|
||||
|
06-14-2017, 09:05 PM | #41 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Troy, Mo
Posts: 6,251
|
I was going to change mine to 50/30/15/5 - I like the 50/50 split... BUT it will not let me in challenge mode?
Is there a way around this? Last edited by MizzouRah; 06-14-2017 at 09:08 PM. |
06-15-2017, 07:37 PM | #42 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Troy, Mo
Posts: 6,251
|
Nobody? Is this something that can be changed in a patch?
I'm not sure how it would be cheating being able to change the AI eval settings in Challenge mode? If not.. that's ok.. I think I might start over minus challenge mode. |
06-22-2017, 04:54 AM | #43 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 104
|
Trades become easier the less weight you place on ratings
|
06-23-2017, 11:14 AM | #44 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,798
|
Quote:
I just started a new MLB quickstart with the updated rosters. I tried Challenge Mode and you cannot change the AI evaluation. So, like you, I am going to play in regular mode. After reading this thread again, I think it makes sense to start with the default settings and then move toward more stats and less ratings in subsequent years. I want the AI to begin the game playing the expected players and not making a bunch of odd trades, but I also want the AI to make better decisions as the game goes on. I might take the ratings down to 55 in late June in order to influence the AI's deadline moves with current year performance. I will probably use PSUColonel's 50/50 for the second year, and your 40/60 in third and subsequent years. |
|
06-23-2017, 12:57 PM | #45 |
Hall Of Famer
|
Based on a Lot of trial and error, I am now recommending keeping ratings at least at 55. 55/25/15/5 seems like a really good mix to me. The AI doesn't make stupid transactions, yet starts players who perform well. With ratings at 50, the AI can still put odd players on waivers I've noticed. You wouldn't think there would be much of a difference, but going greater than 50 for ratings seems to be the "threshold"
Last edited by PSUColonel; 06-23-2017 at 01:01 PM. |
06-23-2017, 01:06 PM | #46 |
Hall Of Famer
|
In all honestly though, think how you evaluate players...once you do that, you realize the defaults are probably pretty good. I think people have gotten way too caught up in this sabermetric craze. It might be a good way to evaluate players who are considered marginal, but let's face it, perceived talent trumps all of that.
Last edited by PSUColonel; 06-23-2017 at 06:36 PM. |
06-23-2017, 01:51 PM | #47 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Troy, Mo
Posts: 6,251
|
Quote:
|
|
06-23-2017, 02:31 PM | #48 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
|
Quote:
Personally, I try to enter the intervals into my Manager's Notes.
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________ |
|
06-23-2017, 10:19 PM | #50 |
Hall Of Famer
|
Not to say there couldn't be exploit here either however...making trades on the last day of May, july( trade deadline though....so not sure how to get around that one)....I think you'd like the shift to the august AI evaluation before the deadline. Perhaps customizable dates in which changes take effect?
|
07-03-2017, 08:08 AM | #51 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Troy, Mo
Posts: 6,251
|
I'm not sure if it's a game mechanics issue or the AI evaluation settings.. but I still see too many players that have a good season, the next season they are on the bench due to a player with slightly higher ratings, even if that player is a rookie. Stats should definitely matter, especially the previous season.
The same with a closer who has like 30-40 saves, the next season they are moved to setup for a younger slightly higher rated pitcher who might not have ever closed a game in his career. I'm wondering if maybe a 50/40/5/5 setting would stop this from happening? I can't test in CM - really hoping Markus will allow us to change that. Maybe even a setting to weigh more on a veteran player with several seasons played vs a younger player who may have higher ratings, but no MLB experience? Last edited by MizzouRah; 07-03-2017 at 08:11 AM. |
07-03-2017, 10:04 AM | #52 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 416
|
Quote:
Closers are a dime a dozen, really. The elite guys ala Trevor Hoffman or Mariano Rivera are more often than not the exception as far as that role goes. It's not that out of the realm of possibility that "veterans" get benched (or replaced) by other players. Lou Piniella did that in Seattle replacing Jose Mesa (coming off a year with 33 Saves) with an unknown Japanese pitcher in Kazuhiro Sasaki (was a lights out Closer in Japan but unproven in MLB obviously). I also look at it as teams promoting "hot, young prospects" and giving them roles while minimizing veterans who are nearing the tail end of their careers e.g. they may be 33-35 years old and not have much left in the tank. Managers and Teams do that all the time, trying to give a young rookie experience/playing time while slowly minimizing the role of a veteran by relying on his "leadership" in the clubhouse more. |
|
07-03-2017, 01:33 PM | #53 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,167
|
just look at save leaders... not many near the top of that list... that tells you they don't keep that role for very long... except for a few, like dawnbtvs said.
30-40years of heavy closer use since the 80's? 6 players have >400 saves. that is a volatile role no matter age or anything else. you definitely can't use the human eye and trust its perception of who's doing what... so, i'd get real evidence that "too" many are losing their jobs for that reason (which is another difficult proposition to prove) and then do a similar analysis to a large period of time in the RL MLB too.. if significantly differnet, you have a real qualm. otherwise it's a feeling that equates to a random stab in the dark. |
07-03-2017, 06:29 PM | #54 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Troy, Mo
Posts: 6,251
|
Thanks to the both of you.. I'll definitely dig deeper.
|
07-07-2017, 06:37 PM | #55 | ||
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________ |
||
07-07-2017, 06:45 PM | #56 | |
All Star Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
|
|
07-31-2017, 10:40 PM | #57 |
Hall Of Famer
|
Overtime I feel I have come to a setting I want, I keep second guessing, and it has become very frustrating to me. I Basically have 4 settings I am torn between. They aren't a hell of a lot different from each other, but they do provide differences in the way the AI behaves.
55/25/15/5 50/30/15/5 45/30/20/5 40/30/20/10 |
07-31-2017, 11:59 PM | #58 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,798
|
I have been using 40/30/20/10 in my historical league and I like it.
|
08-01-2017, 12:26 AM | #60 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 16,843
|
Quote:
__________________
"Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________ |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|