trading preferences REALISTIC

[xx2khazard]

I'm curious ive never in a thread here seen someone recommend the setting favor veterens, I ask because its unrealistically hard dumping a vet making money for ex: a win now team who needs a LF wont take nelson cruz not even for a half star 36 year old scrub... I understand money being a problem but that's just utterly ridiculous so does anyone play on that setting and What is a REALISTIC combination of trading preferences NOT the hardest unless its realistic. I'm looking for realism not difficulty. ANY thoughts on my comment is well appreciated I expect rapid no hostile answers from this healthy and active community.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by xx2khazard

I'm curious ive never in a thread here seen someone recommend the setting favor veterens, I ask because its unrealistically hard dumping a vet making money for ex: a win now team who needs a LF wont take nelson cruz not even for a half star 36 year old scrub... I understand money being a problem but that's just utterly ridiculous so does anyone play on that setting and What is a REALISTIC combination of trading preferences NOT the hardest unless its realistic. I'm looking for realism not difficulty. ANY thoughts on my comment is well appreciated I expect rapid no hostile answers from this healthy and active community.

Well, I look at the main choice here as Trading DIFFICULTY (which, by the way, has swung back toward Average as being the choice of most folks - the developers beefed it up recently - with Hard being for purists and Very Hard being for masochists).

To tell you the truth, I've never moved Trading PREFERENCE off of Neutral, myself. To me, once I have satisfied myself that I have the correct degree of difficulty, it seems like a cheat to then tell the AI, "Oh, by the way, even though I gave you an advantage by setting it to Hard difficulty, I am going to suit myself by making you more interested in veterans because I personally favor prospects."

Maybe you don't see that as a cheat, and I can respect your point of view. So then, consider it to be a game style choice instead. Do you indeed like prospects (which I definitely favor, so if I set my AI to like veterans, I would be feeling guilty)? Then play the game your way.

Instead, you may like dealing with proven players because prospects can fizzle (which I definitely hate, but I also love the thrill of seeing one out of five/ten/fifteen/whatever really blossom into a star). Then play the game that way.

Long story made short, I see Trading PREFERENCE as either a cheat or a game playing style choice. And if you want my recommendation as to what is REALISTIC, I would say Neutral. What major league GM establishes and telegraphs to the rest of the league that he favors prospects or favors veterans? Don't you normally see GMs trading for EITHER according to whatever will help the team? Don't you see GM's favoring prospects when their teams are doing well at the moment, and veterans when their teams need a bit of a boost to "win it all now"?

[xx2khazard]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Well, I look at the main choice here as Trading DIFFICULTY (which, by the way, has swung back toward Average as being the choice of most folks - the developers beefed it up recently - with Hard being for purists and Very Hard being for masochists).

To tell you the truth, I've never moved Trading PREFERENCE off of Neutral, myself. To me, once I have satisfied myself that I have the correct degree of difficulty, it seems like a cheat to then tell the AI, "Oh, by the way, even though I gave you an advantage by setting it to Hard difficulty, I am going to suit myself by making you more interested in veterans because I personally favor prospects."

Maybe you don't see that as a cheat, and I can respect your point of view. So then, consider it to be a game style choice instead. Do you indeed like prospects (which I definitely favor, so if I set my AI to like veterans, I would be feeling guilty)? Then play the game your way.

Instead, you may like dealing with proven players because prospects can fizzle (which I definitely hate, but I also love the thrill of seeing one out of five/ten/fifteen/whatever really blossom into a star). Then play the game that way.

Long story made short, I see Trading PREFERENCE as either a cheat or a game playing style choice. And if you want my recommendation as to what is REALISTIC, I would say Neutral. What major league GM establishes and telegraphs to the rest of the league that he favors prospects or favors veterans? Don't you normally see GMs trading for EITHER according to whatever will help the team? Don't you see GM's favoring prospects when their teams are doing well at the moment, and veterans when their teams need a bit of a boost to "win it all now"?

Interesting take on the preference setting, so I take it you use normal and neutral? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[IsaacR]

I use it as part of my league's evolution. For example, if a bunch of young guys just made it up and tore up the league, I'd set it to favor prospects for a couple years, as that's what would happen in real life. Then it'd bump back to neutral. The opposite would be if the vets are the best players and routine MVPs, and I set it to favor vets.
For example, for 2-3 years, some of the best prospects I had ever seen in OOTP were making the bigs and tearing it up, led by my center fielder and former first overall pick Jimmy Wilson. It was so ridiculous that the championship winner one year had only 1 guy over 30 and 3 guys over 27. For about 4 years I had it to favor prospects, before moving it back to neutral after some bad drafts and not-so-stellar debuts. Now, the same prospects who tore up the league 8-9 years earlier are hitting their 30s, yet still are very, very good. I've moved it to favor vets, since that's what would likely happen in real life. Once these guys hit the rapid decline that comes after 35, I'll move it back to neutral.
Not suggesting this to anyone, but just sharing it.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by xx2khazard

Interesting take on the preference setting, so I take it you use normal and neutral? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, right now I am satisfied with normal (that is, average) trading difficulty and neutral trading preference.

For a while, I was playing with hard trading difficulty but that does not seem realistic. Some of us view it as a challenge but I don't see it as realistic because the AI drives too hard a bargain, like insisting on a top starter plus another decent player plus draft choices in exchange for a utility infielder. Nobody in the real world would consistently do that and still be welcome at the bargaining table.

Just a little while ago, some of us were discussing trading difficulty and a few mentioned using the hard setting but, acting as commissioner, being able to "force" a trade which seemed fair all around. That is, the other team benefited as well and equally. I did this a few times but felt guilty when I did force a few trades in that, did I do enough research to justify my decision as judge and jury?

So, I have regressed from hard difficulty to average. For now. If I feel that I am dominating (as I used to with average trading difficulty), I will set it back to hard for a while. So far, though, average seems to be doing the trick; I have driven what I thought have been tough but fair deals.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by IsaacR

I use it as part of my league's evolution. For example, if a bunch of young guys just made it up and tore up the league, I'd set it to favor prospects for a couple years, as that's what would happen in real life. Then it'd bump back to neutral. The opposite would be if the vets are the best players and routine MVPs, and I set it to favor vets.
For example, for 2-3 years, some of the best prospects I had ever seen in OOTP were making the bigs and tearing it up, led by my center fielder and former first overall pick Jimmy Wilson. It was so ridiculous that the championship winner one year had only 1 guy over 30 and 3 guys over 27. For about 4 years I had it to favor prospects, before moving it back to neutral after some bad drafts and not-so-stellar debuts. Now, the same prospects who tore up the league 8-9 years earlier are hitting their 30s, yet still are very, very good. I've moved it to favor vets, since that's what would likely happen in real life. Once these guys hit the rapid decline that comes after 35, I'll move it back to neutral.
Not suggesting this to anyone, but just sharing it.

Isaac, thanks. You brought to light one other aspect of this setting that I completely missed: using it to shape the evolution and nature of your league. I was looking at it only as an offset to your own style, like, if you favor prospects, you want the AI to favor veterans.

xx2khazard asks what is realistic, however, and for that I will stick by what I have been saying.

[Phantom9in]

Now that we have GMs with personality types(favors young players/veterans) we should get rid of the favors prospects/veterans for trade options. Keep the Hard/easy option though so people can play around and have fun.

[darkcloud4579]

Originally Posted by xx2khazard

I'm curious ive never in a thread here seen someone recommend the setting favor veterens, I ask because its unrealistically hard dumping a vet making money for ex: a win now team who needs a LF wont take nelson cruz not even for a half star 36 year old scrub... I understand money being a problem but that's just utterly ridiculous so does anyone play on that setting and What is a REALISTIC combination of trading preferences NOT the hardest unless its realistic. I'm looking for realism not difficulty. ANY thoughts on my comment is well appreciated I expect rapid no hostile answers from this healthy and active community.

I do recommend favor veterans, in fact, I do heavily favor veterans. Also if you want the AI to offer you stuff for players, you need to put the trading preferences on very easy. This is a relatively new occurrence for me, I used to play differently. But I like how the game operates now and the kinds of offers that get sent to me.

I've found on very easy, you get all sorts of offers and then you can choose what you want to do. Most of the time, in real life, trades aren't 1 for 1, they include more players. If you put it on very easy and then shop a player, you should get some interest unless he's over the hill, terrible or has a bad contract and even then...depending on the time of year, there should be some interest.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by Phantom9in

Now that we have GMs with personality types(favors young players/veterans) we should get rid of the favors prospects/veterans for trade options. Keep the Hard/easy option though so people can play around and have fun.

Both have always been in the game.

On a favor prospect setting a gm who favors vets will still favor vets just not as much as he would with a general setting thats favoring vets. Switching the setting do not make everyone the same it just tips the scale in a more favorable direction.

It people want to play around and have their fun well then they have the option to change settings as they see fit.

[nmain]

I don't get trading. On Very Hard/Hard I looked to trade Andrew McCutchen to the Nationals. They won't even accept an offer of McCutchen for their starting CF who is 24 and only 2 stars. He is terrible. They also have 26 million available so money is not the problem. I only attempted this trade to see if they would, because I cant seem to find anyone that wants him.

[Rain King]

Why don't you want him?

[tcoots423]

Originally Posted by nmain

I don't get trading. On Very Hard/Hard I looked to trade Andrew McCutchen to the Nationals. They won't even accept an offer of McCutchen for their starting CF who is 24 and only 2 stars. He is terrible. They also have 26 million available so money is not the problem. I only attempted this trade to see if they would, because I cant seem to find anyone that wants him.

How old and good is Cutch at this moment? Whats his contract like?

[nmain]

Originally Posted by tcoots423

How old and good is Cutch at this moment? Whats his contract like?

http://i.imgur.com/I3DMRSz.jpg

Since its only in the second year he is still on his real current contract

2016 29 Pittsburgh Pirates $13,000,000
2017 30 Pittsburgh Pirates $14,000,000
2018 31 Pittsburgh Pirates *$14,750,000

[nmain]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Why don't you want him?

Really just to gauge interest as my Pirates arent performing up to real life standards.

[tcoots423]

Is the player you are asking for Michael Taylor? and if not who is it?

[nmain]

Originally Posted by tcoots423

Is the player you are asking for Michael Taylor? and if not who is it?

Brian Goodwin

http://i.imgur.com/74ymbcW.jpg

[tcoots423]

Hmm. Idk.. could be that they already have Michael Taylor, but i cant see why they wouldnt take it. And I cant see why youd wanna get rid of the face of your franchise who STILL has it. Trade him to me... lol

[xx2khazard]

You see what I mean, that's why I'm surprised I haven't seen many people prefer favor vets, although I understand how it may compromise the AI's ability to trade prospects. Thar seemed like a great trade for the nats.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by nmain

I don't get trading. On Very Hard/Hard I looked to trade Andrew McCutchen to the Nationals. They won't even accept an offer of McCutchen for their starting CF who is 24 and only 2 stars. He is terrible. They also have 26 million available so money is not the problem. I only attempted this trade to see if they would, because I cant seem to find anyone that wants him.

Originally Posted by nmain

http://i.imgur.com/I3DMRSz.jpg

Since its only in the second year he is still on his real current contract

2016 29 Pittsburgh Pirates $13,000,000
2017 30 Pittsburgh Pirates $14,000,000
2018 31 Pittsburgh Pirates *$14,750,000

Originally Posted by nmain

Brian Goodwin

http://i.imgur.com/74ymbcW.jpg

Thank you for confirming once again, that the trade AI is hideously broken.

I have a secret for you. The Nationals would be dying to get Cutch. But they won't give you anything of any value. They won't even trade you a bag of baseballs for him. Because the trade AI hates the human player and wants him to cry in utter despair.

If you were to trade them Cutch for a 33-year old AA guy with a broken leg, AND cover ALL of Cutch's salary, then MAYBE they would CONSIDER it.

[tcoots423]

I havent had that many issues with the trade AI set on normal, or what it is on default.

All the trades that dont work make sense to me..either the salary....like its a 34 yr old broken player with 20 mill on his contract, or thier prospects are good and they wont give them up for less than my susperstar.... I have yet to be like WTF.. but who knows... I agree that the Cutch trade does sound odd...I just keep thinking.. i want Cutch.. lol