Development system and recalc

[4maddux_cy's]

Can using these together prevent a player from falling off a cliff since they have real data left? Like could Dale Murphy have continued being an All Star type player or a Grady Sizemore from falling off like he did? I want my progression of players to be somewhat real but have these types of historical differences as well. Thanks!

[Reed]

Don't believe so. If they played that season in real life, then the recall engine kicks in at the beginning of the season, then based on development they may go to up or down some during the season.
If they missed the season in real life, then you are pretty much at the development engine and I think it takes into consideration their age and end of season ratings from the previous year.

[4maddux_cy's]

Should I turn off recalc then? Would that have say, Craig Biggio come into the world as a C or a 2B? With him having potential to turn into the HOFer he was?

[thehef]

I replied to this where you posted it in the OOTP 20 forum. I'll paste my reply here, too. Not sure if it will be helpful, but hopefully

Originally Posted by 4maddux_cy's

Can using these together prevent a player from falling off a cliff since they have real data left? Like could Dale Murphy have continued being an All Star type player or a Grady Sizemore from falling off like he did? I want my progression of players to be somewhat real but have these types of historical differences as well. Thanks!

Possibly. A 3- or 5-year Recalc should smooth out Murphy's descent (and his ascent), but could dilute some of his top-producing seasons.

Development on and set to a high number would be unpredictable (by definition). Recalc would bring him back to ratings based upon each new season; recalc off would take him in whatever direction the game decides: Murphy could take off or crash n burn. Or both at varying times.

If you're looking for Murphy to remain an all-star for a year or two longer, and not have a such a precipitous dropoff, then a 3- or 5-year recalc will likely accomplish that. Keep in mind, though, that not only are down years smoothed about by the great ones, but great ones are smoothed out by the down ones...

If, OTOH, you are looking for Murphy to remain an all-star well into his late-30's, then your best bet is to have development turned off and to edit his ratings. Development on and recalc off *might* accomplish this, but it would be just as likely to send him in the other direction.

I'd suggest you run a few tests and see if you like the results. Start with something like 3-year recalc, double weight of current stats, development set to 50. Devel at 50 will cause some players to deviate from their real-life performance, but not to shocking degrees. The 3-year recalc with double-weight will then bring players' ratings in line with the next season, but any real-life drop-offs or explosions should be smoothed out a bit, but not a lot.

Finally, I'll note that there others on this board who know this stuff better than I do. You might get some replies with more info or some different answers, from those who have tinkered with this stuff more than I have...

Good luck!

[Garlon]

You will not have issues with players getting their great seasoned smoothed out. Ty Cobb routinely bats over .400 in 1912 and I use 5-yr recalc for games. If you do not have players retire according to history then you will always have more talent in the league than there was and fewer big seasons from players.