Never played OOTP before

Hibber · 05-12-2006, 02:38 PM

I will probably get OOTP 2006, just wondering, are the ratings on a 1-20 scale?

ifspuds · 05-12-2006, 02:41 PM

They can be on a number of scales: 2-8, 1-10, 1-20, 1-100, and you can set different scales for different groups of ratings (one scale for batting, one for defense). One of the great features of OOTP is its customizability.

SSG Troyer · 05-12-2006, 02:41 PM

There are several user-selectable scales ... if memory serves, 1-5, 1-10, 2-8, 1-20, 20-80, and 1-100..

2-8 is the actual scale MLB scouts use, before you ask. 20-80 is an extension of that.

Hibber · 05-12-2006, 03:53 PM

Thanks for the info!

Any suggestions on what works best for you guys?

jm47048 · 05-12-2006, 04:54 PM

I like the 1-100 ratings. I look at them as a percentage of being the best of the best. Kinda gives me the edge that way. I think, even in real life, that a 2-8 rating is not detailed enough. I can't figure out how the scouts use it.

Hibber · 05-12-2006, 05:08 PM

I was leaning towards the 1-100 anyway, it's what I'm most used to. Way back in the Front Page Sports days.

ifspuds · 05-12-2006, 05:44 PM

I personally like 1-10. It adds a little challenge to reading a player's ratings: is that 7 a "high" 7 or a "low" 7? The game still *uses* 1-100, it's just that you can only see 1-10.

ihatenames · 05-12-2006, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ifspuds

I personally like 1-10. It adds a little challenge to reading a player's ratings: is that 7 a "high" 7 or a "low" 7? The game still *uses* 1-100, it's just that you can only see 1-10.

That is what i use as well and for the same reason. I like the challenge of the unknown and its been what i've always used since ootp 4.

sporr · 05-13-2006, 04:17 PM

I still use 1-10 just because it is closest to what older versions of the game used.

boilermaker · 05-13-2006, 05:23 PM

As a fan of FM and EHM, I'll shoot for uniformity....I'm going 1-20, myself. Since everyone is interested in knowing.

Vinny P. · 05-13-2006, 07:58 PM

i lkike 1 - 100 myself. i just enjoy the clreaer picture of of how much young player develop. i enjoy watching players constantly improve throughout their career.

Twelvefield · 05-16-2006, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jm47048

I like the 1-100 ratings. I look at them as a percentage of being the best of the best. Kinda gives me the edge that way. I think, even in real life, that a 2-8 rating is not detailed enough. I can't figure out how the scouts use it.

Scouts consider 5 to be the number of the skill that is baseline for Major League play. If you score 5 on each of all 5 skill ratings, then your total is 25. Teams double that number to get the player ability score from 20-80. Such a player then would have an ability score of 50.

So if 5 is the number for "satisfactory", teams typically want three numbers that go above that (good, better, best) and three numbers that go below that (bad, worse, worst). 5-3+2; 5+3=8, giving you a scale of 2 to 8 with 5 exactly in the middle. Make sense? It's pretty easy when you don't try to concentrate on the math.

Put it another way, although this is strictly my interpretation:

2="Extremely poor ability"
3="Poor ability"
4="Some ability at minor league level, but not fit for majors"
5="Satisfactory basic ability for majors, but not at all exceptional"
6="Some advanced abilities at major league level"
7="Advanced major league ability"
8="Outstanding superior major league ability"

See how 5 goes exactly in the middle? Anything below 2 or above 8 more or less defies description, so scouts don't waste using numbers in those ranges. Doubling the rating gives you a bit more of "granularity" in your numbers without having to use fractions, which with sloppy handwriting could be misinterpreted.

BIG Irish · 05-30-2006, 08:26 PM

Couldn't you just use a few more adjectives/decriptions and use 1-10. 2-8 just doesn't make sense to me.

0="No ability"
1="Extremely poor ability"
2="Poor ability"
3="Some ability at minor league level, but not fit for majors"
4="Below average major league ability
5="Satisfactory basic ability for majors, but not at all exceptional"
6="Above average major league abilty"
7="Some advanced abilities at major league level"
8="Advanced major league ability"
9="Outstanding superior major league ability"
10="Hall of Fame ability"

5 is still the middle number and therefore "average".

disposableheros · 05-30-2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG Irish

Couldn't you just use a few more adjectives/decriptions and use 1-10. 2-8 just doesn't make sense to me.

0="No ability"
1="Extremely poor ability"
2="Poor ability"
3="Some ability at minor league level, but not fit for majors"
4="Below average major league ability
5="Satisfactory basic ability for majors, but not at all exceptional"
6="Above average major league abilty"
7="Some advanced abilities at major league level"
8="Advanced major league ability"
9="Outstanding superior major league ability"
10="Hall of Fame ability"

5 is still the middle number and therefore "average".

there is no 0 in 1-10, so 5 isnt the middle

phenom · 05-30-2006, 08:55 PM

I use the 1-100 in leagues where I'm just a spectator (which I do quite often, because I like poring over stats).

But in leagues where I'm participating, I like the 1-20 scale, or 1-10 if I want a little bit more of a challenge.

Try a league with no ratings turned on. That's fun.

05-12-2006, 02:38 PM	#1
Hibber Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 27	Never played OOTP before I will probably get OOTP 2006, just wondering, are the ratings on a 1-20 scale?

05-12-2006, 02:41 PM	#2
ifspuds Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Spokane WA Posts: 2,117	They can be on a number of scales: 2-8, 1-10, 1-20, 1-100, and you can set different scales for different groups of ratings (one scale for batting, one for defense). One of the great features of OOTP is its customizability. __________________ Jeff Watson Former dynasty writer and online league player, now mostly retired

05-12-2006, 02:41 PM	#3
SSG Troyer All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Somewhere to the left of 2nd base Posts: 1,598	There are several user-selectable scales ... if memory serves, 1-5, 1-10, 2-8, 1-20, 20-80, and 1-100.. 2-8 is the actual scale MLB scouts use, before you ask. 20-80 is an extension of that. __________________ MWT Did Tennesee Delaware Mississppi's New Jersey? Idaho ... Alaska!

05-12-2006, 05:44 PM	#7
ifspuds Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Spokane WA Posts: 2,117	I personally like 1-10. It adds a little challenge to reading a player's ratings: is that 7 a "high" 7 or a "low" 7? The game still uses 1-100, it's just that you can only see 1-10. __________________ Jeff Watson Former dynasty writer and online league player, now mostly retired

05-30-2006, 08:55 PM	#15
phenom Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Near the Great Wall. On the GOOD side. Posts: 3,711	I use the 1-100 in leagues where I'm just a spectator (which I do quite often, because I like poring over stats). But in leagues where I'm participating, I like the 1-20 scale, or 1-10 if I want a little bit more of a challenge. Try a league with no ratings turned on. That's fun. __________________ reported

05-12-2006, 03:53 PM	#4
Hibber Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 27	Thanks for the info! Any suggestions on what works best for you guys?

05-12-2006, 04:54 PM	#5
jm47048 All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,244	I like the 1-100 ratings. I look at them as a percentage of being the best of the best. Kinda gives me the edge that way. I think, even in real life, that a 2-8 rating is not detailed enough. I can't figure out how the scouts use it.

05-12-2006, 05:08 PM	#6
Hibber Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 27	I was leaning towards the 1-100 anyway, it's what I'm most used to. Way back in the Front Page Sports days.

05-13-2006, 04:17 PM	#9
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	I still use 1-10 just because it is closest to what older versions of the game used.

05-13-2006, 05:23 PM	#10
boilermaker All Star Starter Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 1,956	As a fan of FM and EHM, I'll shoot for uniformity....I'm going 1-20, myself. Since everyone is interested in knowing.

05-13-2006, 07:58 PM	#11
Vinny P. Banned Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,518 Infractions: 0/1 (4)	i lkike 1 - 100 myself. i just enjoy the clreaer picture of of how much young player develop. i enjoy watching players constantly improve throughout their career.

05-30-2006, 08:26 PM	#13
BIG Irish Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 163	Couldn't you just use a few more adjectives/decriptions and use 1-10. 2-8 just doesn't make sense to me. 0="No ability" 1="Extremely poor ability" 2="Poor ability" 3="Some ability at minor league level, but not fit for majors" 4="Below average major league ability 5="Satisfactory basic ability for majors, but not at all exceptional" 6="Above average major league abilty" 7="Some advanced abilities at major league level" 8="Advanced major league ability" 9="Outstanding superior major league ability" 10="Hall of Fame ability" 5 is still the middle number and therefore "average".