican/Puerto Rican/Venezulean Winter Leagues
Fictional Greenland Winter Ice Baseball League
Fictional Sao Tome and Principe International League

(All real leagues and teams set up like real life, but with fictional players, except where noted. Also, some real indy teams have some higher-profile real players.)

This took a bunch of tweaking to get the finances right, but the early going looks promising. At the end of the '05 Continental League season three of the best players were free agents and went unsigned, which would have been one of those OOTP quirks that required Commish intervention before. But with OOTP 2006 and the expanded universe they were all signed by the Indians in early January. Huge controversy in Continental League circles, but very realistic for a somewhat cash poor league trying to compete with the majors, and too much fun to watch.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_MLB_Expansion_Draft

Like you really couldn't find it.

To be honest, I rarely think of going to Wikipedia to check something out. It's still a new source to me so it often slips my mind.

I find it interesting how you apparently assumed that when I asked about the 1998 expansion it was intended as some kind of back-handed dig at you rather than as an honest question.

Not everything has an ulterior motive. Sometimes a question is just a question.

Originally Posted by The Wolf

The easy and simple answer is that I've never seen or hear of it requested of him.

That's interesting, because in my time on the PureSim boards I often find that request made. And Shaun's response is that he can't really do it yet because of the issue it would cause with the scheduling for the leagues.

There is certainly a portion of PS players who are bothered by the lack of player control over the alignment and setup of leagues and want to see more flexibility in this area.

[CONN CHRIS]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That's interesting, because in my time on the PureSim boards I often find that request made. And Shaun's response is that he can't really do it yet because of the issue it would cause with the scheduling for the leagues.

There is certainly a portion of PS players who are bothered by the lack of player control over the alignment and setup of leagues and want to see more flexibility in this area.

I have not played Puresim or been to their boards since early October of 2004. (Not because I didn't like Puresim, I loved it! - But rather because that is when I discovered that my first love, the old 70s Title Bout board game had been turned into a computer game. I've been rather engrossed in one particular sim since then.)

Anyway, back then the issue of user control over expansion was being discussed quite a bit. I recall griping about it myself over there. Especially when a Western Conference team was moved to the Eastern Conference after an expansion that the game decided to make for me occurred. (Just to name one pet peeve back then.) I have no idea how that issue has evolved or been resolved since PS2005 though. And for the record, Puresim is a fabulous game with an involved and accessible programmer / developer. Much like here.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by andymac

You are the offensive one. Every post you make is (or at least trys to be) manipulative and insulting to both the developers of this game and the fans who enjoy the direction the game is going. We get it, you don't care about large universes, the ability to base leagues in non-U.S. country's and want 100% of development to be spent on either historical or modern MLB league setups.

Your suggestions are welcome, but your hounding and turning every thread into a historical vs. fictional or constantly bitching about things other games have that OOTP doesn't is both unnecassary and insulting to those of us who would like to help make the game better by working together instead of using threats and manipulation.

Let's edit that a bit.

YOU are the offensive one. Every post you make in any thread I post in is (or at least trys to be) manipulative and insulting to critics of this game and the fans who don't enjoy the direction the game is going. We get it, you don't care about historical simming and want 100% of development to be spent on fantasy baseball.

Your suggestions are welcome, but your hounding of every criticism and constantly bitching about anyone who mentions things other games have that OOTP doesn't is both unnecassary and insulting to those of us who would like to help make the game better.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

I find it interesting how you apparently assumed that when I asked about the 1998 expansion it was intended as some kind of back-handed dig at you rather than as an honest question.

I'm supposed to believe that the schedule guy doesn't know where to find expansion rulesets when I do?

As for the the PureSim boards, I visit them about once a week and I have never seen that request. It could have happened and I missed it.

[Bonedwarf]

All you with really complex leagues:

Why don't you make quickstarts and release them? That's one great addition to OOTP this year.

Still not had time to play yet. So much cool homebrew stuff coming out on the Nintendo DS right now is also eating my time...