More Details on Recalc?

Juggernt · 12-28-2017, 08:51 PM

I'm trying to understand more depth of what recalculating ratings does. If I recalc every year, do I just use my knowledge of history to screw over the AI? What does basing ratings on neutralized stats mean? If I use the recalc option, are potential ratings meaningless?

I suppose the bottom line is if the recalc option is just going to make players perform close to how they did historically, the game is more interesting in some ways, but less in others. It seems like if I want a real challenge to turn off the recalc and try to figure out how players will develop. I want to understand the basics of what recalculating (or not) does so that I can make an informed decision on what kind of game I'd like to have.

Juggernt · 12-28-2017, 08:58 PM

Sorry, should have read the online manual first. I have some answers, like on the neutralized stats. It also seems that my assessment that if I know stuff about history the other (AI) GMs don't, then I have an advantage. The first year rookie draft should mitigate that somewhat, I suppose.

NoOne · 12-29-2017, 02:13 PM

a few options during creation will be important to learn about for historic play. based on peak years or not etc... so, lots of moving pieces to consider including how often you re-calc their ratings.

how often you recalc historic players' ratings is upto you.. costs/benefits to each choice. may need some trial and error here... think it through as far as repercussion of each option and pick the method that does what you want. e.g. 3years vs 1 clearly will spread things out more, but not nearly as much as using career to set initial ratings vs. peak years etc.

in any case, you do have an advantage over the AI when it comes to scouting knowledge... simply load up baseball reference

i bet alot of people suggeest 100% accuracy so that the AI is on the same playing field. ie inaccuracy and stats only will inhibit the ai's ability more than yours.

"neutralized" would be good for any league involving players from different time periods - like a random debut league. if you are player history out in a linear way, i'd avoid it? if you find a "historic play" thread, take their advice on this over mine.

if you are 'playing through time' i'd go with less processed ratings - don't neturalize. keep it simple, (stupid), KIS(S) pricinciple.

12-28-2017, 08:51 PM	#1
Juggernt Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2017 Posts: 357	More Details on Recalc? I'm trying to understand more depth of what recalculating ratings does. If I recalc every year, do I just use my knowledge of history to screw over the AI? What does basing ratings on neutralized stats mean? If I use the recalc option, are potential ratings meaningless? I suppose the bottom line is if the recalc option is just going to make players perform close to how they did historically, the game is more interesting in some ways, but less in others. It seems like if I want a real challenge to turn off the recalc and try to figure out how players will develop. I want to understand the basics of what recalculating (or not) does so that I can make an informed decision on what kind of game I'd like to have.

12-28-2017, 08:58 PM	#2
Juggernt Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2017 Posts: 357	Sorry, should have read the online manual first. I have some answers, like on the neutralized stats. It also seems that my assessment that if I know stuff about history the other (AI) GMs don't, then I have an advantage. The first year rookie draft should mitigate that somewhat, I suppose.

12-29-2017, 02:13 PM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	a few options during creation will be important to learn about for historic play. based on peak years or not etc... so, lots of moving pieces to consider including how often you re-calc their ratings. how often you recalc historic players' ratings is upto you.. costs/benefits to each choice. may need some trial and error here... think it through as far as repercussion of each option and pick the method that does what you want. e.g. 3years vs 1 clearly will spread things out more, but not nearly as much as using career to set initial ratings vs. peak years etc. in any case, you do have an advantage over the AI when it comes to scouting knowledge... simply load up baseball reference i bet alot of people suggeest 100% accuracy so that the AI is on the same playing field. ie inaccuracy and stats only will inhibit the ai's ability more than yours. "neutralized" would be good for any league involving players from different time periods - like a random debut league. if you are player history out in a linear way, i'd avoid it? if you find a "historic play" thread, take their advice on this over mine. if you are 'playing through time' i'd go with less processed ratings - don't neturalize. keep it simple, (stupid), KIS(S) pricinciple.