Trade Difficulty: What does it actually do?

[KBLover]

Everyone has ideas on where it should be but that's not what I'm asking.

I was wondering if there was any knowledge on what it actually does.

How does it make trades more or less "difficult"?

Does it impact every trade system? Does it impact AI trades? Will those AI GMs negotiate "harder" or "easier" with each other?

Does it change player valuations, and how so?

I've moved it around while in an active negotiation and it didn't seem to do a lot. If the AI GM liked the trade, they liked it at any setting, and if they didn't, they didn't on any setting.

The only impact is on the "borderline" deals where the AI GM would do from "Barely fair. Submit before I change my mind" and then you can complete the trade or the "I need to think about it for a bit" and you can submit it and they'll reply with the answer.

But what is happening to create that change? For example, does harder make the AI GMs consider more strongly their Team Focus and the strength/weakness make up of the team? Does it let them "know more" as in it can see the editor ratings after a certain level of difficulty? Does it become more cash/money balance aware? (balance as in salary I trade vs salary I take).

I think more information on how the setting works would inform everyone's decisions.

[omg_pwnasaurus]

I always meant to ask this as well. Interested.

[Brad K]

It can't affect AI to AI trades. How can both sides be insisting on more?

I expect it's a simplistic process and revealing how it works would possibly allow it to be gamed.

Some things are better not known.

[uruguru]

I suspect it simply requires the player to give up more in AI & Player trades.

AI-AI trades wouldn't be affected.

[PSUColonel]

Basically, the tougher the setting, the harder it will be to bargain with the AI. The AI will want more in the way of talent, or cash or salary. This can be seen when you click the "make this work now" button. On an easier setting you will see the list of players the AI is willing to accept (if any) against a tougher setting, Try them out a pick what you think is best for you. I myself use +5 in difficulty and +/- 0 for preference.

I feel it creates a realistic and challenging trade AI in doing this. YMMV of course.

I will also just mention that this setting will also work in conjunction with AI evaluation settings....which is another whole topic. There is a discussion about it now on the boards, and there have been many in the past.

[MikeS21]

I have found the trade difficulty setting to be as useful as a thermostat that isn’t connected to anything. The same with the favor veterans and favor prospects setting.

I read all these posts about how easy it is to cheat the trade AI, but I just don’t see it. Not in 23.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by Brad K

It can't affect AI to AI trades. How can both sides be insisting on more?

It could require the AI GMs to have tighter tolerances on valuations.

I see in my save a lot of "20s for 45s" type deals and while that could just be my scout incorrectly rating the players involved, it seems to happen a lot and it's hard to believe my scout, who's well rated and funded, to be wrong on all of them significantly.

Likewise, stricter adherence to focus and strength/weakness would not necessarily require "more" but "more of what I need".

But if the setting is just "make the human team give up more" with no other nuance (be more dogmatic...I need SP and that's what I want, not another OF, even a good one, when I have 4 60+ and a AAA top 3 in the rotation), then I could see why it wouldn't impact the quality of the other GM's trades.

[KBLover]

Does it impact the offers you get from the AI?

Harder means you get nothing but trash but easier means you might get something worth at least discussing?

That's something that's irked me in OOTP for a while - the "hey, how about this projected replacement player for your above average starter"

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I will also just mention that this setting will also work in conjunction with AI evaluation settings....which is another whole topic. There is a discussion about it now on the boards, and there have been many in the past.

I'll have to take a look at that as well then.

I want to get the trading better, largely regarding the AI with each other and the odd offer they float my way.

I don't do much trading otherwise. I get tired of them wanting my young 70's rated players because I asked about a 25-year old, 35-rated "prospect"

Granted, I just take as a "I'm not interested in that/these players" but it's just weird to see.

[Brad K]

In games with historical players there are occasional deals to be had. AI will offer young players who won't be effective in MLB for several years for currently serviceable players. In my current game I got a 19 year old Nolan Ryan that way. He spent his age 19 year in AA and had an ERA around 12. Made the bigs to stay at age 23. Became a SP at 24.

I think AI didn't know what he could become. Or if it did figured waiting five years for it wasn't as good as getting something right now.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by MikeS21

I have found the trade difficulty setting to be as useful as a thermostat that isn’t connected to anything. The same with the favor veterans and favor prospects setting.

I read all these posts about how easy it is to cheat the trade AI, but I just don’t see it. Not in 23.

It's comically easy to cheese the AI on the default settings for an experienced player. I just booted up a new save to showcase this. Standard Game, 2022 MLB. Changed Scouting to 100% Accurate (so that trades can be evaluated objectively by both sides), changed ratings to 20-80 scale. No other changes.

Started as Dodgers.

• Traded Gavin Lux (55/60) for Jared Walsh (55/60), plus prospects Elvis Peguero (RP 45/50), Trey Cabbage (RF 40/45), Brendon Davis (3B 40/45), and Kolton Ingram (RP 25/45)
• Traded Jared Walsh for Tommy Edman (65/65), Junior Fernandez (RP 40/60), Johan Oviedo (SP 40/50), and prospect Joshua Baez (RF 20/50)
• Traded Junior Fernandez for Alec Bohm (50/55) and prospects Jakob Hernandez (RP 40/50), Jason Ruffcorn (CL 20/55), Bailey Falter (RP 40/50), and Andrez Schultz (RP 20/50)
• Traded Tommy Edman and Alec Bohm for Austin Nola (60/60), Jake Cronenworth (65/65), and prospects Tom Cosgrove (RP 45/50), Jose Geraldo (CL 30/55), and Angel Felipe (CL 20/50)

At that point I ran out of shops and so stopped. This all took about 15 minutes of RL time, and I'm sure I could have done better if I spent more time or looked for manual deals instead of using Shop a Player. I also did not take on a single player making more than the minimum, nor did I trade a single player or prospect (even junk ones) that was on the Dodgers other than Lux.

End result:
Gavin Lux (2B, 55/60) for both Cronenworth (2B 65/65) and Nola (C 60/60), as well as 13 prospects all of whom project to be at least MLB bubble players.

[BarneyRubble]

'Shop a player' is a wonderful thing in OOTP.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

It's comically easy to cheese the AI on the default settings for an experienced player. I just booted up a new save to showcase this. Standard Game, 2022 MLB. Changed Scouting to 100% Accurate (so that trades can be evaluated objectively by both sides), changed ratings to 20-80 scale. No other changes.

Started as Dodgers.

• Traded Gavin Lux (55/60) for Jared Walsh (55/60), plus prospects Elvis Peguero (RP 45/50), Trey Cabbage (RF 40/45), Brendon Davis (3B 40/45), and Kolton Ingram (RP 25/45)
• Traded Jared Walsh for Tommy Edman (65/65), Junior Fernandez (RP 40/60), Johan Oviedo (SP 40/50), and prospect Joshua Baez (RF 20/50)
• Traded Junior Fernandez for Alec Bohm (50/55) and prospects Jakob Hernandez (RP 40/50), Jason Ruffcorn (CL 20/55), Bailey Falter (RP 40/50), and Andrez Schultz (RP 20/50)
• Traded Tommy Edman and Alec Bohm for Austin Nola (60/60), Jake Cronenworth (65/65), and prospects Tom Cosgrove (RP 45/50), Jose Geraldo (CL 30/55), and Angel Felipe (CL 20/50)

At that point I ran out of shops and so stopped. This all took about 15 minutes of RL time, and I'm sure I could have done better if I spent more time or looked for manual deals instead of using Shop a Player. I also did not take on a single player making more than the minimum, nor did I trade a single player or prospect (even junk ones) that was on the Dodgers other than Lux.

End result:
Gavin Lux (2B, 55/60) for both Cronenworth (2B 65/65) and Nola (C 60/60), as well as 13 prospects all of whom project to be at least MLB bubble players.

This is why I recommend the +5 difficulty setting.

[Pelican]

Yup “shop a player” can result in some undeserved deals, at least at the middle setting. The only exception is trying to unload a player with a big contract who is underperforming (calling your name, Sir Didi). The AI won’t budge. I finally learned I had to cover part of the salary, as the AI was all about financials (as it should be).

I have been inching up the trade difficulty each year, without perceiving much change in this. Dealing one on one with an AI GM can be excruciating. Shopping players is easier. And “make this work” can yield a bargain. So, okay, I will jump up to highest difficulty.

There is also a global setting for trade frequency (I.e. trades by the AI between AI teams). I set that at rare due to some experience with goofy trades. Maybe with the highest difficulty setting, I could return it to average frequency. Wouldn’t increasing the difficult make trades happen less? Of are only human GM trades affected by the difficulty setting??

[MikeS21]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

It's comically easy to cheese the AI on the default settings for an experienced player. I just booted up a new save to showcase this. Standard Game, 2022 MLB. Changed Scouting to 100% Accurate (so that trades can be evaluated objectively by both sides), changed ratings to 20-80 scale. No other changes.

Started as Dodgers.

• Traded Gavin Lux (55/60) for Jared Walsh (55/60), plus prospects Elvis Peguero (RP 45/50), Trey Cabbage (RF 40/45), Brendon Davis (3B 40/45), and Kolton Ingram (RP 25/45)
• Traded Jared Walsh for Tommy Edman (65/65), Junior Fernandez (RP 40/60), Johan Oviedo (SP 40/50), and prospect Joshua Baez (RF 20/50)
• Traded Junior Fernandez for Alec Bohm (50/55) and prospects Jakob Hernandez (RP 40/50), Jason Ruffcorn (CL 20/55), Bailey Falter (RP 40/50), and Andrez Schultz (RP 20/50)
• Traded Tommy Edman and Alec Bohm for Austin Nola (60/60), Jake Cronenworth (65/65), and prospects Tom Cosgrove (RP 45/50), Jose Geraldo (CL 30/55), and Angel Felipe (CL 20/50)

At that point I ran out of shops and so stopped. This all took about 15 minutes of RL time, and I'm sure I could have done better if I spent more time or looked for manual deals instead of using Shop a Player. I also did not take on a single player making more than the minimum, nor did I trade a single player or prospect (even junk ones) that was on the Dodgers other than Lux.

End result:
Gavin Lux (2B, 55/60) for both Cronenworth (2B 65/65) and Nola (C 60/60), as well as 13 prospects all of whom project to be at least MLB bubble players.

Lol! I guess my problem is that I don’t have any talent to offer that the AI desires enough to offer any real return talent for.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

It's comically easy to cheese the AI on the default settings for an experienced player. I just booted up a new save to showcase this. Standard Game, 2022 MLB. Changed Scouting to 100% Accurate (so that trades can be evaluated objectively by both sides), changed ratings to 20-80 scale. No other changes.

Started as Dodgers.

• Traded Gavin Lux (55/60) for Jared Walsh (55/60), plus prospects Elvis Peguero (RP 45/50), Trey Cabbage (RF 40/45), Brendon Davis (3B 40/45), and Kolton Ingram (RP 25/45)
• Traded Jared Walsh for Tommy Edman (65/65), Junior Fernandez (RP 40/60), Johan Oviedo (SP 40/50), and prospect Joshua Baez (RF 20/50)
• Traded Junior Fernandez for Alec Bohm (50/55) and prospects Jakob Hernandez (RP 40/50), Jason Ruffcorn (CL 20/55), Bailey Falter (RP 40/50), and Andrez Schultz (RP 20/50)
• Traded Tommy Edman and Alec Bohm for Austin Nola (60/60), Jake Cronenworth (65/65), and prospects Tom Cosgrove (RP 45/50), Jose Geraldo (CL 30/55), and Angel Felipe (CL 20/50)

I tried replicating this (after backing up) in my save and couldn't even get something like deal one done (60 for 60, 50, 45, 45, 45).

I guess I don't have the trading chops to make the AI take it lol

Is it because mine is a fictional league 10 years in instead of a fresh MLB standard game?

[MikeS21]

Originally Posted by KBLover

I tried replicating this (after backing up) in my save and couldn't even get something like deal one done (60 for 60, 50, 45, 45, 45).

I guess I don't have the trading chops to make the AI take it lol

Is it because mine is a fictional league 10 years in instead of a fresh MLB standard game?

Same here, except with a fresh standard game, with trade difficulty on “Easy” and “Favor Veterans”. Could not get the AI to bite on Lux for even one of those players, let alone all of them.

When I clicked “Make This Work Now” they would only accept a trade if Julio Urias was added to Lux, and still only one of the other players would be received back in trade.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by MikeS21

Same here, except with a fresh standard game, with trade difficulty on “Easy” and “Favor Veterans”. Could not get the AI to bite on Lux for even one of those players, let alone all of them.

When I clicked “Make This Work Now” they would only accept a trade if Julio Urias was added to Lux, and still only one of the other players would be received back in trade.

Did you have Scouting set to 100% (then re-ran Scouting)? Was this on today's beta patch?

[MikeS21]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

Did you have Scouting set to 100% (then re-ran Scouting)? Was this on today's beta patch?

Scouting at 100%, re-ran full scouting, but not with today’s latest patch. Didn’t even notice that there was a new beta patch. I will update and see if that changes anything.

Thanks!

[MathBandit]

That's odd. Mine was also done on the patch before today's. You'd think it should match every time.

I wonder if the Prefer Vets is somehow discounting Lux?