Regarding trading--Not a debate but just interested in knowing who agrees

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by mking55

This is my official notification that I will not comment on your drooling drivel.

LOL, only one of us has trouble with self-control, and it's not me.

This entire thread is just self-indulgence. Man up and learn some self-control and you won't have to throw tantrums like this.

[CD1083]

Did anybody NOT see a thread with "Not a debate" in the title, turning into a debate?

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by gord

I don't understand. He was just taking advantage of a flaw in the messageboard posting system. It exists, so he felt obligated to do it. He feels like that if the creators of the messageboard allow this, then it's not only OK to do it but that he must do it. Until the ability to post extremely sarcastic posts is taken away then he will continue to do so, even past the point of self-enjoyment.

It's an exploit! Censor the message boards!

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by Chase Davis

Did anybody NOT see a thread with "Not a debate" in the title, turning into a debate?

He just wanted his own little rant space to complain about how dare the game allow him to exploit it. But shutting off debate is impossible here.

[kckid4u]

Remember in "Back to the Future" Marty McFly had that sports encylopedia with him that had the results of all the sports events way into the future when he went back in time to the 1950's? Then Biff stole it and used it to get rich by winning bets cause he knew the outcomes of each event? Well, that's pretty much the same thing as mking55 is doing when he makes these trades for players he knows are going to be stars in the future. So, where's the flaw really? Is it with the future, or is it with the people like Biff and mking55 who take advantage of the future by using a "sports encyclopedia" giving them the advantage?

For me, that's what this boils down to. I'm sure mking55 will disagree though, and that's ok for him to do so. I'm sure my thoughts are not worthy of this thread nor are they up to his standards. But that's ok. However, I just feel like my above comment describes what's really going on here.

[SATW]

No offense to mking, but basically he ranted and then said if you don't agree, don't post because I'm not listening. Clearly an argument was inevitable.

Like someone mentioned before, this is the equivilant of buying Madden or something and finding a play that works everytime. You then run the play constantly, and complain that you're getting bored. There ARE solutions to your problems, you just don't seem to want to use them. Should those "problems" be fixed or improved? Probably. But in the meantime, there are ways to fix it.

[dunningrb]

Originally Posted by SATW

No offense to mking, but basically he ranted and then said if you don't agree, don't post because I'm not listening. Clearly an argument was inevitable.

Like someone mentioned before, this is the equivilant of buying Madden or something and finding a play that works everytime. You then run the play constantly, and complain that you're getting bored. There ARE solutions to your problems, you just don't seem to want to use them. Should those "problems" be fixed or improved? Probably. But in the meantime, there are ways to fix it.

Can we start over? Please share the solutions you're thinking about. I'm knew to OOTB, so the more details or examples you can give the more it will help me. I might want to get back into historical sims with OOTP if I can avoid the problems mking brought up (and that I observed too). Thanks.

[mking55]

Originally Posted by GCCWolverine

mking, maybe I missed it earlier, but what are the re-calc and talent change settings you are using?

Recalc is off and talent change is 100.

Originally Posted by David Watts

MKing, are you playing with the financial part of the game on or off? I know free agency didn't exist during the time you are replaying, but seeing the success you have had made me curious. Also, what injury settings do you use?

I use financials and my injury settings in '39 (when the league began) were set to very low. In 1960 I upped them to low.

[William Satterwhite]

Originally Posted by SteveP

Not quite sure how you think this example runs counter to what I said. OOTP does have a "cheat" option, and only one, which is the setting for Trading Difficulty. This is a cheat because with the harder settings, the AI will trade more easily with itself than with you.

Not to derail the thread or anything but is this discussed in detail anywhere? This is actually the first I've ever heard of this (I always assumed the harder settings just changed what the AI would ask for in a trade, not how the AI teams handled trades among themselves). Thanks!

[robc]

Originally Posted by kckid4u

Remember in "Back to the Future" Marty McFly had that sports encylopedia with him that had the results of all the sports events way into the future when he went back in time to the 1950's? Then Biff stole it and used it to get rich by winning bets cause he knew the outcomes of each event? Well, that's pretty much the same thing as mking55 is doing when he makes these trades for players he knows are going to be stars in the future. So, where's the flaw really? Is it with the future, or is it with the people like Biff and mking55 who take advantage of the future by using a "sports encyclopedia" giving them the advantage?

For me, that's what this boils down to. I'm sure mking55 will disagree though, and that's ok for him to do so. I'm sure my thoughts are not worthy of this thread nor are they up to his standards. But that's ok. However, I just feel like my above comment describes what's really going on here.

I know mking flew off the handle in the other thread and that probably left a bad taste in your mouth so you are having some fun here. But let us pretend that didn't happen, or that this thread was started by someone who didn't get on your nerves in the other thread. I'm pretty sure you have made some helpful posts in some of my threads, so bear with me.

Making trades in historical is not the same as knowing the future for a couple reasons. Note: mking is not using recalc and is using the OOTP development engine.
1) If OOTP is working in a reasonable way is would assign high potential ratings to players like young Ted Williams and others. Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't, I'm not sure. The AI should be able to use those potential ratings to evaluate the future value of players. Granted, the AI might not know how long the player will play at that level, but it should know he is a darn good player. Since mking is not using recalc, mking also doesn't know how long Willams should be great.
2) Since the OOTP development engine is being used, players with good potentials may or may not turn out how they should. I don't know what talent randomness setting is being used.

I think it is really hard to stay totally neutral when trading in historical leagues. We have our preferred players and may use that knowledge sometimes, but if the ratings and AI are working correctly the AI should have agood idea too.

[dunningrb]

Originally Posted by kckid4u

Remember in "Back to the Future" Marty McFly had that sports encylopedia with him that had the results of all the sports events way into the future when he went back in time to the 1950's? Then Biff stole it and used it to get rich by winning bets cause he knew the outcomes of each event? Well, that's pretty much the same thing as mking55 is doing when he makes these trades for players he knows are going to be stars in the future. So, where's the flaw really? Is it with the future, or is it with the people like Biff and mking55 who take advantage of the future by using a "sports encyclopedia" giving them the advantage?

For me, that's what this boils down to. I'm sure mking55 will disagree though, and that's ok for him to do so. I'm sure my thoughts are not worthy of this thread nor are they up to his standards. But that's ok. However, I just feel like my above comment describes what's really going on here.

My experience with historical sims is very similar to mking's. I see good points on both sides of this debate.

What I would like to see is an AI that is "aware" of the players' careers just as I am, and make trade decisions based on that knowledge. In a perfect version of OOTB, it would be impossible to tell the difference between the AI and another human being who could evaluate players' careers as well as you can. (That's essentially what "AI" means, of course.) A goal that's more realistic than perfection, but perhaps out of reach given the company's resources, is an AI that can use any one of several assessment strategies to evaluate a potential trade involving historical players. I wrote a post about this earlier in this tread. Who knows? Perhaps this something they can work on version 12. It might be difficult code it, debut it, and test it, but it's not impossible.

--
Rodney Dunning

[robc]

Originally Posted by SATW

No offense to mking, but basically he ranted and then said if you don't agree, don't post because I'm not listening. Clearly an argument was inevitable.

The reason he opened the thread that way was he was only trying to see how many people felt the way he did. He knows there are dissenting opinons. He was trying to see if this was a problem that bothered a lot of people so he would know how much effort he should put into trying for a solution.

And no, mking is not one of the personalities that live in my head and escape every once in a while. I've been PMing him a little bit on this topic too.

[robc]

Originally Posted by dunningrb

My experience with historical sims is very similar to mking's. I see good points on both sides of this debate.

What I would like to see is an AI that is "aware" of the players' careers just as I am, and make trade decisions based on that knowledge. In a perfect version of OOTB, it would be impossible to tell the difference between the AI and another human being who could evaluate players' careers as well as you can. (That's essentially what "AI" means, of course.) A goal that's more realistic than perfection, but perhaps out of reach given the company's resources, is an AI that can use any one of several assessment strategies to evaluate a potential trade involving historical players. I wrote a post about this earlier in this tread. Who knows? Perhaps this something they can work on version 12. It might be difficult code it, debut it, and test it, but it's not impossible.

--
Rodney Dunning

You may be interested in this...

Puresim Baseball uses this method to aid the AI trade logic. There is some build in knowledge as far as who won MVPs, All-Stars, etc. It uses this knowledge to determine the value of players.

Personally, I do not like that method, but if you do you may want to try the Puresim demo at Wolverine Studios.

To me a better solution is making:
- make sure the historical player ratings make sense (both current and potential).
- Make sure the AI properly values the current and potential ratings. The AI should also properly value a players past performance.
- Make sure the AI handles putting a value on multiple players in a trade correctly. 3 so-so players do not = 1 Ted Williams.

I think if these are all working correctly, we would have an AI that while not perfect would prevent the absurd from happening.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by robc

And no, mking is not one of the personalities that live in my head and escape every once in a while.

That really wasn't very convincing.

[kckid4u]

Originally Posted by robc

I know mking flew off the handle in the other thread and that probably left a bad taste in your mouth so you are having some fun here. But let us pretend that didn't happen, or that this thread was started by someone who didn't get on your nerves in the other thread.

Tell mking55 for me it wasn't just the "other thread" that left a "bad taste in my mouth," it was this thread too.

And I stick to what I said. Life is full of things people can take advantage of to exploit something or someone. My point is ultimatley it's up to each person to decide if they are going to exploit them or not. That's basically what life is all about.

[CD1083]

Originally Posted by kckid4u

And I stick to what I said. Life is full of things people can take advantage of to exploit something or someone. My point is ultimatley it's up to each person to decide if they are going to exploit them or not. That's basically what life is all about.

Yeah, like in NFL Sports Talk Football where I could take it to the house every time with Kenneth Davis on the Bills.

I ran the Flip Weak Side run every play and every time he'd take it home, spin here, stiff arm there and I had six...

...of course I was 10 then so I was commonly making dumb decisions.

[dunningrb]

Originally Posted by robc

You may be interested in this...

[snip]

Thanks for the note about PureSim. It looks interesting but I've already put a lot of time into learning OOTB!

I think your solution makes good sense. Anything that improves the AI is good for the game.

[bosunmate]

I play strictly Historical so i know my players so well that i have to let the computer do trades. I would love to do my own trades as the computer does some stupid moves. However in fairness i play with trading on average, so if i put trading at very hard will that wipe out the future all stars being traded for a burned out veteran...?

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by William Satterwhite

Not to derail the thread or anything but is this discussed in detail anywhere? This is actually the first I've ever heard of this (I always assumed the harder settings just changed what the AI would ask for in a trade, not how the AI teams handled trades among themselves). Thanks!

AFAIK, when you set it to Hard, it makes the AI demand more from you in a trade. It has no affect on what the AI does when it trades with itself (nor should it). I assume the same is also true of the Trading Preference option as well (that is, if you set it prefer prospects, as some people do, it will make that demand of you, but it won't change anything it does when trading with itself).

[robc]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

That really wasn't very convincing.

The person who lives in my head is called Frooble and I don't let him create his own accounts on the internet.