Talent change randomness specification

catcherjul · 06-08-2014, 09:40 PM

Hi guys, I have a little question mark when it comes to the real effect of talent change randomness. I just want to know if it affects players in their early development years (more late draft gems) or it will affect established player too (more declining performance, more exceptional years) or both?

IMO it would be very usefull if the TCR only affect player in their development years (much more before 25) then anytime during their career.

RchW · 06-09-2014, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catcherjul

Hi guys, I have a little question mark when it comes to the real effect of talent change randomness. I just want to know if it affects players in their early development years (more late draft gems) or it will affect established player too (more declining performance, more exceptional years) or both?

IMO it would be very usefull if the TCR only affect player in their development years (much more before 25) then anytime during their career.

It would not be randomness if it worked the way you desire. I think TCR is one of the best things in OOTP. It replicates the real life variability that exists throughout player careers. Before this feature expected player performance was too predictable.

catcherjul · 06-09-2014, 09:20 AM

Good point! And you would suggest to set numbers at what? 100?150?200?

Thanks a lot buddy

Carlton · 06-09-2014, 10:27 AM

I rarely see a 30 year old have a jump to become a superstar after 5 years of medicority, but I've seen a couple so that makes me think established players get a part of this, which I like, as it has happened throughout history. Players are blocked or they change their batting stance (Jose Bautista) or master one of their pitches (RA Dickey)

RchW · 06-09-2014, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catcherjul

Good point! And you would suggest to set numbers at what? 100?150?200?

Thanks a lot buddy

I preferred 70-80 a while back. Now I'm at 110. It doesn't hurt to try different settings.

goalieump413 · 06-09-2014, 11:03 AM

I've never played with the TCR setting before, but I can imagine that increasing the TCR number to 150 or beyond puts a lot more pressure on you to draft better since your league would be a more volatile place to play? Just a thought...

catcherjul · 06-09-2014, 11:05 PM

Ok I tough TCR would make players go crazy and impossible to know how they will progress. I'm glad to know that it won't affect every players but only give more chances to late draft pick and much more 1st round bust. I rarely see 1st rounder in my game that doesn't play in MLB

The Wolf · 06-10-2014, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

I preferred 70-80 a while back. Now I'm at 110. It doesn't hurt to try different settings.

Yes. Experiment with settings until you find something that you like best.

RchW · 06-10-2014, 04:00 PM

I'd like to see TCR applied separately to batters and pitchers. The development and aging curve is modified separately, why not the noise that is TCR? It is well established that pitching results are more variable or less predictable than batting results. A single TCR setting seems to be a compromise.

Further to that, a variable player attribute such as consistency should be considered. I don't buy the current amalgam of intelligence and work ethic being used to suggest consistency (per the manual). Sometimes intelligent hard working players are less consistent than so-called natural athletes. The appearance of hard work or deep thinking is often cited as a reason for success and an excuse for failure (no one works harder than X).

Slightly OT but my

goalieump413 · 06-10-2014, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

I'd like to see TCR applied separately to batters and pitchers. The development and aging curve is modified separately, why not the noise that is TCR? It is well established that pitching results are more variable or less predictable than batting results. A single TCR setting seems to be a compromise.

Further to that, a variable player attribute such as consistency should be considered. I don't buy the current amalgam of intelligence and work ethic being used to suggest consistency (per the manual). Sometimes intelligent hard working players are less consistent than so-called natural athletes. The appearance of hard work or deep thinking is often cited as a reason for success and an excuse for failure (no one works harder than X).

Slightly OT but my

Possibly because the talent playing at any time (youth baseball through veteran MLB) comes from the same basic pool of human talent. It is very difficult to divide pitchers from position players at lower levels of amateur play, and therefore the mix of natural talent, good coaching, baseball IQ, etc is fairly evenly spread across the entire game. In other words, there's no strict "pitcher's diet" that kids follow to make them more or less consistent than any other position.

And your argument cited "results", not talent. It may be true that it's more difficult to predict the results a pitcher produces, but that's due to many factors, not just talent. And since we're talking about the TCR setting, we're only pointing out how random the talent change is. How volatile the talent is. I think it would be a mistake to separate pitchers from position players for this reason. Why should some players be more prone to wild swings in talent, while others are more docile?

Just my 2c too...

Carlton · 06-11-2014, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

Further to that, a variable player attribute such as consistency should be considered. I don't buy the current amalgam of intelligence and work ethic being used to suggest consistency (per the manual). Sometimes intelligent hard working players are less consistent than so-called natural athletes. The appearance of hard work or deep thinking is often cited as a reason for success and an excuse for failure (no one works harder than X).

Slightly OT but my

For a computer program, you need a set point to determine consistency, I think Markus did a pretty good job in this aspect. You are correct in your assessment, but than the programming gets cloudy if you try to put too much in there.

If it's any consolation, in my league, I have Manny Ramirez as 35 work ethic and 1 Intelligence, and he is living up to his talent...he may have a shorter career which is what I am hoping for, greater chance of a shooting star

goalieump413 · 06-11-2014, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carlton

For a computer program, you need a set point to determine consistency, I think Markus did a pretty good job in this aspect. You are correct in your assessment, but than the programming gets cloudy if you try to put too much in there.

If it's any consolation, in my league, I have Manny Ramirez as 35 work ethic and 1 Intelligence, and he is living up to his talent...he may have a shorter career which is what I am hoping for, greater chance of a shooting star

So even if you max out TCR, Manny might pick up a book, read a sentence, and double his intelligence!

Carlton · 06-12-2014, 09:07 AM

Yea...Manny picking up a book! Get outta her ya joker!

Although there might be a book in the Green Wall that he will move in order to pee on it, if he reads the title...watch out!

The Wolf · 06-12-2014, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

I'd like to see TCR applied separately to batters and pitchers. The development and aging curve is modified separately, why not the noise that is TCR? It is well established that pitching results are more variable or less predictable than batting results. A single TCR setting seems to be a compromise.

Good idea, Rich. Suggest it for OOTP 16?

Painmantle · 07-07-2014, 10:05 AM

My Historical League has the TCR set to 200. We are now in our 4th season and it seems to me that the older the players get, the less affect there is. The players seem to level off in talent and be more consistent with their statistical output eventually.
But players in the 18-27ish range can be all over the map from year to year, but is seems to trend either down or up from their original "potential/current ratings" Rarely do I see a guy who dropped 2-3 points then went back up to where they were or even above. It appears to, more often than not go one way or the other.

This setting, maxed out,makes for a very interesting dilemma for GM's, it really makes them think twice about signing a young so called "Stud" to a long term extension.

This is my experience so far with this setting

Note: we use 1-20 scale

SirMichaelJordan · 07-08-2014, 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Painmantle

My Historical League has the TCR set to 200. We are now in our 4th season and it seems to me that the older the players get, the less affect there is. The players seem to level off in talent and be more consistent with their statistical output eventually.
But players in the 18-27ish range can be all over the map from year to year, but is seems to trend either down or up from their original "potential/current ratings" Rarely do I see a guy who dropped 2-3 points then went back up to where they were or even above. It appears to, more often than not go one way or the other.

This setting, maxed out,makes for a very interesting dilemma for GM's, it really makes them think twice about signing a young so called "Stud" to a long term extension.

This is my experience so far with this setting

Note: we use 1-20 scale

Similar results for me. I love TCR @ 200.

PSUColonel · 09-24-2014, 06:13 PM

would anybody recommend using a much higher talent randomness number, while also upping the accuracy of scouting. This way, most scouts will agree on players (for the most part) but players will still be very unpredictable?

Would this simulate the actual modern day MLB?

What do people think?

06-08-2014, 09:40 PM	#1
catcherjul Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Montréal Posts: 311	Talent change randomness specification Hi guys, I have a little question mark when it comes to the real effect of talent change randomness. I just want to know if it affects players in their early development years (more late draft gems) or it will affect established player too (more declining performance, more exceptional years) or both? IMO it would be very usefull if the TCR only affect player in their development years (much more before 25) then anytime during their career.

06-10-2014, 04:00 PM	#9
RchW Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The big smoke Posts: 15,628	I'd like to see TCR applied separately to batters and pitchers. The development and aging curve is modified separately, why not the noise that is TCR? It is well established that pitching results are more variable or less predictable than batting results. A single TCR setting seems to be a compromise. Further to that, a variable player attribute such as consistency should be considered. I don't buy the current amalgam of intelligence and work ethic being used to suggest consistency (per the manual). Sometimes intelligent hard working players are less consistent than so-called natural athletes. The appearance of hard work or deep thinking is often cited as a reason for success and an excuse for failure (no one works harder than X). Slightly OT but my __________________ Cheers RichW If you’re looking for a good cause to donate money to please consider a Donation to Parkinson’s Canada. It may help me have a better future and if not me, someone else. Thanks. “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit

07-07-2014, 10:05 AM	#15
Painmantle Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Greenfield ,IN Posts: 3,053	My Historical League has the TCR set to 200. We are now in our 4th season and it seems to me that the older the players get, the less affect there is. The players seem to level off in talent and be more consistent with their statistical output eventually. But players in the 18-27ish range can be all over the map from year to year, but is seems to trend either down or up from their original "potential/current ratings" Rarely do I see a guy who dropped 2-3 points then went back up to where they were or even above. It appears to, more often than not go one way or the other. This setting, maxed out,makes for a very interesting dilemma for GM's, it really makes them think twice about signing a young so called "Stud" to a long term extension. This is my experience so far with this setting Note: we use 1-20 scale __________________ “As soon as I got out there I felt a strange relationship with the pitcher's mound. It was as if I'd been born out there. Pitching just felt like the most natural thing in the world. Striking out batters was easy.” -Babe Ruth “Ruth made a grave mistake when he gave up pitching. Working once a week, he might have lasted a long time and become a great star.”-Tris Speaker My Dynasties The Beantown Bambino

06-09-2014, 09:20 AM	#3
catcherjul Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Montréal Posts: 311	Good point! And you would suggest to set numbers at what? 100?150?200? Thanks a lot buddy

06-09-2014, 10:27 AM	#4
Carlton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 3,765	I rarely see a 30 year old have a jump to become a superstar after 5 years of medicority, but I've seen a couple so that makes me think established players get a part of this, which I like, as it has happened throughout history. Players are blocked or they change their batting stance (Jose Bautista) or master one of their pitches (RA Dickey)

06-09-2014, 11:03 AM	#6
goalieump413 All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 765	I've never played with the TCR setting before, but I can imagine that increasing the TCR number to 150 or beyond puts a lot more pressure on you to draft better since your league would be a more volatile place to play? Just a thought...

06-09-2014, 11:05 PM	#7
catcherjul Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Montréal Posts: 311	Ok I tough TCR would make players go crazy and impossible to know how they will progress. I'm glad to know that it won't affect every players but only give more chances to late draft pick and much more 1st round bust. I rarely see 1st rounder in my game that doesn't play in MLB

06-12-2014, 09:07 AM	#13
Carlton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 3,765	Yea...Manny picking up a book! Get outta her ya joker! Although there might be a book in the Green Wall that he will move in order to pee on it, if he reads the title...watch out!

09-24-2014, 06:13 PM	#17
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,988 Blog Entries: 37	would anybody recommend using a much higher talent randomness number, while also upping the accuracy of scouting. This way, most scouts will agree on players (for the most part) but players will still be very unpredictable? Would this simulate the actual modern day MLB? What do people think?