Realistic aging settings?

nauds3000 · 04-29-2013, 01:29 AM

All of my players ratings are dropping quite drastically between the ages of 29-31.

Matt Kemp alone lost 10 in every category at age 29, does anyone have more realistic aging settings they use?

Pacoheadley · 04-29-2013, 01:37 AM

Stuff like this happens in baseball all the time. How many players is this happening to?

zroberts1991 · 04-29-2013, 01:44 AM

I use the same ones I used in OOTP 13 and still get great results! The settings may seem drastic but they work. Most of my top players are still in their late 20's but guys will hang around longer and you'll get the occasional one playing until his 40's (rare but happens)

Batter age .250
Batter dev 1.000
Pitcher age .375
Pitcher dev .900

SunDevil · 04-29-2013, 01:45 AM

I have run 3 20 year tests from the MLB quickstart and have found the default aging and development setting much better than last year.

nauds3000 · 04-29-2013, 02:02 AM

all of them:

Adrian Gonzalez
Carl Crawford
Andre Ethier
Matt Kemp

all 29-31 range

JMDurron · 04-29-2013, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nauds3000

all of them:

Adrian Gonzalez
Carl Crawford
Andre Ethier
Matt Kemp

all 29-31 range

Well...yeah. The players who don't drop off at that age are more special than those who do. Players decline, particularly now with PED testing, earlier and more sharply than they did in the mid-90s and early-00s. This is why free agency is such a lousy way to acquire talent now in 2013. A particular player not aging gracefully is not evidence that there is a problem with OOTP's aging model.

RchW · 04-29-2013, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMDurron

A particular player not aging gracefully is not evidence that there is a problem with OOTP's aging model.

Submitted as evidence m'Lord is the entire Blue Jays roster in real life.

JMDurron · 04-29-2013, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW

Submitted as evidence m'Lord is the entire Blue Jays roster in real life.

See also: last year's Red Sox roster.

You know, the one that somebody took Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez from.

I don't think that OOTP has a good way to model a "Find the players who have the new, undetectable PEDs" system.

Aumakua · 04-29-2013, 02:30 PM

Moose hoof paste, just hit the market!

just rub it on your arms and chest

04-29-2013, 01:29 AM	#1
nauds3000 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 20	Realistic aging settings? All of my players ratings are dropping quite drastically between the ages of 29-31. Matt Kemp alone lost 10 in every category at age 29, does anyone have more realistic aging settings they use?

04-29-2013, 01:37 AM	#2
Pacoheadley All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Kincheloe, MI Posts: 518	Stuff like this happens in baseball all the time. How many players is this happening to?

04-29-2013, 01:44 AM	#3
zroberts1991 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 216	I use the same ones I used in OOTP 13 and still get great results! The settings may seem drastic but they work. Most of my top players are still in their late 20's but guys will hang around longer and you'll get the occasional one playing until his 40's (rare but happens) Batter age .250 Batter dev 1.000 Pitcher age .375 Pitcher dev .900

04-29-2013, 01:45 AM	#4
SunDevil Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 373	I have run 3 20 year tests from the MLB quickstart and have found the default aging and development setting much better than last year.

04-29-2013, 02:02 AM	#5
nauds3000 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 20	all of them: Adrian Gonzalez Carl Crawford Andre Ethier Matt Kemp all 29-31 range

04-29-2013, 02:30 PM	#9
Aumakua Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Flat lands Posts: 421	Moose hoof paste, just hit the market! just rub it on your arms and chest