|
||||
|
|
OOTP 15 - Historical Simulations Discuss historical simulations and their results in this forum. |
|
Thread Tools |
07-11-2014, 06:05 PM | #1 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,238
|
Re-calc vs Development/talent system in historical mode.
Last night I finally decided to start a historical dynasty to go along with my modern day Blue Jays file (I'm in 2032). I decided to take over the 1903 St. Louis Cardinals and plan to play until present day, although I know this will take a loooooong time.
Anyways, I've decided to go with the development and talent engine rather than re-calculating ratings before each season. Was this a good choice? Do others pick this option? I don't need my dynasty to be completely accurate and I do like the ideas of some players having different careers than what they had in real life. Makes it unpredictable. But at the same time I don't want the players straying too far away from their real historical selves. So what I'm asking, is the development engine a good option for a historical replay? |
07-11-2014, 07:17 PM | #2 |
Bat Boy
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3
|
This is EXACTLY what I want to do but I'm not sure the correct settings to go about doing it! And when the rookies come in I don't want them to be already like 80s on the 20-80 scale.
|
07-11-2014, 09:44 PM | #3 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,798
|
Quote:
Reduce the talent randomness setting quite a bit, and you should get exactly what you want. There will be surprises, including career-ending injuries, but most players will develop as you expect based on their initial potential. |
|
07-11-2014, 09:58 PM | #4 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,238
|
Quote:
Default is 100, correct? What do you figure I should place it at? |
|
07-11-2014, 11:26 PM | #5 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Maryland - just outside DC
Posts: 1,483
|
Set up a test league with TCR set to 75 and sim 10 years to look at stats. I would run it from 1946 through 1956 for some amazing Cardinal players.
Then do the same test with TCR at 50 and compare the outcomes. I have a league now set at 47 but that's because I like numbers that end in 7.
__________________
- - - World Series championships: 1926, 1931, 1934, 1942, 1944, 1946, 1964, 1967, 1982, 2006, 2011 |
07-12-2014, 07:45 AM | #6 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 367
|
Quote:
The development engine is great. There are enough surprising and interesting careers without changing talent randomness too. In a 1969 game to 1983, most players performed close to real life, however some of the surprises included Nolan Ryan not being dominant after 1974. Though he did suffer torn Labour injuries in 1972 and 1973. He did pitch a no hitter though. Mark Fidrych. In real life Fidrych had a great 1976 before injury too his career. engine on Fidrych went 16-13 in 1976, 20-11 in 1977. I thought that would be it and he'd revert to his real life career curve after a 14 month layoff. but he came back strong in 1981 and 1982 winning 20 games in each season and 17 games in 1983. Reggie Smith was a beast hitting 51 home runs in 1977, Sparky Lyle was ineffective after bone chips in his elbow in 1971 and never panned out, Joe H Coleman became a durable winning pitcher pitcher one of the few still effective since 1969. Bob Ojeda is stud winning 76 games in his first 4 years. Ray Culp became a 2 time all star and my favourite surprise of all. I have yet to try changing talent randomness but engine on works for me, there is just enough to keep interested in a Mike Paxton, a 30 game winner IRL and out of baseball by 1980 at age 27 to a 2 time all star pitcher winning over 100 games and still pitching in 1984 at age 30 with a fat free agent contract. Hope this helps. |
|
07-12-2014, 01:23 PM | #7 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks
Posts: 8,863
|
My vote is for the development engine as well. So much more fun. I think the only time I will use recalc anymore is if I decide to play using real transactions/retire according to history/miss seasons according to history.
|
07-30-2014, 09:53 PM | #8 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 283
|
Where do I find this "talent randomness" you're talking about? I can't find anything listed like that when setting up a historical simulation. The concept seems like exactly what I've been looking for out of this game.
__________________
It is not certain that everything is uncertain. - Blaise Pascal |
07-31-2014, 09:51 AM | #9 |
All Star Reserve
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 624
|
I agree with David, but I will also add that recalc provides sufficient variation to be interesting also. My 1972 Hank Aaron only hit .199 with 20 HR on one-year recalc, although his 1971 and 1973 seasons were very close to RL numbers. One year recalc is more likley to provide surprises than 3 year recalc in my experience. After using 3 year recalc for many leagues I now only use one year recalc with real transactions and real lineups and it's my favorite historical set-up.
|
07-31-2014, 10:29 AM | #10 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks
Posts: 8,863
|
Quote:
|
|
07-31-2014, 11:41 AM | #11 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,798
|
Quote:
Game Settings --> Players & Facegen tab ---> Player Development Settings The lower the number, the less variation from the potential career arc. 100 is considered average variation. |
|
07-31-2014, 12:23 PM | #12 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks
Posts: 8,863
|
Quote:
|
|
07-31-2014, 01:31 PM | #13 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,798
|
I agree. I get better results if I retire players according to history with recalc. If I want Sandy Koufax to have a long career, I just don't use recalc and let the development engine do it all.
|
07-31-2014, 04:42 PM | #14 | |
All Star Starter
|
Quote:
If you have the development engine enabled along with recalc, it does kick in. A drawback for doing a recreation with it enabled is that accumulated injuries will take a performance toll on players. The best example I have seen of this is with an injury plagued Babe Ruth when using recalc and player development. Ruth had a lengthy career with rate numbers more like Gorman Thomas than the Sultan. I do not think this will happen when player dev is not enabled, but I am not completely sure. Using recalc and player dev I have had Bobby Murcer rival Honus Wagner as greatest career SS ever, even though there was no RL SS data for Murcer once he returned from the Service. ADD: Goldschmidt gets a very favorable end point to his RL data and the development engine takes it from there. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ml#post3731591
__________________
Real Live Bleeding Fingers Last edited by VanillaGorilla; 07-31-2014 at 04:55 PM. |
|
07-31-2014, 05:20 PM | #15 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 283
|
Thanks Orcin. I never noticed that before. Is it new with 16?
__________________
It is not certain that everything is uncertain. - Blaise Pascal |
07-31-2014, 05:51 PM | #16 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks
Posts: 8,863
|
Quote:
|
|
09-06-2014, 06:55 PM | #17 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 278
|
I've been playing with Recalc off because I like there to be some uncertainty, but I'm getting a bit more uncertainty than I want. With recalc on, career arcs are too predictable for my liking. With it off they're too all-over-the-place.
I keep starting my game over and tweaking settings to get what I'm looking for, and I keep not getting it, because I don't really know what the settings do. I have recalc off, injuries set to "low", all the player development settings (aging, development, talent randomness) at their defaults, and Disable Player Development unchecked. I'm looking for "some" randomness in terms of development and career length; what I'm getting is too many instances for my liking of players who had twenty-year careers in real life starting to break down after ten, and too many career-ending injures snuffing out what should be 10-15 year careers before they've barely gotten off the ground. Should I be setting injuries at "very low"? I'm unclear on how the Player Development Settings effect things with recalc off vs recalc on. Maybe what I should be looking into is turning recalc back on but raising the PDS to get more randomness that way? |
09-08-2014, 02:27 PM | #18 | ||
Major Leagues
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 304
|
Quote:
From the manual: Quote:
|
||
09-08-2014, 03:21 PM | #19 | |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 278
|
Quote:
|
|
09-09-2014, 01:12 AM | #20 |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 304
|
For what you are describing, you would want recalc turned off. When you create a historical league and historical players are imported each year, their potential ratings will be assigned according to whatever you have set under historical settings/player ratings/base potential ratings on (career totals, remaining years, peak years, etc).
With recalc off and the player development engine on, the player will develop toward those initial imported ratings. How close to those potential ratings he stays or how far he strays is determined by the talent change randomness setting. The lower the setting, more likely he will develop into the player he was imported to be. With recalc on, you can still have the player development engine on and you might get some random changes to his actual/potential ratings, but each year the recalc engine will override those changes and reset his ratings according to whatever recalc setting you use (1 yr, 3 yr, etc). I think in the past, most everybody used recalc in historical leagues. What seems to have happened is that because the ootp player development engine has improved so much over the years, it's often more interesting to play and still get realistic historical results with recalc off, unless you are going for a very accurate replay of history ala Diamond Mind. Try setting recalc off and talent change randomness at 50, 33, or 25 if things were too random for you at the default setting of 100. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|