Inaugural draft AI in Historic leagues - Page 2

actionjackson · 04-13-2018, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

Agreed that leaving it off looks a lot better than having it on.

I might agree with this, except that I saw Babe Ruth taken 8th overall in my historical random debut with it switched off. That's when I decided it was time to turn it back on.

Spritze has spoken in the Historical Database Issues thread, and yes the players pre-defined draft values were played around with after there were complaints that Babe Ruth was going #3 in his draft class (1913 - debut in 1914). This led to much tinkering, and has brought us to where we are now.

So my final recommendation is if you're playing as a human GM uncheck the pre-defined draft value for AI box, and if you don't take over a team (i.e. like me you're the commissioner/official historian/record keeper) leave it checked. I hope that makes sense. Also, leave it unchecked for inaugural and expansion drafts because a lot of those drafts have players who were great in them, who may be 36 or so, who you'll be forcing the AI to take earlier, when really they're past their prime.

Reed · 04-14-2018, 07:16 AM

Action, thanks for the info.
Started new league and left it off for inaugural draft. Very happy with results. Will turn Pre Defined draft values ON for amateur draft (since I control a team) and see if I can take advantage by focusing on hitters (dead ball era).

PS ran a test league with pre defined on and T Cobb was selected #2.
I still think Tinkers and Evers are more valuable than #11 and #12 but a part of the fun of baseball is to disagree.

actionjackson · 04-14-2018, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

Action, thanks for the info.
Started new league and left it off for inaugural draft. Very happy with results. Will turn Pre Defined draft values ON for amateur draft (since I control a team) and see if I can take advantage by focusing on hitters (dead ball era).

PS ran a test league with pre defined on and T Cobb was selected #2.
I still think Tinkers and Evers are more valuable than #11 and #12 but a part of the fun of baseball is to disagree.

Leave it off if you control a team, and on if you do not. Unless you want said advantage. In that case, leave it on.

Reed · 04-14-2018, 04:07 PM

Off it shall be since I do not want an advantage (even though I probably need one-ha) and I do control a team.

actionjackson · 04-14-2018, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

Off it shall be since I do not want an advantage (even though I probably need one-ha) and I do control a team.

Unless they "fix" it, which it sounds like they have no intention of doing. This appears to be the new M.O. for pre-defined draft values. Not sure I like it, but nothing can be done.

Scoman · 04-14-2018, 04:58 PM

Pre-defined draft values on is vital to the competitive balance of the AI in Historical play or its way to easy to dominate. With this on it ensures the AI is taking who they should. There is really no other substitute.

You would think this would be hard-coded based on draft value.

Scoman · 04-14-2018, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

Unless they "fix" it, which it sounds like they have no intention of doing. This appears to be the new M.O. for pre-defined draft values. Not sure I like it, but nothing can be done.

The more drafts I'm seeing with it off I'm not real happy with. This really needs to be fixed.

actionjackson · 04-14-2018, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scoman

Pre-defined draft values on is vital to the competitive balance of the AI in Historical play or its way to easy to dominate. With this on it ensures the AI is taking who they should. There is really no other substitute.

You would think this would be hard-coded based on draft value.

It is based on draft value, but they decided to change the draft values...Drastically. I agree it's important for competitive balance to have it checked, but I think it gives the human a bit of an advantage in its current incarnation. I could be wrong though. See post #105 (my question for Spritze) and #106 (Spritze's answer) in this thread.

Scoman · 04-14-2018, 05:57 PM

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=266901 This same issue had been lingering for quite some time. maybe markus needs to step in again and fix it right..

Scoman · 04-14-2018, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

It is based on draft value, but they decided to change the draft values...Drastically. I agree it's important for competitive balance to have it checked, but I think it gives the human a bit of an advantage in its current incarnation. I could be wrong though. See post #105 (my question for Spritze) and #106 (Spritze's answer) in this thread.

totally kills the immersion when this isn't right

Scoman · 04-14-2018, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

It is based on draft value, but they decided to change the draft values...Drastically. I agree it's important for competitive balance to have it checked, but I think it gives the human a bit of an advantage in its current incarnation. I could be wrong though. See post #105 (my question for Spritze) and #106 (Spritze's answer) in this thread.

Looks like they have tried to fix something that wasn't broken.....but now it is. All anyone would have to do is analyze some drafts and you can plainly see something is off.

Spritze · 04-14-2018, 10:34 PM

None of these posts spend any time explaining factually who they think is taken in the wrong place and who should be there instead. Since there are no specific examples put forth nothing can be adjusted.

Orcin · 04-14-2018, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spritze

None of these posts spend any time explaining factually who they think is taken in the wrong place and who should be there instead. Since there are no specific examples put forth nothing can be adjusted.

What about these?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

I usually play historical starting in 1901 and Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie are picked in the top 2 or 3. I just started a new league today, 1901, real stats and the entire 1st round selected by the AI were pitchers. Wagner was selected in the 2nd round and Lajoie selected in the 5th round.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radsmats

Yeah I just ran a draft league (random starts) where 38 y.o. Randy Johnson went first overall and Mickey Mantle age 22? 23? was available for the 13th pick.

actionjackson · 04-14-2018, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin

What about these?

Or you know...This thread in the bug reports section of the forum.

Spritze · 04-14-2018, 11:58 PM

Randy Johnsons draft value is number 51 all-time. Same as his uni number.

Mantle is #7 all time. Same as his uni number.

Random debut is a different animal than historical. Nothing I can do about that. Sorry.

Starting a league in 1901 will produce unexpected results as well since careers have started..

The only thing I can control are the actual draft values for actual drafts. I'll see if I can adjust those to the point where the Ruth crowd and you guys all hate on it equally.

actionjackson · 04-15-2018, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

I usually play historical starting in 1901 and Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie are picked in the top 2 or 3. I just started a new league today, 1901, real stats and the entire 1st round selected by the AI were pitchers. Wagner was selected in the 2nd round and Lajoie selected in the 5th round. This is why a couple years ago I started letting the AI do the inaugural draft for my team to prevent me from taking advantage.

Spritze, this quote is not talking about random debut. It is talking about straight, vanilla historical, as is the thread I linked to. If you don't think Wagner going in the second round, or Lajoie going in the 5th round is an issue, I don't know what to say, except that I'm baffled.

Spritze · 04-15-2018, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

Spritze, this quote is not talking about random debut. It is talking about straight, vanilla historical, as is the thread I linked to. If you don't think Wagner going in the second round, or Lajoie going in the 5th round is an issue, I don't know what to say, except that I'm baffled.

They debut in 1896 and 1897 not 1901. That means they are adjusted in some way by the game that I have no knowledge of. Same with random debuts. Neither are things I can do anything about.

Wagner goes 2nd overall in his 1897 draft
Lajoie goes 3rd overall in his 1896 draft
Both went #1 in the league I am currently playing for fun so it can vary

It appears these challenges are not database challenges but are caused by the game and its procedures. Since lajoie and wagner are 5-6 years older by 1901 perhaps that is a cause? Inaugural draft might not use pre-defined draft numbers at all. random debut neither. You are just assuming it does despite all the contrary evidence.

Consider that perhaps the game does not work in the way you think it does in these situations. You may be mixing apples and oranges and expecting a figgy pudding to result.

Reed · 04-15-2018, 09:17 AM

Amateur draft with Pre defined values check. Ok, I just feel there should be some tweaking so it won’t appear to be top heavy with pitchers. For example, IMHO

1901 amateur draft Tinker is definitely more valuable career wise than McFarland. I feel Evers and Tinker (and probably other hitters) should be moved up by at least 5 spots (currently 11 & 13).

1902 example. I would say H. Lovett had a more valuable career than Moren and Jones. Also I noticed of the 32 first picks, 25 were pitchers. Maybe that was a pitcher dominated season.

1903 I think actually had a good mix between pitchers and hitters the 1st couple rounds.

1904. Ty Cobb goes number 2 (although Cicotte is very good but more valuable than Cobb?). Also later in the round Check and Thielman go before Hummel and Hinchman.

1905. Eddie Collins goes #3. Should go ahead of Coombs at least, maybe not Adams. Also further down in the draft Murray is definitely more valuable than Barger and Hartzell has a better career than Doyle (IMO).

That is as far as I looked. A side observation, with so many pitchers being drafted early, it seems like late 1st round/early second round pitchers with a couple decent years are being selected ahead of or at the same time as batters with 5 or 6 decent years.

Now this is where I show my ignorance and will get flamed (if I am not flamed already). Why not just take baseball references career WAR values and use them for pre defined draft values?

Spritze · 04-15-2018, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reed

Now this is where I show my ignorance and will get flamed (if I am not flamed already). Why not just take baseball references career WAR values and use them for pre defined draft values?

Consider yourself flambé worthy.

Do you have MLB WAR for all major, minor, negro, Cuban, Japanese, etc. players available? You perhaps need to think beyond your own little MLB box? This is only the extremely obvious reason. I can come up with three more in under a minutes worth of thought.

Scoman · 04-15-2018, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spritze

Consider yourself flambé worthy.

Do you have MLB WAR for all major, minor, negro, Cuban, Japanese, etc. players available? You perhaps need to think beyond your own little MLB box? This is only the extremely obvious reason. I can come up with three more in under a minutes worth of thought.

Your smart ass answers get real old man ....

The default historical database has no minor, negro, Cuban, Japanese, etc. And that is what we are talking about here....

You asked for examples and he gave you a few just in the first few years,then you still belittle the man.

Maybe someone needs to look at how your speaking to paying customers?

There is a problem with the Default Historical Database AI drafting w/ pre-defined Draft value for AI on,whether you want to admit it or not.

I really think somebody needs to make Markus aware of this issue.

04-14-2018, 04:58 PM	#26
Scoman All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: heath ohio Posts: 1,771	Pre-defined draft values on is vital to the competitive balance of the AI in Historical play or its way to easy to dominate. With this on it ensures the AI is taking who they should. There is really no other substitute. You would think this would be hard-coded based on draft value. Last edited by Scoman; 04-14-2018 at 05:02 PM.

04-14-2018, 05:57 PM	#29
Scoman All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: heath ohio Posts: 1,771	http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=266901 This same issue had been lingering for quite some time. maybe markus needs to step in again and fix it right.. Last edited by Scoman; 04-14-2018 at 06:06 PM.

04-14-2018, 10:34 PM	#32
Spritze OOTP Historical Czar Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Bothell Wa Posts: 7,254	None of these posts spend any time explaining factually who they think is taken in the wrong place and who should be there instead. Since there are no specific examples put forth nothing can be adjusted. __________________ It's madness, madness, I tell you! For the love of God, don't do it!

04-14-2018, 11:58 PM	#35
Spritze OOTP Historical Czar Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Bothell Wa Posts: 7,254	Randy Johnsons draft value is number 51 all-time. Same as his uni number. Mantle is #7 all time. Same as his uni number. Random debut is a different animal than historical. Nothing I can do about that. Sorry. Starting a league in 1901 will produce unexpected results as well since careers have started.. The only thing I can control are the actual draft values for actual drafts. I'll see if I can adjust those to the point where the Ruth crowd and you guys all hate on it equally. __________________ It's madness, madness, I tell you! For the love of God, don't do it! Last edited by Spritze; 04-15-2018 at 12:09 AM.

04-14-2018, 07:16 AM	#22
Reed All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,946	Action, thanks for the info. Started new league and left it off for inaugural draft. Very happy with results. Will turn Pre Defined draft values ON for amateur draft (since I control a team) and see if I can take advantage by focusing on hitters (dead ball era). PS ran a test league with pre defined on and T Cobb was selected #2. I still think Tinkers and Evers are more valuable than #11 and #12 but a part of the fun of baseball is to disagree.

04-14-2018, 04:07 PM	#24
Reed All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,946	Off it shall be since I do not want an advantage (even though I probably need one-ha) and I do control a team.

04-15-2018, 09:17 AM	#38
Reed All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,946	Amateur draft with Pre defined values check. Ok, I just feel there should be some tweaking so it won’t appear to be top heavy with pitchers. For example, IMHO 1901 amateur draft Tinker is definitely more valuable career wise than McFarland. I feel Evers and Tinker (and probably other hitters) should be moved up by at least 5 spots (currently 11 & 13). 1902 example. I would say H. Lovett had a more valuable career than Moren and Jones. Also I noticed of the 32 first picks, 25 were pitchers. Maybe that was a pitcher dominated season. 1903 I think actually had a good mix between pitchers and hitters the 1st couple rounds. 1904. Ty Cobb goes number 2 (although Cicotte is very good but more valuable than Cobb?). Also later in the round Check and Thielman go before Hummel and Hinchman. 1905. Eddie Collins goes #3. Should go ahead of Coombs at least, maybe not Adams. Also further down in the draft Murray is definitely more valuable than Barger and Hartzell has a better career than Doyle (IMO). That is as far as I looked. A side observation, with so many pitchers being drafted early, it seems like late 1st round/early second round pitchers with a couple decent years are being selected ahead of or at the same time as batters with 5 or 6 decent years. Now this is where I show my ignorance and will get flamed (if I am not flamed already). Why not just take baseball references career WAR values and use them for pre defined draft values?