The Annual Settings Thread - Page 2

The Wolf · 03-29-2016, 02:39 PM

A great post from Fyrestorm about stats-only. Turn rating and stats off, set trading to hard/neutral and follow this and you're off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

I used to think and play this way for the longest time. Then I tried pure stats-only, and let me tell you, it is COMPLETELY different than having ratings, no matter how inaccurate they may be. The thing is - and most people should be able to relate to this - it's nearly impossible to un-bias yourself after seeing a player with top-notch ratings in every field. In the back of your mind, that guy is a GOD, and he's just not reaching his potential yet. So you take him through arbitration even though he hasn't hit his stride yet, because it's hard to shake that initial impression. Stats-only completely eliminates that bias. The same guy in stats-only is going to be a perennial minor leaguer, if he even stays in your organization. As Wolf said, it's up to you and how you like to play. This is just how I see it.

Go to League Setup -> Global Setup. Set your scouting accuracy to Normal or below (since your scout will still give you barebones scouting reports). Under Rating Scales, selecting "None displayed" for Player Actual Ratings Scale and Player Potential Ratings Scale. I usually leave Other Player Ratings Scale on, since that gives you speed and positional ratings that are nigh-impossible to quantify otherwise...Next, check "Overall rating based on AI evaluation, not pure ratings". That ensures that the AI values players the way you want them to, which is the next step:

Go to the AI Options tab in the League Setup. Make sure that "Ratings Weight" is set to 0%. The other percentages are up to you, but I personally use Wolf's recommendation (67/22/11). What this does is it changes how the AI evaluates players. By giving zero weight to a player's ratings, the AI is forced to evaluate their worth solely by their stats, just as you are. Make sure to hit the Apply Changes Now button, and you should be good to go. Set up the rest of the league normally, and like Wolf said, make sure you sim a few years ahead. No point in inaugural drafting if you have no idea what any players can do...I don't think I could ever go back to playing with ratings now; I'm hooked on stats-only. But it's your game; how you play is up to you.

TwinsGuy11 · 03-29-2016, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

A great post from Fyrestorm about stats-only. Turn rating and stats off, set trading to hard/neutral and follow this and you're off.

Thank you so much!

The Wolf · 03-29-2016, 02:48 PM

Create a new league - fictional is best, I usually use a fictional MLB set 5 to 10 years ago (although I did back-sim 30 years once) - let the AI run all the teams as you sim to the current season and then take over a team. Don't ever peek at ratings, and set scouting quality to low. Determine your lineups, pitching staff, trades, promotion, demotions, draft choices all from stats and scouting reports.

The difficulty level goes up amazingly. You get much more of a GM and managerial experience. Is young player X lucky, or is he actually good? Is aging Player Y done for, or just hitting/pitching in bad luck? Is Player Z injury prone? Good luck figuring it all out!

In stats-only you make your decisions on incomplete data and take your chances, just like a real GM. It's not for everyone, most people don't want that much of a challenge. It's your game, play it your way. My way is on hard mode.

Me, I love stats only. But it's your game, play it your way.
__________________

Silent_Thunder · 03-29-2016, 02:55 PM

From the exact opposite side of the fence from stats only, I can't recommend the new historical minors play enough this year. While stat-only would be somewhat of a chore without feeder leagues, you probably could still get away with it with less good of a draft. But the real thing is that it allows you to learn about baseball history so much more than in past years. You meet the players who almost did but never could, players who were cut down in their prime by injuries just before making the injury, see greats fail to live to their supposed potential, and more.

I'm doing 20-80 with V Low scouting accurancy, OOTP dev engine, no recalc, and starting from 1919.

Also for stats only I prefer 0-65-24-11, as it means the AI is a tiny bit more willing to look deeper into a players history, for better or worse. It's a very minor shift from Fyre's weights, but it seems to make a slight enough difference. But I'm too knee deep in historical play to be doing stats right now, as I'd like to keep the pace up a bit faster.

The Wolf · 03-29-2016, 03:25 PM

Stats only does make for a much slower game, as evaluating players becomes difficult and time consuming - just like it is in real life.

ohiodevil · 03-29-2016, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Stats only does make for a much slower game, as evaluating players becomes difficult and time consuming - just like it is in real life.

Silly question....do you use feeder leagues?

Doc_Brown · 03-29-2016, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ohiodevil

Silly question....do you use feeder leagues?

Was about to ask the same question myself.

Silent_Thunder · 03-29-2016, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ohiodevil

Silly question....do you use feeder leagues?

Some swear by it, others claim the generated stats from non feeder drafts tell a better picture. That said I use feeders and a Japanese League to give posted players actual stats as well. But that part is only relevant if you want posting. Might do something different this time though, decided to do a new fictional league post ww1 with custom uniforms and such, so it'll be a long haul for once.

Rain King · 03-29-2016, 04:07 PM

As a slight alternative to stats only, I prefer having ratings but at the most condensed level possible. So, I typically play with potential ratings and other ratings on at 1-5. Current ratings I can go either way on, if I turn them on I don't use them much except maybe during the draft to get a slightly better idea of how developed a guy is coming in.

Potential ratings at 1-5 give a decent "at a glance" view of a player without lifting much fog-of-war. You are still going to rely 80%+ on stats, but it enables you to do a little bit of prior filtering. Real life GM's do have something to go on from their scouts in number form.

Grafton19 · 03-29-2016, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Engineer. And once you play stats only, it will sell itself. You'll probably never go back.

Went stats only a few years ago. It's a hell of a drug

Syd Thrift · 03-29-2016, 04:24 PM

I do almost all stats-only. The only arena in which I use ratings are the "other" ratings, because those are the ratings (speed, ability to sacrifice, and fielding, mostly) that your scout does have to make a judgement on.

The other issue with ratings, particularly when you're playing in old-timey leagues, but really in any situation where the stat base has been adjusted in some way or another (maybe you want to reduce Ks and bring the game to a more 70s/80s feel), the way the game works out ratings is always the same. So a guy with a 200 Power rating is going to be seen as super valuable even if you're playing in 1906, where the league leader in HRs IRL had just 6. The way the game accounts for this itself is it creates players during that era with very low Power ratings but it's debatable if that's really the way things ought to go (were HRs low because nobody hit for HR power, or were they low because the environment kept them low? Both probably have some impact but in the 1900s especially I think it's about 90/10 in favor of the environment - it's hard to hit a ball out of the park when only a couple of baseballs are used for an entire game and it's basically legal to scuff up or spit on the ball).

I agree with everyone else, though, with the notion that stats-only represents a whole new ballgame so to speak. You can, FWIW, still get a sense of a young player's potential by looking at their scouting reports. I would set your scouting ratings to Very Low, however, as I think it ought to be a bit of a crapshoot, even with a great scouting director.

monkeystyxx · 03-29-2016, 04:32 PM

Damnit... I'll give it a shot, but if I end up allergic to ratings, I'm blaming you.

The Wolf · 03-29-2016, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monkeystyxx

Damnit... I'll give it a shot, but if I end up allergic to ratings, I'm blaming you.

If all else fails you can blame it on me!

I've done it with feeders and without. My current league is without. Do what you like!

NotMuchTime · 03-29-2016, 06:00 PM

Stats only is the way to go, displaying only the 'other' ratings. I use 0/58/28/14, but it's almost identically the same. :-)

The Wolf · 03-29-2016, 06:01 PM

Guys, all I can say is this: TRY IT. Seriously, give it a fair trial.

You may hate it. You may have to tinker with it to get something that you do like. But it costs nothing, so do at least give it a fair trial. Like Grafton19 said, it's a hell of a drug.

Doc_Brown · 03-29-2016, 06:28 PM

I'm just creating a league and I'm all in.

philthepat · 03-29-2016, 06:33 PM

For the first time ever I'm going to create a fictional league and go stats only with it.. Can't believe I've never tried this before

MizzouRah · 03-29-2016, 06:38 PM

Trading frequency? LOW
AI evaluation settings? 50/30/15/5
Trading difficulty? Hard/Neutral
Scouting accuracy? Default
Talent change randomness? Default

frank_olaf · 03-30-2016, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Create a new league - fictional is best, I usually use a fictional MLB set 5 to 10 years ago (although I did back-sim 30 years once) - let the AI run all the teams as you sim to the current season and then take over a team. Don't ever peek at ratings, and set scouting quality to low. Determine your lineups, pitching staff, trades, promotion, demotions, draft choices all from stats and scouting reports.

The difficulty level goes up amazingly. You get much more of a GM and managerial experience. Is young player X lucky, or is he actually good? Is aging Player Y done for, or just hitting/pitching in bad luck? Is Player Z injury prone? Good luck figuring it all out!

In stats-only you make your decisions on incomplete data and take your chances, just like a real GM. It's not for everyone, most people don't want that much of a challenge. It's your game, play it your way. My way is on hard mode.

Me, I love stats only. But it's your game, play it your way.
__________________

Wolf, if I just want to play a standard MLB game starting in 2016 would you still recommend stats only or do you only recommended it if I sim a few years first?

Thanks.

Matt Uk · 03-30-2016, 08:20 AM

I think you could still go stats only. Sure you'll have preconceived real life views of a lot of the players but once you begin play the ootp engine takes over development anyway so things aren't going to pan out the same anyway.

I'm doing a historical starting in 2001 and have stats only (bar the others rating for speed etc)

03-29-2016, 02:55 PM	#24
Silent_Thunder Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Upstate NY Posts: 235	From the exact opposite side of the fence from stats only, I can't recommend the new historical minors play enough this year. While stat-only would be somewhat of a chore without feeder leagues, you probably could still get away with it with less good of a draft. But the real thing is that it allows you to learn about baseball history so much more than in past years. You meet the players who almost did but never could, players who were cut down in their prime by injuries just before making the injury, see greats fail to live to their supposed potential, and more. I'm doing 20-80 with V Low scouting accurancy, OOTP dev engine, no recalc, and starting from 1919. Also for stats only I prefer 0-65-24-11, as it means the AI is a tiny bit more willing to look deeper into a players history, for better or worse. It's a very minor shift from Fyre's weights, but it seems to make a slight enough difference. But I'm too knee deep in historical play to be doing stats right now, as I'd like to keep the pace up a bit faster. Last edited by Silent_Thunder; 03-29-2016 at 03:16 PM.

03-29-2016, 04:07 PM	#29
Rain King Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 2,111	As a slight alternative to stats only, I prefer having ratings but at the most condensed level possible. So, I typically play with potential ratings and other ratings on at 1-5. Current ratings I can go either way on, if I turn them on I don't use them much except maybe during the draft to get a slightly better idea of how developed a guy is coming in. Potential ratings at 1-5 give a decent "at a glance" view of a player without lifting much fog-of-war. You are still going to rely 80%+ on stats, but it enables you to do a little bit of prior filtering. Real life GM's do have something to go on from their scouts in number form.

03-29-2016, 04:32 PM	#32
monkeystyxx Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 293	Damnit... I'll give it a shot, but if I end up allergic to ratings, I'm blaming you.

03-29-2016, 06:00 PM	#34
NotMuchTime Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2016 Posts: 150	Stats only is the way to go, displaying only the 'other' ratings. I use 0/58/28/14, but it's almost identically the same. :-)

03-29-2016, 06:28 PM	#36
Doc_Brown All Star Starter Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 1,326	I'm just creating a league and I'm all in.

03-29-2016, 06:33 PM	#37
philthepat Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Dover, UK Posts: 271	For the first time ever I'm going to create a fictional league and go stats only with it.. Can't believe I've never tried this before

03-29-2016, 06:38 PM	#38
MizzouRah Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Troy, Mo Posts: 6,251	Trading frequency? LOW AI evaluation settings? 50/30/15/5 Trading difficulty? Hard/Neutral Scouting accuracy? Default Talent change randomness? Default

03-30-2016, 08:20 AM	#40
Matt Uk Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK Posts: 450	I think you could still go stats only. Sure you'll have preconceived real life views of a lot of the players but once you begin play the ootp engine takes over development anyway so things aren't going to pan out the same anyway. I'm doing a historical starting in 2001 and have stats only (bar the others rating for speed etc)