Alright boyz, here we go!!! 'OOTPX' First Impressions!

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Ok the history is up now.

So I think that's everything.
BNN Home Page

Thank you Dan

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

QFT

I typically draft through the first four rounds then turn it over to the AI. 25+ rounds of 1-star disasters is just too much with full minors.

I sort of like the full minors but ultimately I'll probably play with it downsized in the future. Running one major league team is fun; running a full minors system makes me feel like I'm actually working in a GM's office, but not in a good way.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I'd really like it to work as it provides another layer of depth ad difficulty to the game, but as it is it's just too random.

The draft is even worse. Even with OSA ratings only I'm still frustrated that @1000 of @1050 draftees have the same minimal rating. I tend to draft the first two rounds and the supplemental and let the scout do it from their. It's not nearly as fun as it could be IMO.

This is the only sports game I play where the draft completely bores me. There is a thread going on right now on the OOTP boards where we are discussing overall ratings. I personally believe that the game goes to far one way or the other. Players are either close to 20 or close to 80 (on the 20-80 scale).

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

This is the only sports game I play where the draft completely bores me. There is a thread going on right now on the OOTP boards where we are discussing overall ratings. I personally believe that the game goes to far one way or the other. Players are either close to 20 or close to 80 (on the 20-80 scale).

I haven't played OOTP in some time, but it's extremely frustrating to see that only the first 15 or so have more than one star while the rest have one star or less. Far too many players to go through. You would think that more than 15 players would have greater than one star potential.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

This is the only sports game I play where the draft completely bores me. There is a thread going on right now on the OOTP boards where we are discussing overall ratings. I personally believe that the game goes to far one way or the other. Players are either close to 20 or close to 80 (on the 20-80 scale).

I think that's right. I see very few players in the 30-65 range. I can't imagine a real scout that that threw up his hands heading in to round three and said, "Well everyone from here on out has exactly the same potential."

[Alan T]

You can modify your player creation modifiers in a way to create larger amount of talent for your league. But my experience is if you have too much talent coming into the draft, it will eventually saturate the league and cause a "Star Deflation" because now those guys with all green ratings aren't that great when there are 30 guys now with all blue ratings out there. So instead of being 4-star or 4.5 star they suddenly are 2 or 3 star.

So in the end, I think having too much talent in the drafts ends up hurting you long term even if for a short term gain. I personally hack the number of rounds that I draft by a great deal, so you don't have to go through endless number of 1-star rounds.

There are other ways to perhaps increase the interest in the draft, one of which might be to up the talent randomness some, so instead of being excited by sorting through 5 star players to pick, you could be eager to find the diamond in the rough. I'm not sure if that is really what you're interested in either though.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I think that's right. I see very few players in the 30-65 range. I can't imagine a real scout that that threw up his hands heading in to round three and said, "Well everyone from here on out has exactly the same potential."

I agree with ya'll. The difference between a two star and a four star player is not what it should be, and it might be less than the difference between one and two stars or four and five.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

I agree with ya'll. The difference between a two star and a four star player is not what it should be, and it might be less than the difference between one and two stars or four and five.

Yeah, I think the way overall stars are done just needs to be overall re-evaluated. With the changes to the pitching system as well as other things down the road, it becomes outdated since it does not do a good job of comparing different style of players anyways. Stars have almost become useless to look at for 3-4 versions now.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Ok the history is up now.

So I think that's everything.
BNN Home Page

So the Cubs finally win in 2018, after losing to the Sox in 2016. Intense.

[BigPapi]

Originally Posted by Alan T

There are other ways to perhaps increase the interest in the draft, one of which might be to up the talent randomness some, so instead of being excited by sorting through 5 star players to pick, you could be eager to find the diamond in the rough. I'm not sure if that is really what you're interested in either though.

This is still useless to me, though...Even though some guys might be "diamonds in the rough", there's still no rhyme or reason to it, and therefore no good reason to try to sort through 1000 1 star guys and convince yourself you're making an informed decision.....It's all still a crapshoot.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by BigPapi

This is still useless to me, though...Even though some guys might be "diamonds in the rough", there's still no rhyme or reason to it, and therefore no good reason to try to sort through 1000 1 star guys and convince yourself you're making an informed decision.....It's all still a crapshoot.

I agree. Thats probably why I rarely set my draft longer than 5 - 7 rounds. It becomes tedious at that point

[MizzouRah]

This is my first time using scouting and I like it. I look more at stats than anything though...

I'm also using full minor leagues and letting the AI take care of them for me as I concentrate on the ML team.

[DanGarion]

Maybe instead of the stars there just needs to be an overall rating like a 1-100 rating for the players...

[Alan T]

Well on that subject:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Hey guys,

just a heads-up: The next patch will introduce some changes to the calculation of the potential overall value (read: silver star rating). In the past this value displayed how a player's potential ratings did match up to the average overall rating on the league. But since the average overall rating had stats included in the calculations, results were strange at times. So, it is now relative to the average potential rating of the league. Another change is the the potential was adjusted to the averall current rating (gold stars) if the current rating was higher than the potential. This was removed.

So, in a nutshell:
- Overall (gold) stars are always relative to the league average ratings (at the player's position), including stats evaluation
- Potential (silver) stars are always relative to the league average potential ratings (at the player's position), EXcluding stats evaluation

Hope that makes more sense than before

Cheers,
Markus

[CleBrownsfan]

Originally Posted by Alan T

You can modify your player creation modifiers in a way to create larger amount of talent for your league. But my experience is if you have too much talent coming into the draft, it will eventually saturate the league and cause a "Star Deflation" because now those guys with all green ratings aren't that great when there are 30 guys now with all blue ratings out there. So instead of being 4-star or 4.5 star they suddenly are 2 or 3 star.

So in the end, I think having too much talent in the drafts ends up hurting you long term even if for a short term gain. I personally hack the number of rounds that I draft by a great deal, so you don't have to go through endless number of 1-star rounds.

There are other ways to perhaps increase the interest in the draft, one of which might be to up the talent randomness some, so instead of being excited by sorting through 5 star players to pick, you could be eager to find the diamond in the rough. I'm not sure if that is really what you're interested in either though.

I'm in the same boat as everyone else. There are not many 2-3 blue potential star players. Have you guys seen 1 blue star players jump up to a 2-4 star player as they progress? I have yet to see it happen....

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by CleBrownsfan

I'm in the same boat as everyone else. There are not many 2-3 blue potential star players. Have you guys seen 1 blue star players jump up to a 2-4 star player as they progress? I have yet to see it happen....

Yes, if your talent randomness is set higher, you'll see players that started off at 1 star suddenly become 2 or 3 or more star prospects in the minors. You also will see the opposite true where first round draft picks that have 5 stars suddenly become 1-3 star busts.

The problem is as someone else said however, that there is no rhyme or reason to when it will occur. (ie: a player who ends up on a hot hitting streak in the minors suddenly getting a boost or such).. it all is just random. You never know who will bust or boom like that which takes some of the fun out of it.

[fantom1979]

For me its a real fine line. If you play some of the mass market games on the Playstation, there is a "potential rating". The potential rating is not realistic at all, and the way OOTP does it is probably more realistic, but the fun factor is just not there.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Well on that subject:

I had no clue that the star ratings included stats. You learn something new every day...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Any word on when that change will be implemented?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Any word on when that change will be implemented?

Next patch he says. No time given for when that would be though.

[fantom1979]

I would guess it will come out in Spring or Summer in 2009.

[stevew]

The FA comp seems way too loose. Virtually all of my FAs are type B. Plus I got type A comp for losing Marlon Byrd and Eric Hinski.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by stevew

The FA comp seems way too loose. Virtually all of my FAs are type B. Plus I got type A comp for losing Marlon Byrd and Eric Hinski.

Weird, my only complaint so far with it was that I hardly ever saw any Type B free agents. It seemed like most of those ended up either accepting arbitration or got re-signed by their existing teams.

I'm seeing the exact opposite of you.

[stevew]

I should say I didn't actually have any of my guys that were type B actually sign, but all of them denied arbitration and tested FA.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Ok the history is up now.

So I think that's everything.
BNN Home Page

You didn't upload player pages for people in history so I couldn't look at everything that I wanted to, but from what I can see, your testing has resembled most of mine...

- The first year offensive inflation for a newly created league is still happening and needs to be compensated for in a way that does not affect future seasons.
- Other than the first season of a new career, the stats default out of the box really don't look that bad. Some things can be tweaked, but on the major league level they at least seem realistic enough to me to not worry a ton about.
-Player development is still off nearly as much as it was last season. Too many players hitting their prime in their mid-20s, superstars seem to become superstars at age 21-24 routinely. Most star players tend to play a full 15-18 seasons before they begin to tail off. Thusly, some form of player development change might be desired in order to push the player peak back to age 26-28ish and have players start to fade at around age 33,34 or 35 (obviously leaving room for exceptions on either end).

[JPhillips]

Some interface wishes I 'd like to see:

The status box in the upper right should update the wins/losses and the date as the game quick sims.

There should be a way to see previous season's stats and minor league stats in the free agency and waiver pages.

The manager info is saved in the new manager box, but it oddly adds a year to the birth date when you start a new career.

Personal message updates should provide info on the message. So I'd see, PLAYER wants to discuss a contract extension or PLAYER is unhappy with his role. It already does this with player trade notifications.

When a player is injured I should go straight to the disabled list page as I do when a player recovers from injury.

I should be able to see my starting lineup stats(avg/obp/slg) on the depth chart screen in the same fashion I can see pitcher's ERA when choosing the rotation. I'd like that info on starters pulled out from the rest of the position players.

I'd like a win/loss streak on the standings page.

I wish I didn't have to go back through pages I've already reset. For instance, if I'm on the trade page and I go to a player page and then the contract page and back to the player page, if I hit the back arrow I'll go to contract then player then finally back to the trade page. I'd like it to know I've already gone back to the player page and go straight to the trade page.

I'd love to have draft position somewhere on the player card.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Alan T

You didn't upload player pages for people in history so I couldn't look at everything that I wanted to, but from what I can see, your testing has resembled most of mine...

Well i didn't have 2 days for the game to sit there and chunk my harddrive till it finished and another 2 days to upload it. HEHEHEHE.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I'd like a win/loss streak on the standings page.

If you click off the "show league leaders" box in the upper right side of the standings page you get extended standings with L10, winning streak, and magic number.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Atocep

If you click off the "show league leaders" box in the upper right side of the standings page you get extended standings with L10, winning streak, and magic number.

Sorry, I meant the standings page as it's simming more than one day.

[Drake]

Just had one of those "reasons why I keep buying this game" moments.

As of the conclusion of the 2012 playoffs (MLB set-up, fictional rosters), the Phillies have managed to have the best record in the NL for 4 consecutive years...and been knocked out in the first round of the playoffs every year. The AI even fired the Phillies' manager at the end of the 2011 season in an apparent attempt to shake things up.

The only difference? Ten fewer wins over the course of the season and getting swept in the first round rather than even putting up a fight.

Little subplots like that are the reason I keep playing this game.

Oh, and lest I forget: the Phillies' clean-up hitter has been the NL MVP the last 3 seasons. He's been a consistent .335-45-140 guy who has been lights out in the playoffs...unfortunately, he's the only guy who's playing consistently in the postseason.

[JPhillips]

Has anyone else noticed a lot of 3 pitch relievers being made into starters? I'm talking about guys with stamina lower than 35 getting 20+ starts because they are highly rated overall and have three or more pitches.

For example in 2012 Bobby Jenks lost the closer job at some point and got 20 starts including two in the playoffs with a stamina of 23.

Same season Rafael Betancourt got 16 starts with a stamina of 26. Renyel Pinto with 23 starts and 29 stamina. Paul Estrada 18 starts 32 stamina. RJ Swindle 21 starts and 26 stamina.

Going to bed instead of finishing the league stats.

[Ksyrup]

I'm noticing a lot of guys switching between starter and reliever for no apparent reason, and it must be because of the 3-pitch thing. I don't like it. I'll see a career arch where a guy will throw 200+ innings for 5 straight years, spend a year or two coming out of the bullpen (a couple of these guys are the "super-reliever" types I mentioned before, who make 70+ appearances, 5+ starts, and thrown 150+ innings), and then it's back into the rotation at some point.

This is just like the issue I had with previous versions (and it might still be happening with this version, too, I just haven't had the time to check) where the AI demotes or releases guys who were really good the year before. The issue is the AI making moves before the performance demonstrates a move is necessary. IRL, you don't take an effective 200+ inning pitcher and stick him in the bullpen to start the next year because you think he's lost his third pitch. You let him start and if he sucks, you make a change. I really cannot get over the inability of this game to not make pre-emptive changes based on ratings - even when there is supposedly an option to have the game based on nothing but stats (because it doesn't work, either). It just kills the realism for me. All of those examples I showed lasat year where Cy Young winners are in AAA the next year. That just can't happen in a game that's supposed to be all about realism.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I'm noticing a lot of guys switching between starter and reliever for no apparent reason, and it must be because of the 3-pitch thing. I don't like it. I'll see a career arch where a guy will throw 200+ innings for 5 straight years, spend a year or two coming out of the bullpen (a couple of these guys are the "super-reliever" types I mentioned before, who make 70+ appearances, 5+ starts, and thrown 150+ innings), and then it's back into the rotation at some point.

This is just like the issue I had with previous versions (and it might still be happening with this version, too, I just haven't had the time to check) where the AI demotes or releases guys who were really good the year before. The issue is the AI making moves before the performance demonstrates a move is necessary. IRL, you don't take an effective 200+ inning pitcher and stick him in the bullpen to start the next year because you think he's lost his third pitch. You let him start and if he sucks, you make a change. I really cannot get over the inability of this game to not make pre-emptive changes based on ratings - even when there is supposedly an option to have the game based on nothing but stats (because it doesn't work, either). It just kills the realism for me. All of those examples I showed lasat year where Cy Young winners are in AAA the next year. That just can't happen in a game that's supposed to be all about realism.

For the pitchers, I'm still trying to figure out what I feel about that, I don't know if I feel strongly one way or another about a mediocre starting pitcher being regulated to the bullpen. I don't know that I like the idea of that happening in reverse a ton though. (Seems more often teams bring up a minor leaguer or a different major league starter rather than digging into their bullpen for a guy).

For the issue of demoting a 200+ inning guy before the move is necessary just means that the AI evaluation for players in your settings should be tweaked. That is a clear sign of the AI paying far more attention to ratings than the last few years of stats. It sees that pitcher even though he pitched well last season doesn't have anything left in the tank and demotes him before it statistically being apparent. If you put a much higher weighting on the last few years of stats than the ratings, that should curb that. However be warned, doing so usually makes the AI less competitive for the sake of "realism" so you get what you ask for in some sense.

[Ksyrup]

I've tried that, it only works to varying degrees. What I really wanted was just to have thegame base everything off of stats, but that doesn't work very well, either. IIRC, I think SD might have suggested going with a 1% ratings modifier because the zero screwed things up, and that helped a bit. I'm still not comfortable with what I see in the sims I do, because no matter what the combination of ratings/stats is, I always see a number of instances that just don't make much sense.

And yeah, I can see how the realism will screw up the competitiveness, but right now I'm just focused on the simming. In fact, I have "played' very little of this game over the past 4-5 years or so. I'm almost exclusively an historical simmer.

[jbergey22]

Has anyone heard when patch#1 is coming out? Usually takes about a week but I havent seen any updates. Id love to see the pitcher/batter injury ratio fixed and a couple of other things corrected before I get rolling.

[nfg22]

Am I wrong or is this a bug.

I was under the impression that when a guy is invited to spring training he doesn't use up one of his options. Yet this game automatically activates the whole 40 man roster(fine with me), but then when the season starts, I have to place half of the guys returning to the minors on waivers because they were out of options. So is this true to life?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by nfg22

Am I wrong or is this a bug.

I was under the impression that when a guy is invited to spring training he doesn't use up one of his options. Yet this game automatically activates the whole 40 man roster(fine with me), but then when the season starts, I have to place half of the guys returning to the minors on waivers because they were out of options. So is this true to life?

You have to send them down the day of the last spring training game. If you wait until the day of the first regular season game then they're active for 1 day of the regular season and thus use up an option year.

[nfg22]

ok..my bad..thanks. I guess I stand to lose the year then.

[JPhillips]

Yeah, the sm to date really needs to be the last day of spring training as opposed to the first day of the regular season.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Yeah, the sm to date really needs to be the last day of spring training as opposed to the first day of the regular season.

Good point. I'll make that a request

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Yeah, the sm to date really needs to be the last day of spring training as opposed to the first day of the regular season.

Actually, now I think of this more, wasn't the change to bring the entire 40 man roster up supposed to fix people being able to circumvent the minor league option years in the first place? Are you still able to demote a player to the minor leagues during spring training without burning an option?

I thought the reason they made that change was because any minor league player on the 40 man roster is supposed to burn a minor league option each year?

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Actually, now I think of this more, wasn't the change to bring the entire 40 man roster up supposed to fix people being able to circumvent the minor league option years in the first place? Are you still able to demote a player to the minor leagues during spring training without burning an option?

I thought the reason they made that change was because any minor league player on the 40 man roster is supposed to burn a minor league option each year?

You do have to use an option for anyone on the 40 man roster if they don't make the 25 man active roster, IRL and in OOTP.

IRL and OOTP it does stop teams from stockpiling players. It is why the Cubs traded Pie this year. All options used so either trade him and get something or expose him to waivers and get nothing if claimed. In previous versions of OOTP you could "protect" Pie by never bringing him to ST. IRL you cannot protect him nor can you in OOTP X with the new fix of forcing all 40 man roster members to ST.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Sweed

You do have to use an option for anyone on the 40 man roster if they don't make the 25 man active roster, IRL and in OOTP.

IRL and OOTP it does stop teams from stockpiling players. It is why the Cubs traded Pie this year. All options used so either trade him and get something or expose him to waivers and get nothing if claimed. In previous versions of OOTP you could "protect" Pie by never bringing him to ST. IRL you cannot protect him nor can you in OOTP X with the new fix of forcing all 40 man roster members to ST.

Correct on the MLB part and in previous versions of OOTP. I hadn't really paid attention to that in this version, though.

In previous versions if you waited until opening day to send your spring training invites back to AAA they'd get charged 1 day of service time. Is that still the case?

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Correct on the MLB part and in previous versions of OOTP. I hadn't really paid attention to that in this version, though.

In previous versions if you waited until opening day to send your spring training invites back to AAA they'd get charged 1 day of service time. Is that still the case?

I don't know for sure as I'm just finishing my first ST in vX. It takes me awhile as I play out every inning of every game even ST. I would think though that it is unchanged. Just have to make sure to move them down on the last day of ST before hitting "finish day" to avoid the day of service. I was caught on this once, not sure if v2007 or v9, so am now very anal about the dates when the OOTP calender moves to a different "season" IE off-season>preseason>ST>opening day>etc..

[spleen1015]

The first patch is close to being ready...

hxxp://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/ootp-10-general-discussions/184266-small-update-about-patch-1-a.html

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by nfg22

Am I wrong or is this a bug.

I was under the impression that when a guy is invited to spring training he doesn't use up one of his options. Yet this game automatically activates the whole 40 man roster(fine with me), but then when the season starts, I have to place half of the guys returning to the minors on waivers because they were out of options. So is this true to life?

Yes, if you are on the 40 man roster you need to have an option remaining to avoid waivers.

[lynchjm24]

Originally Posted by Atocep

You have to send them down the day of the last spring training game. If you wait until the day of the first regular season game then they're active for 1 day of the regular season and thus use up an option year.

This is not true. Any player on the 40 man roster who gets sent to the minors is on 'optional assignment' and needs to have an option to avoid being sent through waivers. It doesn't matter if it's March 15th or June 15th.

OOTP has always been wrong where you could bury a guy in the minors forever by not calling him up. The game would let you leave players in the minors with no options, where in real life the 40 man roster is active in the offseason and all 15 of those players on the 40 man who don't make the 25 man either have to be optioned or clear waivers.

[Big Fo]

What a pain in the butt, I just turn waivers and 40 man rosters off.

[stevew]

In real life, if you sign a player to a major league deal in August(draft pick), does this eat up the guys first option?

So, say Strasberg. If he signs in July to a major league deal, they have to option him to the minors?

So 2010 uses his 2nd option up if he moves from the minors to the bigs? Or stays all year in the minors?

And if he still is bouncing back in forth in 2011, he can't go back to the minors in any subsequent seasons(2012-on) without being exposed to waivers?

Or Samardzija. He can't go down to the minors next year cause he signed an MLC in 2007? 07/08/09 would be his 3 options?

[Mike Lowe]

I'm not an expert, especially with how things are handled in the offseason of MLB, but I do know that options do NOT have to be used in consecutive years. What I mean is, it's not a MUST that if you use a player option in 2007 and 2008 that your last chance to use an option is 2009. There are plenty of cases where certain players have been sent down to the minors for some at bats to work out kinks (not for rehab as that is different) because they were 35 and still had an option floating around.

[stevew]

Yeah, from what I was reading the other day, if you spend the whole year in the majors it doesn't use an option.