Team Needs

[VinCal]

I find it annoying that in my solo league I play myself, when I set my team needs to a certain position or type a player, the AU ran teams send me emails asking if I have interest in their stud prospects. When I click on yes, then (make this work) in the trade box, it always comes back saying I have no players that would make this trade happen. It drives me crazy. This happen to everyone else?

[malor]

Yes.

To test it out, I've offered rebuilding teams my top five prospects for the player they offered and they said no, they needed more. I've offered Win-now teams my best starters and they said no. I've mixed and matched offering outrageous deals in their favor and they said no.

It is very annoying to waste time on offers that no chance of being accepted. I've stopped using the Team Needs feature because of it.

I would love to see this feature get some attention in upcoming patches.

I have the same issue with trading block players. I don't see the AI ever making an offer for them so the result is simply an angry player. I stopped adding player to it and I have no idea how to know if the AI has any players on the list so I never make offers for if they do use it.

Malor

[Kangostar]

Well from my understanding and I could be wrong this is just from my experience. The feature works, but you will need to be close to make the opposing GM want to make it work. The 'make it work' feature will only ask for one player, if you don't have a single player that the opposing GM wants (with your current offer) then yes its useless.

You will need to add another player/money/draft pick then click make this work again and see if there is now a single player that will make it work. If still no results you are still far from with the GM - remove that player you just added (or keep him there) and add another player/money/pick then click it again... again if no results you are still far away from what they want... yes sometimes you will need to do that multiple times with multiple different players to finally hit that sweet spot where they finally suggest one player that they want that'll make it work

[WIUPIKE]

I believe Matt answered this in another post. When you get an email like that the AI cannot find a one for one deal for that player. I believe he mentioned that with putting different pieces together you should be able to acquire that player.

[malor]

I'll agree to disagree about it working.

I'm was not talking about bad prospects, I'm talking about ones that were better than I was offered. I was not talking about one-for-one, I was talking five of mine for one of theirs. I even tried throwing in all of my available cash $10M.

If a team does not want my five best prospects and $10M for the one prospect they offer to me in the email, the feature is broke.

I do my best to not cheat the AI on trades, but it should have no problems saying yes when this kind of offer is made.

Wish I had saved the screen shots from my previous league where I ran this test.
I never reported my findings because others already had reported the same and the response was that it was almost impossible to code a fix. I understand that explanation because time needs to be spent on things that can be fixed and bettered now. At some point, time will permit improvements to be made in the future.

Thanks.
Malor

[RchW]

Originally Posted by WIUPIKE

I believe Matt answered this in another post. When you get an email like that the AI cannot find a one for one deal for that player. I believe he mentioned that with putting different pieces together you should be able to acquire that player.

And I replied to Matt that the logic is flawed. Realistic interactions don't work that way. I shouldn't have to guess what the other GM wants he should tell me and if I'm interested the deal should be negotiated. Why would I ever tell a competitor who I'm willing to trade? That lowers my leverage vs him asking for one of players X or Y or Z all of which I'm reluctant to trade.

Of course the rival GM can ask for more than I'm willing to give and that would be a start point for negotiations possibly leading to a trade.

IMO any real life GM who worked that way would have difficulty making any trades or developing good relationships.

[italyprof]

Originally Posted by malor

I'll agree to disagree about it working.

I'm was not talking about bad prospects, I'm talking about ones that were better than I was offered. I was not talking about one-for-one, I was talking five of mine for one of theirs. I even tried throwing in all of my available cash $10M.

If a team does not want my five best prospects and $10M for the one prospect they offer to me in the email, the feature is broke.

I do my best to not cheat the AI on trades, but it should have no problems saying yes when this kind of offer is made.

Wish I had saved the screen shots from my previous league where I ran this test.
I never reported my findings because others already had reported the same and the response was that it was almost impossible to code a fix. I understand that explanation because time needs to be spent on things that can be fixed and bettered now. At some point, time will permit improvements to be made in the future.

Thanks.
Malor

You are right that this is what happens, but you are, I think, misunderstanding what people here are saying. You are offering too much for these other teams, not too little. If you add another player from the other team, then one of your stars may be tradeable for two or three of theirs, or else they will tell you it is close but you need to add something, so maybe then add a bench player or AA prospect not worth much to your star in exchange for three or four of their players, It is adjust, adjust and eventually you can usually hit the right formula. It is no easier for real GMs.

[malor]

I agree that if the other team comes to me with an offer to fill a need from my team, they should also provide a player or list of players they want back. I'd actually settle for something like "we need some prospects at these positions" or "we need a starting CF to help us win it all". This is probably extremely difficult to code. We already know the AI cannot handle one for many or many-for many when using Shop-a-player. Probably same logic used here. I'm not even sure the AI uses the colored indicators on the trade screen.

Where the major flaw lie is they will not take anything you offer. As I stated above, I've looked at their needs using the color lights on the trade screen. I filled their needs with five of my best prospects, one for each of their main needs as noted. Response was this is not enough. I added money. I changed out one player for a second high SP, than a third, and numerous other combinations too detailed to list here. Still no dice and no feedback to even indicate if I was close. (Yes I do know they will change the text when the deal is getting close. That did not happen. While at the same time my Asst. GM was throwing a fit saying we were not getting anything of value and that I should ask for more in return). In this situation, if the AI offered me the same deals I offered them, I would have taken them in a flash. In my book a five for one highly rated prospects change in my favor is a no brainer. Remember, I did not go to them, they came to me with the offer.

I've tried the same types of offers for Teams looking to win by offering my starters for positions they needed to fill while even agreeing to retain contact $.

Since I've never been successful when the fill the need offer is made, I found it easier to just stop using the feature. Why would I want to stress myself out attempting to make a deal when the other side came to me with the offer.

For this feature to work, the AI needs to be smart enough, as RchW indicated above, to come to use with a request for a player(s) they would take in return.

It is actually worse than you think. The AI does not have a needs list we can use to offer them deals. Thus it is actually one side in favor of the human (except in online leagues) if it actually worked.

Sorry for rambling a little (lot).
Malor

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by RchW

And I replied to Matt that the logic is flawed. Realistic interactions don't work that way. I shouldn't have to guess what the other GM wants he should tell me and if I'm interested the deal should be negotiated. Why would I ever tell a competitor who I'm willing to trade? That lowers my leverage vs him asking for one of players X or Y or Z all of which I'm reluctant to trade.

Of course the rival GM can ask for more than I'm willing to give and that would be a start point for negotiations possibly leading to a trade.

IMO any real life GM who worked that way would have difficulty making any trades or developing good relationships.

if it worked realistically it would make use of even more subterfuge and not be anything close to honest... this is a negotiation.. it's all about deception and leverage. on a philisophical and forward-thinking level, it literally brings out the worst in humanity due to the motivations of the whole process.

do you think a commission salesman ever tells you somethign negative about a product unless it helps him make more money elsewhere? (a good salesman would be more creative than saying something negative, fwiw.) they purposely withhold any informatin that would cuase you not to buy too. the most successful also have the highest profit margin.. so they also take you for the most money and you generally like them whle they do it. (well, peopel that don't know the game behind the scenes... otherwise it's pure torture and you are helpless to fight against it, lol)

mlb trading is a bit different dynamic but similar to sales.

GM's should never directly tell you anything of real value that would aid anything but a trade that favors themselves... fair? balanced? they care not for theet things....

it's an offer, counter-offer process and you never tip your hand unless you want to get r%ped.

a "make it work" button that is too funcitonal is a get out of jail free card. it would make the game a joke... a setting that makes it less/more accurate is fine, but as a one-sized fits all "button" it shouldn't work better than doing the work yourself.

you get their strenghts and weaknesses and other objective facts... the rest is all upto you, just like a real gm. it's really not rocket science.

outside of the idea that it would be realistic, none of the rest is directed specificalyl at rich's post... i would bet he rarely pushes that button, or if he does merely uses it as a launching point for something better.

it will almost always favor the AI as it should.


edit:

fwiw i've seen alot more viable offers via mail over the last couple releases.. they are workign on it.. but again, this stuff should not be spoon fed to us... the first offer should favor the team offering... it only makes sense that you hav a counter offer and put in some work instead of expecting somethign to be served to you wihtout any effort or thought.

negotiation is about the worst in humanity, not hte best... lol.. it's all geared to take advantage of someone else's lack of knowledge or expertise and to maximize their own return, regardless of any damage done to the other party.