Tanking?

[HRBaker]

Originally Posted by David Watts

So, if I let my team that was promoted to Gold a couple weeks ago wither into oblivion, am I tanking?

No, if you ignore your team the AI will do the best it can. "Depleting" your team, however, is a different story - thus "tanking".

[CapeCodCranberry]

Originally Posted by <Pion>

Not sure what you mean by this. I don't see how I traded anything for anything unless you're referring to the temporary reduction in defense while the player is training.

So you made a decision with a known outcome by you (but since you didnt know my outcome, made an assumption by me?).

Originally Posted by <Pion>

Both guys that I trained ended up as better defenders than the people that had started there. I lost some offense at one position, but that was more than offset by the improvement of the defense. Guys that used to have an ERA of 4.50 to 5.00 are now 3.50 to 4.00.

On my FTP team, I made another attempt at understanding how this game works by installing 90+ DEF players throughout my infield, and C Johnson (136 DEF) as my C and saw my ERA go up. So, Id say variance - at its highest level (as usual).

Originally Posted by <Pion>

Yes, or in my case having two very good defending SS and training one to play 2B that ends up being better than the previous starter. Though the offense took a hit, the defense made up for it. The other move was to train a tall 3Bman sitting on the bench to play 1B. Ended up improving not only defense but also offense at that position.

If youre saying you made 2 changes @ SS, and moved a 3B to 1st for your scenario, than we have very different scenarios. Also, might I add, lets say you had Andrelton Simmons at each of those positions you mentioned you swapped out, then you would still be fielding defenders with a 20-40 DEF rating (worse for defenders below his level of defense) for at least most of a season. Essentially punting DEF. If thats the case, than we are simply debating semantics, and the fact that you prefer your way vs mine.

Originally Posted by <Pion>

Not sure what you mean by this. I don't see how I traded anything for anything unless you're referring to the temporary reduction in defense while the player is training.

There are countless articles on here on how to build "championship level" teams on just DEF alone, so Im going to assume that DEF is as equally, if not more important than offense...

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by CapeCodCranberry

So you made a decision with a known outcome by you (but since you didnt know my outcome, made an assumption by me?).

No assumption made.

Originally Posted by CapeCodCranberry

On my FTP team, I made another attempt at understanding how this game works by installing 90+ DEF players throughout my infield, and C Johnson (136 DEF) as my C and saw my ERA go up. So, Id say variance - at its highest level (as usual).

I go based on rank within the league when talking about my team. They went from last to top 3 consistently without significant variance in both ERA and Defensive Efficiency rank.

Originally Posted by CapeCodCranberry

If youre saying you made 2 changes @ SS, and moved a 3B to 1st for your scenario, than we have very different scenarios. Also, might I add, lets say you had Andrelton Simmons at each of those positions you mentioned you swapped out, then you would still be fielding defenders with a 20-40 DEF rating (worse for defenders below his level of defense) for at least most of a season. Essentially punting DEF. If thats the case, than we are simply debating semantics, and the fact that you prefer your way vs mine.

What I did was acceptable according to the Devs. They don't mind if you are training players to make the team better. Not a violation of the ToS in what I did as it has specifically been approved by Devs. Nothing to do with my preference, just doing what is accepted by the games owners.

Originally Posted by CapeCodCranberry

There are countless articles on here on how to build "championship level" teams on just DEF alone, so Im going to assume that DEF is as equally, if not more important than offense...

I personally feel it is more important, just my opinion. Thus the reason for improving players within the allowed tools available.

[kingcharlesxii]

Originally Posted by <Pion>

What I did was acceptable according to the Devs. They don't mind if you are training players to make the team better. Not a violation of the ToS in what I did as it has specifically been approved by Devs. Nothing to do with my preference, just doing what is accepted by the games owners.

So this is one that really doesn't make sense to me and I consider it just as much a problem as the other examples brought up in this thread. OOTP severely penalizes players playing out of position until they get experience. Effectively, you're giving away wins to the other teams in your league until that point. Is that any better than playing a strong silver player that is in the correct position? Why is one tanking but not the other? You can argue the player learning the position might be better next season but you'll probably be in a league with different teams next season, which is the same as if you got demoted.

Is selling your best player for points any worse? What about selling your two best players to save up for a star that you know you can't afford until next season?

It's really a lot more gray than you're making out to be. Honestly, I wouldn't be upset by CapeCodCranberry's team being in a different division in my league any more than a team training players at key defensive positions.

[mcdog512]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

So this is one that really doesn't make sense to me and I consider it just as much a problem as the other examples brought up in this thread. OOTP severely penalizes players playing out of position until they get experience. Effectively, you're giving away wins to the other teams in your league until that point. Is that any better than playing a strong silver player that is in the correct position? Why is one tanking but not the other? You can argue the player learning the position might be better next season but you'll probably be in a league with different teams next season, which is the same as if you got demoted.

Is selling your best player for points any worse? What about selling your two best players to save up for a star that you know you can't afford until next season?

It's really a lot more gray than you're making out to be. Honestly, I wouldn't be upset by CapeCodCranberry's team being in a different division in my league any more than a team training players at key defensive positions.

Tanking is when you ****can most of your players for complete garbage. I don't think it's worth arguing about selling your best players to raise funds.

If I started selling my best players would I field Iron cards? I can't, they were all auto sold.....not saved for a tank job.

[kingcharlesxii]

An all-iron team is different than the one that was brought up as the example. I think everybody would agree that is tanking.

That said, a player playing out of position could easily put out less value than an iron player. Don't put too much value on card ratings. There are bronzes that can play well at Diamond and Silvers that can play at Perfect.

EDIT: Basically, what I'm saying is that a team that is making the 1899 Cleveland Spiders look like a quality ballclub, clearly that's tanking. I'm not sure if I'd say a team with a decent amount of non-irons that loses 100 games is tanking. I've said my piece, feel free to disagree. Ultimately it's up to the OOTP crew to make that distinction and I don't envy them finding that fine line.

[mcdog512]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

An all-iron team is different than the one that was brought up as the example. I think everybody would agree that is tanking.

That said, a player playing out of position could easily put out less value than an iron player. Don't put too much value on card ratings. There are bronzes that can play well at Diamond and Silvers that can play at Perfect.

EDIT: Basically, what I'm saying is that a team that is making the 1899 Cleveland Spiders look like a quality ballclub, clearly that's tanking. I'm not sure if I'd say a team with a decent amount of non-irons that loses 100 games is tanking. I've said my piece, feel free to disagree. Ultimately it's up to the OOTP crew to make that distinction and I don't envy them finding that fine line.

I would agree with that.

Cheers.

[bobbycockstrong]

I dont think you will find many people that like to see "tanking", but the only argument I see is that it sucks because someone that is not you gets to play the "tanking" team 19 times or whatever.

But how is that any different than when you get stuck in a division with 4 teams having 90+ wins and two of those teams miss out on playoffs? And then some other division has 1st place with 84 wins?

Its the luck of the draw any time a season starts really, either way. Sometimes you have really strong opponents in your div and its tougher for you since you have to play them 19 times and sometimes you get an awful team that you get to play 19 times.

And you cant play the "well its against the rules if you arent trying to win" - in capecod's case you could argue that he is trying to retool his team to win later instead of this season, and he did say he actually gave it a whirl for 5 seasons to no avail before adopting this approach to retool the team. I think thats perfectly reasonable, no pun intended

Meanwhile, completely separate train of though - this is a baseball simulator. PT mode is free and there are no prizes. There is literally nothing on the line, other than I guess to say you won such and such league. Many people like random things about OOTP like historical leagues, seeing how so and so would do in such and such scenario. What is X and Y played on the same team. Etc. If someone wants to field an all X team and see how they did in perfect league, why cant they? Or if they want to send a band of bronze and silver misfits out there against "perfect level" competition, why cant they? Or if they decide the expensive team they built just isnt cutting it, and they sell most of their players so they can buy other players or buy packs or change their team concept, why cant they?

Who is any individual here to dictate what another can and cant do for their enjoyment of the game. If they managed to get their team to perfect league, then havent they earned the right to do whatever they want for a season? If they truly are "tanking" then they will be out of the league next season anyways.

I personally think its fine for people to do whatever they want with their teams, within reason (as in nothing that seems like an exploit or intentional up and down league hopping over and over). There is no reset/rebuild option, so people have to take matters into their own hands if they are trying to do that. And if one of these teams happens to be in your league/division, deal with it. People have to deal with mega teams when they start out and play them when they are in bronze, silver, etc. Thats not fair either. Nor is it when the luck of the draw places 4 90 win teams in your division. Or various other scenarios.

In capecod's case here though, I dont think he is doing anything wrong as described by his post.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

So this is one that really doesn't make sense to me and I consider it just as much a problem as the other examples brought up in this thread. OOTP severely penalizes players playing out of position until they get experience. Effectively, you're giving away wins to the other teams in your league until that point. Is that any better than playing a strong silver player that is in the correct position? Why is one tanking but not the other? You can argue the player learning the position might be better next season but you'll probably be in a league with different teams next season, which is the same as if you got demoted.

Is selling your best player for points any worse? What about selling your two best players to save up for a star that you know you can't afford until next season?

It's really a lot more gray than you're making out to be. Honestly, I wouldn't be upset by CapeCodCranberry's team being in a different division in my league any more than a team training players at key defensive positions.

It is specifically built into the game engine to be able to train. Are you suggesting it be eliminated?


Note - In the year I trained two players, my win% dropped from 45% to 43%.
The year I trained, my ERA went up about a tenth and the team lost a few extra games. Not too much of an impact. It didn't take many games for them to be better than the guys they replaced, and by the end of the season, they were much better and canceled out most of what had been lost it seems.

[kingcharlesxii]

Originally Posted by <Pion>

It is specifically built into the game engine to be able to train. Are you suggesting it be eliminated?

Note - In the year I trained two players, my win% dropped from 45% to 43%.

Actually, yes. I'm not sure why the cards should be able to learn new positions when all other development is off. I've mentioned before that it seems really odd to only be able to change that one aspect of the cards in this mode.

How many WAR did you lose at the position you were training though? I'd bet that putting an iron instead of training would drop your win % a similar amount. I'd test out that hypothesis myself but I don't want to be accused of tanking.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

Actually, yes. I'm not sure why the cards should be able to learn new positions when all other development is off. I've mentioned before that it seems really odd to only be able to change that one aspect of the cards in this mode.

How many WAR did you lose at the position you were training though? I'd bet that putting an iron instead of training would drop your win % a similar amount. I'd test out that hypothesis myself but I don't want to be accused of tanking.

I didn't lose any WAR, but rather gained...

The year before training, at 2B/SS it was 1.8/-0.3
The year during training, 2.9/0.3
The year after training, 2.1/2.0
The 2nd year after, 3.0/1.8

So the net total each of the four years was 1.5, 3.2, 4.1, 4.8

As for 1B, the four years (before, during, two years after) followed a similar pattern with 0.4/0.8/1.2/1.9

Net effect of the two trainings, WAR went from 1.9 before, 4.0 during, and 5.3 and 6.7 after.

I don't think an iron in place of them could have done the same. As for you being accused of tanking when training, it was already stated that the Devs gave the OK to it, so feel free.

[Kushiel]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

So this is one that really doesn't make sense to me and I consider it just as much a problem as the other examples brought up in this thread. OOTP severely penalizes players playing out of position until they get experience. Effectively, you're giving away wins to the other teams in your league until that point. Is that any better than playing a strong silver player that is in the correct position? Why is one tanking but not the other? You can argue the player learning the position might be better next season but you'll probably be in a league with different teams next season, which is the same as if you got demoted.

Is selling your best player for points any worse? What about selling your two best players to save up for a star that you know you can't afford until next season?

It's really a lot more gray than you're making out to be. Honestly, I wouldn't be upset by CapeCodCranberry's team being in a different division in my league any more than a team training players at key defensive positions.

Can you not see the difference in training a player to play another position to make your team better in the future and losing on purpose? One is for improvement while the other is, "Oh poor me. I screwed up building my team and everybody does not get a trophy. Let me lose on purpose so I can go back down a notch or two and then put my starters back in."

When you tank, losing on purpose, you adversely effect the entire OOTP community.

[Kushiel]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

Who is any individual here to dictate what another can and cant do for their enjoyment of the game. If they managed to get their team to perfect league, then havent they earned the right to do whatever they want for a season? If they truly are "tanking" then they will be out of the league next season anyways.

The rules as outlined by OOTP have the right to tell you what you can and can't do. The rules clearly state that you cannot lose on purpose. Players here are only saying to play be the rules. Next question?

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by Kushiel

The rules as outlined by OOTP have the right to tell you what you can and can't do. The rules clearly state that you cannot lose on purpose. Players here are only saying to play be the rules. Next question?

I dont know where these alleged rules are, but did they say you "cannot lose on purpose" or that you need to make a good faith effort to win? Those are two different thing. Anyways, in this case the player in question says they are trying to rebuild to win (having lost/done poor 5 straight seasons). Sometimes you have to lose now to improve your chances to win in the future.

There is blatantly trying to lose (all irons in wrong positions, multiple seasons of .300 win %), and there is trying rebuilding your team. There is a difference. And sometimes there is no option to rebuild without selling players/losing/whatever.

As I said above, im all about taking action against people who exploit/show a pattern of abuse. Im not in favor punishing someone for a single season where they are trying to rebuild.

I haven't seen any "rules" against rebuilding.

*EDIT* also, just to note - there is no clear, easily accessible "rules". I couldnt find anything in the game client, nor if there a clear rules post here on the forums. Maybe some dev mentioned something in a one off post somewhere, but thats not easily accessible to all players. Even if there was a rules post on the forums, you assume all players read the the forums. I even tried to search for OOTP terms of service to see if there is anything in there, but I cant find it anywhere. The point is, there are these alleged rules - but the rules arent clearly stated in an accessible place from what I can tell. Also, I would expect many of the people who random "tank" probably dont even use the forums or have a clue whether its against the rules or not.

[kingcharlesxii]

Originally Posted by Kushiel

Can you not see the difference in training a player to play another position to make your team better in the future and losing on purpose? One is for improvement while the other is, "Oh poor me. I screwed up building my team and everybody does not get a trophy. Let me lose on purpose so I can go back down a notch or two and then put my starters back in."

When you tank, losing on purpose, you adversely effect the entire OOTP community.

If you look at the single season effect, which is what I am talking about, it's the same. You are intentionally making your team worse in the short term, which affects the results the same as if you played a much lower rated player (OOTP has always been brutal to players learning a new position, to the point where you're often losing 2-3 wins on defense). Unless you checked the box to stay with the same teams, you'll be in a different league with different teams next season. Effectively, for competitive reasons, only the single season results should matter to teams in your league. For a single season it's basically the same as playing an iron in a starting position - they'll likely be at or below replacement level for your team.

I'm certainly not advocating tanking with all irons (as I said earlier) but there's no denying that you're weakening your team in-season with training a new position. That's why I'd like to see it removed. There's a reason you don't see similar modes in other games allowing this. The OOTP staff has blessed training as okay so clearly you can do that. However, I'm hoping they revisit allowing training in 20.

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

If you look at the single season effect, which is what I am talking about, it's the same. You are intentionally making your team worse in the short term, which affects the results the same as if you played a much lower rated player (OOTP has always been brutal to players learning a new position, to the point where you're often losing 2-3 wins on defense). Unless you checked the box to stay with the same teams, you'll be in a different league with different teams next season. Effectively, for competitive reasons, only the single season results should matter to teams in your league. For a single season it's basically the same as playing an iron in a starting position - they'll likely be at or below replacement level for your team.

I'm certainly not advocating tanking with all irons (as I said earlier) but there's no denying that you're weakening your team in-season with training a new position. That's why I'd like to see it removed. There's a reason you don't see similar modes in other games allowing this. The OOTP staff has blessed training as okay so clearly you can do that. However, I'm hoping they revisit allowing training in 20.

I get your point, it makes perfect sense to me. But some folks just dont get/see comparative examples. Yes, its different, but as you say the general principle is the same. You are making your team worse in the short term, to win/improve later. Just like the guy this post is about who is trying to rebuild his team. But apparently its ok to do one (positional training), and not the other (rebuild/retool).

[HRBaker]

I think we have reached the point where we pose the question to the OOTP staff. What is defined as "tanking"; what are it's limits, where are these descriptions posted, and what is the punishment, if any.

We can go around in circles forever and we're never going to find a resolution by ourselves.

If the Devs are ok not having some kind of reset or rebuild function, then they are going to have to define clearly what "tanking" is, or is not.

[old timer]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

If you look at the single season effect, which is what I am talking about, it's the same. You are intentionally making your team worse in the short term, which affects the results the same as if you played a much lower rated player (OOTP has always been brutal to players learning a new position, to the point where you're often losing 2-3 wins on defense). Unless you checked the box to stay with the same teams, you'll be in a different league with different teams next season. Effectively, for competitive reasons, only the single season results should matter to teams in your league. For a single season it's basically the same as playing an iron in a starting position - they'll likely be at or below replacement level for your team.

I'm certainly not advocating tanking with all irons (as I said earlier) but there's no denying that you're weakening your team in-season with training a new position. That's why I'd like to see it removed. There's a reason you don't see similar modes in other games allowing this. The OOTP staff has blessed training as okay so clearly you can do that. However, I'm hoping they revisit allowing training in 20.

I only know how it's been for me, but my players that I trained at positions where they were either not rated at all or had low ratings there, still had a solid WAR for that season. But that was probably because I was retraining guys who were very strong defensively and were able to train to a high level at their new position quickly.

I really hope they don't take the training option away since it can be used in a way that will not only improve your team in the long run, but even in the short run, your team can still do quite well (in each season I trained more than one player, I either made the playoffs or nearly did). Obviously, how well you do in the short run depends on lots of factors, like how well matched they are for the new position and how many you are training at once.

Edit: As an example, I'm pretty sure Willie McGee (82 OVR) didn't have a rating at LF nor RF (the one currently in the AH didn't and I don't remember mine having ratings there). So when I trained him in LF, he still had a 4.4 WAR in 128 games played. Of course, he had a great year offensively, but still, his defense wasn't even that bad.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

If you look at the single season effect, which is what I am talking about, it's the same. You are intentionally making your team worse in the short term, which affects the results the same as if you played a much lower rated player (OOTP has always been brutal to players learning a new position, to the point where you're often losing 2-3 wins on defense). Unless you checked the box to stay with the same teams, you'll be in a different league with different teams next season. Effectively, for competitive reasons, only the single season results should matter to teams in your league. For a single season it's basically the same as playing an iron in a starting position - they'll likely be at or below replacement level for your team.

I'm certainly not advocating tanking with all irons (as I said earlier) but there's no denying that you're weakening your team in-season with training a new position. That's why I'd like to see it removed. There's a reason you don't see similar modes in other games allowing this. The OOTP staff has blessed training as okay so clearly you can do that. However, I'm hoping they revisit allowing training in 20.

You asked for the WAR of the players trained and can see that training them did not hurt but even helped the team even in the one season they did train. Not sure how that even compares or can be seen as bad.

For the record... The team has two perfects, two diamonds and 10 golds on their reserve roster and plays silvers, bronzes and irons in their place. They went from 80-82 to winning 23% of their games,

[zrog2000]

Originally Posted by HRBaker

I think we have reached the point where we pose the question to the OOTP staff. What is defined as "tanking"; what are it's limits, where are these descriptions posted, and what is the punishment, if any.

We can go around in circles forever and we're never going to find a resolution by ourselves.

If the Devs are ok not having some kind of reset or rebuild function, then they are going to have to define clearly what "tanking" is, or is not.

It really is pathetic that people can't freaking figure it out themselves. Why do people have to push rules to the limit?

Really if you're so tired of a team, just leave it the way it is and start a new one or quit playing.