Alright Boyz!.... here we go OOTP 17

[markprior22]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Right. I recall when I first started doing QuickStarts with suggested settings, people would go NUTS over me setting the AI to use ratings very heavily in determining who starts, and to pretty much ignore previous-season stats. Uhhhhhhh, it makes the AI teams *better* when they do that, dummies. It's as if people would rather see the AI teams use weaker starting lineups. I'd rather the AI do everything it can to give me an actual challenging experience. If I am running a team and my guy who went .260-35-100 last year drops from 55/75/50 to 45/55/40 in the offseason, he's sitting if I have a better player. And I want the AI to make that same decision.

Tried to find your posts at OOTP but can't remember your user name over there. Question for you

I play an MLB setup with fictional players, stats only. I currently have settings at 0, 67,22,11 (everything stats based). What would you recommend for best AI strategy?

[spleen1015]

Skydog

[markprior22]

That's right...thanks

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Tried to find your posts at OOTP but can't remember your user name over there. Question for you

I play an MLB setup with fictional players, stats only. I currently have settings at 0, 67,22,11 (everything stats based). What would you recommend for best AI strategy?

Game still uses ratings as a baseline even in a stats only environment unless you turn off potential ratings. Not sure what you mean by "AI strategy" though.

[markprior22]

I just mean the management of AI teams. Making smart trades, roster moves, etc

[Balldog]

Is it possible to create a fictional save with real life MLB structure starting back in 1900 and fast sim to today with correct expansion timing? Basically a fictional historical type replay??

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Is it possible to create a fictional save with real life MLB structure starting back in 1900 and fast sim to today with correct expansion timing? Basically a fictional historical type replay??

Very doable. I don't know how fast it would be. Might have to do all of the changes yourself.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by markprior22

I just mean the management of AI teams. Making smart trades, roster moves, etc

There's no way to make the game smarter short of playing as I do, basically in God mode. You can set a salary cap at a reasonable amount (60-100m in modern $) and having roster rules, a Rule V draft and a deep draft will keep parity up too.

Also talent change randomness at over 100 is a good way to keep things honest.

But there's no making the AI smarter through the settings and a heavy dose of tinkering.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Is it possible to create a fictional save with real life MLB structure starting back in 1900 and fast sim to today with correct expansion timing? Basically a fictional historical type replay??

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Very doable. I don't know how fast it would be. Might have to do all of the changes yourself.

I haven't tested this, but seems to me that you could setup a normal historical league and play it like normal.

The ONLY key difference according to your scenario, would be to have the draft import fictional players rather than real ones, which should just be a matter of unchecking a few boxes I don't have the game open right now.

If I'm right, then you'd be able to sim like normal without intervening because the only key difference is the players inputted into the game.

[Balldog]

I will have to check it out tonight. I was messing around with it yesterday and couldn't get it figured out.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Tried to find your posts at OOTP but can't remember your user name over there. Question for you

I play an MLB setup with fictional players, stats only. I currently have settings at 0, 67,22,11 (everything stats based). What would you recommend for best AI strategy?

I used 80/15/4/1 in the QS to calm things down some. I use 100/0/0/0 when playing, though, because as a human, that is how I evaluate my players. I put the best players on the field, regardless of how they perform, and I want the AI to do likewise.

[Comey]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Is it possible to create a fictional save with real life MLB structure starting back in 1900 and fast sim to today with correct expansion timing? Basically a fictional historical type replay??

1) Create a historical league set in 1900.
2) Before play starts, release all of the players to FA.
3) Delete the FA pool
4) Fill the rosters with fictional players
5) Fill the FA with fictional players (maybe 100, however you choose. I go for a varied group, some vets, some prospects).

That would do it.

Make sure you have historical player creation on, but importing historical players off.

[Balldog]

Thanks Comey!

[spleen1015]

Make sure you are a commissioner when you want to delete the FA. I was stumped by this for 39 minutes earlier today because I thought I was a commish and I wasn't.

[Ben E Lou]

If anyone has time to test in the next few days, it would be appreciated. I'm trying to confirm that changing AI settings to favor ratings more has the effect of ushering in a heavily "dead ball" era. I think I've isolated it to that specific setting. League OPS was around .730 in the first few seasons of the most recent run, and it dropped to under .700 consistently within 10-15 seasons. In the previous run, where I changed other settings but left the AI settings alone, this did not happen.

To be clear, I've been seeing the "dead ball" issue in 10-15 50+ season sims, and it appears resetting the AI eval is the only thing that makes it go away. Ugh.

[IlliniCub]

Has anyone found a good sweet spot for the financial settings this year?

[SirFozzie]

The folks at OOTP were nice enough to consent to an interview with me for the blog, so I'm cross posting it into this thread: Markus DOES crush my pie-in-the-sky dreams a couple times, sadly (I would love to see something like what APBA broadcast blast did, and I think Inside the Park was fun), but it's kinda interesting to get into a discussion with them:

https://www.an8bitmind.com/index.php...park-baseball/

[fortheglory]

Wow. This thread died off quickly

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by fortheglory

Wow. This thread died off quickly

The die hards are old. The game has been around for a long time and it's labour intensive and gets harder and harder to justify farting away hours simulating sportz even if you really want to.

[MizzouRah]

I'm in 2023 and enjoying it.

[RainMaker]

This game is really good. Thoroughly enjoying it.

Anyone with some recommended settings?

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Anyone with some recommended settings?

Settings for what, exactly? There's a fairly big (or vocal, at least) faction that like to play Stats Only (no ratings visible, you have to go on the guy's stats).

Or are you looking for potential leagues to play in?

[RainMaker]

Sorry, trade settings, development setting, aging setting. Basically if any of you adjust settings for a more realistic league.

Also are there any differences in the results using the 3D view as opposed to not?

[MizzouRah]

I use hard/neutral, use 50/30/15/5 for evaul settings, that's about it.

For 3D, the results are the same, just played out with little icons (players) moving around making plays.

[fortheglory]

I use avg trading...which seems very realisti (at least if you are trying to trade for prospects) 40/25/25/10

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Sorry, trade settings, development setting, aging setting. Basically if any of you adjust settings for a more realistic league.

Also are there any differences in the results using the 3D view as opposed to not?

Realistic injuries are actually one notch UP from default but that does NOT sound like fun to me. I used to have trade settings on hard/favor prospects but now it seems more like one of those, not both is the sweet spot. I like to increase talent change randomness to around 150 just so there's some more unknown in the world. Everything default (except for injury freq) is designed to be MLB accurate. There's an amazing amount of numbers crunching to make that so.

As was said, there's only one game engine. 3D results are the same as non-3D. As a matter of fact, that's been a big struggle for the design team -- to get the 3D guys to realistically play out the results from the engine. Still a bit of a work in progress but I very much like watching a game in 3D. There's a lot more excitement for me watching that ball hit deep to the gap and not knowing whether the CF pawn is going to move over in time to catch it for the out.

[fortheglory]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

There's no way to make the game smarter short of playing as I do, basically in God mode. You can set a salary cap at a reasonable amount (60-100m in modern $) and having roster rules, a Rule V draft and a deep draft will keep parity up too.

Also talent change randomness at over 100 is a good way to keep things honest.

But there's no making the AI smarter through the settings and a heavy dose of tinkering.

What about trade settings? Can't you make the AI a little more savvy there?

[JPhillips]

Let me tell you the strange saga of Cincinnati's Matt Magill.

In 2016 Magill pitched to a 4+ ERA in AAA and then in a six game callup he pitched to an 8.22 ERA in the majors. In the winter Cincy declined the minimum salary offer to keep Magill. Over the winter Magill sat unwanted by any major league team.

And then came April and the KC Royals. On opening day of the 2017 season Magill was plucked off the scrap heap with a 3 year 38 million dollar contract.

[JPhillips]

And let me tell you the strange story of Kevin Plawecki.

Early in the 2016 season the Reds shopped Brandon Phillips and the Mets offered Plawecki. The Reds tested to see what the Mets would offer and also asked for Amed Rosario. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Cecchini. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Szapucki. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Dominic Smith. The Mets said yes.

Now the bad trade AI really isn't the story here. When I removed Plawecki the Mets said no. When I removed the prospects the Mets kept saying no. I couldn't get any of the prospects straight up for Phillips, but the Mets hate Plawecki so much they are willing to give up four good to great prospects to get rid of him.

[fortheglory]

I see...not good. Well, I am hoping for a new FOF this fall I guess.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by fortheglory

What about trade settings? Can't you make the AI a little more savvy there?

I don't know about savvy, but certainly more obstinate and therefore less likely to be fleeced. I love a good prospect so I set it for Favor Prospects. You can also adjust what weight you give ratings, this year's stats, last year's, and the year before. You can set those weights so the AI values the same things you do. However, it still won't be perfect.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

And let me tell you the strange story of Kevin Plawecki.

Early in the 2016 season the Reds shopped Brandon Phillips and the Mets offered Plawecki. The Reds tested to see what the Mets would offer and also asked for Amed Rosario. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Cecchini. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Szapucki. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Dominic Smith. The Mets said yes.

Now the bad trade AI really isn't the story here. When I removed Plawecki the Mets said no. When I removed the prospects the Mets kept saying no. I couldn't get any of the prospects straight up for Phillips, but the Mets hate Plawecki so much they are willing to give up four good to great prospects to get rid of him.

I've encountered this as well. It seems like there are two competing AI streams. One is saying that OK, we're going to offer Plawecki for Phillips and another that is calculating trade values that don't say the same thing. So, it's suppressed Plawecki's value to get an agreement as long as he's in the offer.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

And let me tell you the strange story of Kevin Plawecki.

Early in the 2016 season the Reds shopped Brandon Phillips and the Mets offered Plawecki. The Reds tested to see what the Mets would offer and also asked for Amed Rosario. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Cecchini. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Szapucki. The Mets said yes, so the Reds added Dominic Smith. The Mets said yes.

Now the bad trade AI really isn't the story here. When I removed Plawecki the Mets said no. When I removed the prospects the Mets kept saying no. I couldn't get any of the prospects straight up for Phillips, but the Mets hate Plawecki so much they are willing to give up four good to great prospects to get rid of him.

This would make sense if Plawecki is signed to a very bad contract.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by fortheglory

What about trade settings? Can't you make the AI a little more savvy there?

Heavily favor veterans. Put trading on Low. Makes it easier to make a bigger amount of trades.

[fortheglory]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Heavily favor veterans. Put trading on Low. Makes it easier to make a bigger amount of trades.

How do these settings help?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

This would make sense if Plawecki is signed to a very bad contract.

Yeah, but when I made the trade he was still pre-arbitration.

[lcjjdnh]

It might not be a perfect game, but I've still spent tons of hours--and gotten plenty of enjoyment--out of this year's version. Well worth $40, in my opinion. And, although I sim most games, it's fun to watch the big ones in 3D.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by lcjjdnh

It might not be a perfect game, but I've still spent tons of hours--and gotten plenty of enjoyment--out of this year's version. Well worth $40, in my opinion. And, although I sim most games, it's fun to watch the big ones in 3D.

It's the best version, period.

[EagleFan]

It would be nice to be able to start a new game on a date that I want to instead of April. For a game that has as many options you would think this would be an option. Basically I am trying to create a 6 level league system with 132 teams; each level is slightly lower than the one before but no minor league affiliations. There will be manual promotion/relegation each year. I want to start the first year out with a free agency frenzy. Can't do that when the game keeps defaulting to two days before the league starts.

Any suggestions?

[Johnny93g]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

It would be nice to be able to start a new game on a date that I want to instead of April. For a game that has as many options you would think this would be an option. Basically I am trying to create a 6 level league system with 132 teams; each level is slightly lower than the one before but no minor league affiliations. There will be manual promotion/relegation each year. I want to start the first year out with a free agency frenzy. Can't do that when the game keeps defaulting to two days before the league starts.

Any suggestions?

Create a fake 2 team league and sim to the date you want everything to start. Then create everything?

[Comey]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

It would be nice to be able to start a new game on a date that I want to instead of April. For a game that has as many options you would think this would be an option. Basically I am trying to create a 6 level league system with 132 teams; each level is slightly lower than the one before but no minor league affiliations. There will be manual promotion/relegation each year. I want to start the first year out with a free agency frenzy. Can't do that when the game keeps defaulting to two days before the league starts.

Any suggestions?

You can select your season's starting date when you create the league. You can also edit the schedule (which is more cumbersome, but doable).

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

It would be nice to be able to start a new game on a date that I want to instead of April. For a game that has as many options you would think this would be an option. Basically I am trying to create a 6 level league system with 132 teams; each level is slightly lower than the one before but no minor league affiliations. There will be manual promotion/relegation each year. I want to start the first year out with a free agency frenzy. Can't do that when the game keeps defaulting to two days before the league starts.

Any suggestions?

Haha this isn't a traditional setup, so the game not really being able to handle it out of the box isn't too weird as another weird player. But the suggestion above to start a small league, sim a year and then edit from there is the most sensible idea.

Then you can expand how you want or add teams. Be sure to set the league schedule to not start based on the XML date (which will always be in April) and set it to when you want it.

[EagleFan]

For a game that allows you to customize as much as this you would think there could easily be an option for what freaking day you want your universe to start in.

I even tried changing the league to start in January, unchecked the HTML option and yet the game still started in April.

[Uncle Briggs]

This is on sale for $10 during the World Series. I have OOTP14. Is this one sufficiently different/better to justify a new purchase (taking into consideration that I don't care about face pictures and will likely never watch a game play out)?

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Uncle Briggs

This is on sale for $10 during the World Series. I have OOTP14. Is this one sufficiently different/better to justify a new purchase (taking into consideration that I don't care about face pictures and will likely never watch a game play out)?

Definitely.. it's the best version yet. I love the 2d.. but if you don't play out your games, there are other improvements such as coaches/managers with their own play styles, improved trade AI and roster management AI, multiple short lists, etc..

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Uncle Briggs

This is on sale for $10 during the World Series. I have OOTP14. Is this one sufficiently different/better to justify a new purchase (taking into consideration that I don't care about face pictures and will likely never watch a game play out)?

Without question. In fact, 15 and 16 were better enough to warrant the $10 spent too.

[fortheglory]

I don't see why someone wouldn't pay full price upon release???

[chinaski]

Just picked it up! 10 bucks is a great deal from what I gather. Havent bought OOTP since OOTP10.

[korme]

Originally Posted by fortheglory

I don't see why someone wouldn't pay full price upon release???

I paid full price from OOTP 2 to OOTP 16. This is the first year I didn't, and I'm considering it now at the price drop. Sometimes the burnout is real...

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by fortheglory

I don't see why someone wouldn't pay full price upon release???

I don't either.. but I only really love two sports games, OOTP and NHL on Xbox One.