Fundamental flaws... your chance to vent!

[Elendil]

Originally Posted by Kelric

I still miss the old Development Report. I want to be able to see every change my players undergo. It still irritates me to no end that this was removed and replaced with a much inferior system.

FWIW, I prefer the new system. It's more realistic, creating a kind of "fog of war." Your advantage over the AI would be greatly increased if you could release or trade a young star the day after he took an unexpected, massive talent hit. I say leave detailed dev reports to the modders.

[Jaxxvain]

Originally Posted by MidKnight

I'll roll with the "FA compensation is broken" example. As is, there lies two main problems with compensation:

1. The first is a result of the game's in-game arbitration system. Namely, there is no ability to offer outgoing Free Agents a one-year arbitration deal. Currently, the only arbitration system in the game is that for those who have little service time. In reality, teams can offer arbitration to players whose FA contracts have run out. If the player accepts, then he returns to the team on a one-year deal. The amount is to be debated between the two sides, and if no agreement is reached then goes to arbitration hearings. This is likely a bit too complicated for OOTP at the moment, and instead a salary that the computer determines (ala the current arbitration) would work. If the player refuses, then (and only then) the team that offered it is eligible for compensation picks.
   
   This helps enforce parity and allows for lower market teams to have a chance at retaining a player for a year. Teams do run the risk of an unwanted player being offered arbitration (due to the desire for compensation) only to have him return.
   
   Brief arbitration primer: How Baseball Arbitration Works: MLB Rules Governing the Eligibility and Process of Arbitration
   
   There is no need to make OOTP's arbitration system complicated, but allowing teams to offer arbitration to outgoing free agents is a fundamental process in modern MLB, and is crucial to how the compensation system works.
2. No supplemental rounds are currently implemented. The system of supplemental rounds helps make up for the fact that the lower half of the draft is protected for compensation.
   
   The system works like this: if an "A" ranked Free Agent is signed (and had been offered arb by his old team), then the team that signed him forfeits their first round draft pick AND a pick in the first supplemental round - - sandwiched between the first and second rounds. If the signing team did poorly and has "protected" first-half draft picks, then instead they forfeit their first supplemental round and a SECOND round draft pick instead.
   
   If a "B" ranked Free Agent is signed, then the signing team forfeits nothing, but the team that originally lost the player to FA gets a first round supplemental pick.
   
   Primer: Free Agent Compensation: MLB Rumors - MLBTradeRumors.com

These may not seem like major issues at first glance, but they are integral to how teams sign and build, which affects the amount of parity and planning in the league.

Great post, I agree that this should be fixed.

Just wanted to point out one mistake in the text above. The bolded underlined red type in the above quote is misleading. The team that signs a type A free agent does not forfeit a sandwich pick. The pick is created and rewarded to the team that loses the player.

[Mike Donlin]

1. Fix the pitching model. This issue has been discussed to death on these boards, so it doesn't need too much comment. Having something as arbitrary and circular as endurance determine role (starter or reliever) is artificial and slightly embarrassing for a game of this quality. There has to be a better way--indeed, countless better ways have been proposed. I've proposed what I think is a simple, workable one here: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ing-model.html

2. Fix AI roster management, specifically by making teams smarter about finances. As it stands now, teams are too-willing to take on salary--either through trades or through signing contract extensions with largely replaceable or below-league-average players. They thus end up disqualifying themselves from signing very good free agents or extending their very good players, not to mention handicapping themselves when it comes to scouting expenditures. Closely related, teams should try harder to follow their strategy of rebuilding or winning now. Rebuilding teams should never, EVER trade for veterans or trade away prospects, yet they frequently do or will. The AI just needs to be smarter about resources in general.

3. Fix free agent compensation. This feature adds *so* much to GM decisions. As with the Cleveland Indians this past year, do you decide to trade your star pitcher at the break or do you hold on to him and collect the draft picks? Without compensation, it's an easy decision. With it, as it stands now, it's slightly harder. If compensation worked properly, it would be even more compelling.

[deadringer]

I got already to type out a list of all the bitches I have about the game until I realized that most of them are more "design decisions" than flaws. The rest have already been stated here.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by Kelric

I still miss the old Development Report. I want to be able to see every change my players undergo. It still irritates me to no end that this was removed and replaced with a much inferior system.

I miss this too. It needs to be put back in the game.

[JohnBigBoots]

If historical replays are based on actual stats, why not injuries? If a player played all 162 games in real life he should not become injured during a replay. When I do replays, injuries eventually happen to players that aren't rested -- and by that, I mean position players, not pitchers (pitcher abuse would be the exception). For instance, in my current league, Steve Carlton, Ricky Henderson and Cal Ripkin, Jr. all went down with career enders. That's just wrong and should never ever happen. I know the injury rate can be adjusted, but I like realistic replays and injuries are part of the game. And in real life, some players are more durable than others and the game should reflect this.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by JohnBigBoots

If historical replays are based on actual stats, why not injuries?

Because there is no database of historical injuries. Indeed, there isn't any reliable data on injuries going back more than ten years.

One could look at playing time as a rough guide to injuries, but that would seem to be an imprecise approach at best. (I'll leave aside the additional point that there are notable differences in how the disabled list used to work which would come into play as well.)

[CubbyFan23]

I guess it's not a fundemental flaw, so forgive me, but if there was an option to combine two player's data into one, it would give roster makers so much more flexibility. Right now, I am not aware of anyway to import history of more than one league (ie. Japan and MLB) and then have players who have played in both not be exclusive.

Craig Brazell is an example, if I could hit a button and combine the two of them in both league's, it would make roster making so much easier. My #1 request.

Secondly, I mentioned this elsewhere, but there needs to be something looked at in regards to the AI promotion young players who should be developing at a rapid pace. They seem to do it the instant a player is ready for the next level, including placing teenagers as backups at the MLB level. I wish the AI would take into account a player's future ratings and age when promoting them.

[JWay]

Originally Posted by CubbyFan23

I guess it's not a fundemental flaw, so forgive me, but if there was an option to combine two player's data into one, it would give roster makers so much more flexibility. Right now, I am not aware of anyway to import history of more than one league (ie. Japan and MLB) and then have players who have played in both not be exclusive.

Craig Brazell is an example, if I could hit a button and combine the two of them in both league's, it would make roster making so much easier. My #1 request.

Secondly, I mentioned this elsewhere, but there needs to be something looked at in regards to the AI promotion young players who should be developing at a rapid pace. They seem to do it the instant a player is ready for the next level, including placing teenagers as backups at the MLB level. I wish the AI would take into account a player's future ratings and age when promoting them.

YES! It should be able to figure out, player x is filling out and major league ready, however he'll get <200 Abs up there, so we'll stash him in AAA until we really need him.

[Ktulu]

The game should list Spring Training standings and leaders on the HTML during Spring Training and then be able to switch to regular season standings and leaders when the regular season starts. As it is now, in online leagues there is no mention of ST results on the league or team front page.

I don't know if this ever got addressed, but this was a problem with the post-season as well.

[Elendil]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Because there is no database of historical injuries.

Well, I bet there is one, and that it's proprietary info. Strat-o-matic always had higher injury chances for players that actually were injured more in each season.

[Afino]

I'm going to second the whole "too many talented MR" bug here.

Especially in the days where there was maybe one or two MR PER TEAM, the game does NOT need to create 20-25 4 or 5-star MR's per draft class. There's no talent elsewhere when this happens.

Oh, and reserve-clause era financials need serious attention. Players up until the 1960's (at least) made at MOST $100,000 per year, and that was the best of the best (Ruth, Williams, etc). I don't want players making $1m in 1950.

[Neags23]

Originally Posted by Kelric

I still miss the old Development Report. I want to be able to see every change my players undergo. It still irritates me to no end that this was removed and replaced with a much inferior system.

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

I miss this too. It needs to be put back in the game.

It should be in the game, agreed. But for the time being, feel free to check out my Player Development utility that even has graphs for easy data consumption. (link in sig)

[Comedian2004]

Strat-o-matic did a LOT of research on each team when it did a league. It examined every box score and they created the ratings manual. They were semi-automated, but the arm ratings, error ratings, etc, were done manually. I was a very big strato fan back in the day.

Now, if they redid a season, like 1968, that season would cost you as much as this entire game does. So, in essence, they were a game designer/research company.

As far as injuries, they did NOT research injuries, they based it on different things, such as games played, pitched, etc. It was not perfect. But it was a pretty decent thing. However, Cal Ripken could still be injuried.

When I played, I had found a injury chart that I ended up modifying. When you had an injury, which always happened with a HBP, unless it was a pitcher, you consulted the 'user made' chart to see how long the injury was.

I agree that if the team played 162 games and said player played 162 games, then he should ONLY be injured for that game. If he played 154 games during the season, then his injury should not exceed 8 games. It should also check to see how many games he missed because of injury during the current season. Now, even this is not perfect, as if a player missed 1/2 season, only playing in 81 games, was it because he was injured for 81 games or was he a platoon player.

Pitchers are even harder. For starters, it would have to be based on how many games did he start. But then again, did said player only start 18 games because he was injured 1/2 the season or because he was in the minors for half a season, or maybe he just sucked or was a spot starter.

It is quite a challenge for historical leagues.

As far as CEI, I think the best thing would be an option to ALWAYS be notified of a CEI and then let YOU decide if it is indeed a CEI or not.

Remember, you can always switch to commish in your leagues and change the CEI to whatever you want.

We have had many discussions on this in beta and I am sure it will come around again this year.

Originally Posted by Elendil

Well, I bet there is one, and that it's proprietary info. Strat-o-matic always had higher injury chances for players that actually were injured more in each season.

[Nutlaw]

Originally Posted by injury log

The Trade AI needs to take more sophisticated account of salary and contract duration.

This becomes a very serious issue when paired with the fact that the game doesn't include limited no-trade clauses for recently signed free agents (MLB won't let you trade a newly signed FA until June 1st, as I recall). Nothing stops you from signing players to bad contracts during the off-season, then trading them to the AI for players with more desirable contracts. As long as the AI's team has budget room, it won't mind.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by Comedian2004

Strat-o-matic did a LOT of research on each team when it did a league. It examined every box score and they created the ratings manual. They were semi-automated, but the arm ratings, error ratings, etc, were done manually. I was a very big strato fan back in the day.

Now, if they redid a season, like 1968, that season would cost you as much as this entire game does. So, in essence, they were a game designer/research company.

As far as injuries, they did NOT research injuries, they based it on different things, such as games played, pitched, etc. It was not perfect. But it was a pretty decent thing. However, Cal Ripken could still be injuried.

When I played, I had found a injury chart that I ended up modifying. When you had an injury, which always happened with a HBP, unless it was a pitcher, you consulted the 'user made' chart to see how long the injury was.

I agree that if the team played 162 games and said player played 162 games, then he should ONLY be injured for that game. If he played 154 games during the season, then his injury should not exceed 8 games. It should also check to see how many games he missed because of injury during the current season. Now, even this is not perfect, as if a player missed 1/2 season, only playing in 81 games, was it because he was injured for 81 games or was he a platoon player.

Pitchers are even harder. For starters, it would have to be based on how many games did he start. But then again, did said player only start 18 games because he was injured 1/2 the season or because he was in the minors for half a season, or maybe he just sucked or was a spot starter.

It is quite a challenge for historical leagues.

As far as CEI, I think the best thing would be an option to ALWAYS be notified of a CEI and then let YOU decide if it is indeed a CEI or not.

Remember, you can always switch to commish in your leagues and change the CEI to whatever you want.

We have had many discussions on this in beta and I am sure it will come around again this year.

If you want a great historical replay, there's always retro-sheet. You can click the refresh button on your browser and it plays that season over and over and over again with great accuracy.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Afino

Oh, and reserve-clause era financials need serious attention. Players up until the 1960's (at least) made at MOST $100,000 per year, and that was the best of the best (Ruth, Williams, etc). I don't want players making $1m in 1950.

I would agree, however the issue of proper reserve clause era financials goes beyond just the dollar value of the player salaries. The possibility of player holdouts would need to be factored in, along with the fact that major league clubs could buy out a player's contract at any time at very little cost (just ten days' pay prior to 1946, and thirty days' pay afterwards until the 1970s). Also, nearly all contracts during the era were only for one year, which means renegotiating a new contract each year (though the club had the option of imposing a new salary if the team and player could not agree to one).

[Simmo13]

Originally Posted by RonCo

If you want a great historical replay, there's always retro-sheet. You can click the refresh button on your browser and it plays that season over and over and over again with great accuracy.

I'll just go and cheer on Claude Willoughby....thanks for the moment of mirth RonCo.

[Carplos]

This becomes a very serious issue when paired with the fact that the game doesn't include limited no-trade clauses for recently signed free agents (MLB won't let you trade a newly signed FA until June 1st, as I recall).

I thought it was one year from the signing date if it's a multi-year deal. The June 1st deadline was for one year deals, I thought.

Of course, then we get into MLB vs fictional rules.

[ike121212]

-Bunting in non-bunting situations
It seems like every night I play, the computer bunts it's way out of a scoring opportunity. 1st and 3rd, 1 out, down 1, #2 hitter up in the 9th......bunt?!?! I like winning, but it feels hollow when this happens.

-RP fatigue
If an RP throws 2 straight days for short stints (20 pitches or less), he's often fatigued (below 50%) for 3-4 days. It's just not realistic. As others have pointed out, building a strong bullpen is extremely easy....build a strong one, and never allow your relievers to pitch 2 straight days, and you've 'outsmarted' the AI's bullpen management and given yourself a massive advantage.

-Draft
The overall potential ratings really got messed up in v9, especially with SP's. It's too easy to build a bullpen, and leverage it in trades. It's very hard to build a starting rotation