Historical Game Adjust/Weaken settings AKA the Make Bad Setting

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Garlon

The adjust/weaken is there for determining the sample size for AB and IP. You can use any values you want.

Exactly. It's not there to make stars perform closer to reality although your suggested settings have that effect. And measuring its effectiveness by how the stars perform is completely backwards.

Anyway, you posted one time implying real stats were neutralized. Since you're answering questions, are real stats neutralized during or after import against the game's park factors?

[LansdowneSt]

BradK,

Why to you keep insulting the way others choose to play the game? Or what settings they elect to use? Or for what purpose the elect to use said settings? Or telling the community that the point of A/W is x as if you created the concept? And that the way they measure their satisfaction with their games is backwards? Get over yourself.

You also keep demanding other members of the community give you answers. You are owed nothing from the other customers of the game but perhaps a trip to the Ignore list.

How are you finding the historic results based on how you play? Or are you not playing the game and are just here to hear yourself bark.

[Brad K]

I didn't create this fiasco of omissions and deceptions.

I'm not insulting how others play the game. Look a step further. I'm criticizing a person who plays in a specific way and hands out one size fits all advice based on his method.

I'm not demanding answers from customers. I'm demanding answers from a quasi developer who can now be recognized as a long time source of misinformation. Straightening this out would be beneficial for him.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by Garlon

I suggest using doubl-weight in OOTP25 because in previous OOTP games since it was internally scaling your Adjust/Weaken settings the game was making an additional adjustment for how it handles rookies and players in their final season. With 5yr recalc rookie only really has 3 seasons of statistics, so in OOTP23 it would take that 200/50 and scale it to 600/150 for a rookie. However, OOTP25 does not adjust for rookies in this way, so if yo type in 1000/250 it will still look for 1000 AB over those first 3 seasons. If you use double-weight you are at least counting their rookie season twice then in the total sample that the game is using.

Does doubling the current year increase (in the case of 5yr recall) the minimum threshold by 20%? I ask because the trade off would be that if someone were not choosing to have players miss seasons according to real life and / or were playing RD, the double-weighting would have the unwanted effect of amplifying the effect of injured / low-usage seasons.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by jcard

Does doubling the current year increase (in the case of 5yr recall) the minimum threshold by 20%? I ask because the trade off would be that if someone were not choosing to have players miss seasons according to real life and / or were playing RD, the double-weighting would have the unwanted effect of amplifying the effect of injured / low-usage seasons.

Pretty sure Garlon said that double weight actually works in a rookie/injured or low usage player's favor, as they get credit towards the adjust threshold twice.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Pretty sure Garlon said that double weight actually works in a rookie/injured or low usage player's favor, as they get credit towards the adjust threshold twice.

I am referring to the situation where a player missed all or most of one year mid-career. When that season becomes the current year, double-weighting will amplify its impact if double-weighting increases the five-year threshold by 20% (on the logic that there are now six base years: X-2, X-1, X, X, X+1, X+2); if the double-weighting instead in effect gives you an extra year in the aggregate base period numerator without changing the threshold denominator, then the impact is milder (basically, the free year bonus is eliminated and the process for that year is in effect an equal-weight five year calculation.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by jcard

I am referring to the situation where a player missed all or most of one year mid-career. When that season becomes the current year, double-weighting will amplify its impact if double-weighting increases the five-year threshold by 20% (on the logic that there are now six base years: X-2, X-1, X, X, X+1, X+2); if the double-weighting instead in effect gives you an extra year in the aggregate base period numerator without changing the threshold denominator, then the impact is milder (basically, the free year bonus is eliminated and the process for that year is in effect an equal-weight five year calculation.

Sounds like a good reason to use 300 ABs.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by jcard

I am referring to the situation where a player missed all or most of one year mid-career. When that season becomes the current year, double-weighting will amplify its impact if double-weighting increases the five-year threshold by 20% (on the logic that there are now six base years: X-2, X-1, X, X, X+1, X+2); if the double-weighting instead in effect gives you an extra year in the aggregate base period numerator without changing the threshold denominator, then the impact is milder (basically, the free year bonus is eliminated and the process for that year is in effect an equal-weight five year calculation.

According to Garlon it won't hurt him. If a guy only gets 100 at bats in the season that is the double weight year, he will get credit for 200 at bats. If he gets 150, he will get credit for 300, Now if he misses the season he gets zero. So, when using double weight, a player has what amounts to 6 seasons to get the 1000 at bats. Using double weight does not mean a batter has to get 1200 at bats if you have the threshold set at 1000,

[jcard]

A quick question to the problem people mention where when playing with certain settings selected players will continue playing (well) (well) past not just their historical but also any realistic retirement age. While not perfect and certainly inelegant, would setting a maximum age for the league in the league options mitigate the problem for you at all?