Re: Performance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

[Bullit]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Sorry yes I am kidding, my sarcastic font is broken, Didnt mean any harm.

[Smallville102001]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Just simmed one season, here are some examples.

Mark Buehrle (36 YO): 14W - 10L, 2.49 ERA: Went from 83 OVR to 69 OVR (-14 OVR)

R.A Dickey (40 YO): 11W - 8L, 3.99 ERA: Went from 84 OVR to 68 OVR (-16 OVR)

David Ortiz (39 YO): 31 HR, 75 RBI, 261 AVG: Went from 88 OVR to 74 OVR (-14 OVR)

There are other examples of guys regressing to this degree (Tim Hudson of the Giants, etc.). Dickey and Ortiz retired, Buehrle stayed around.

wow that dose not look good. Its was thing for guys to get worse in a season but to drop by 10 or more points in just one year and when they have a good season to is not good at all.

[extremeskins04]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Sorry but this thread is kinda ridiculous.

In ANY sports game, AGE IS KING when it comes to regression. Always has been, and it always should be. Yes SCEA toned how much players regress but no sorry, a 39 or 40 year player is not going to stay the same in attributes.

It's just not going to happen, and it shouldn't.

I understand that the devs said in their stream that regression was tweaked some but not to the extent you're thinking of. Old players do not stop getting worse.

[Smallville102001]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Sorry but this thread is kinda ridiculous.

In ANY sports game, AGE IS KING when it comes to regression. Always has been, and it always should be. Yes SCEA toned how much players regress but no sorry, a 39 or 40 year player is not going to stay the same in attributes.

It's just not going to happen, and it shouldn't.

I understand that the devs said in their stream that regression was tweaked some but not to the extent you're thinking of. Old players do not stop getting worse.

Yeah old guys do get worse but guys shouldn't be dropping off by a whole 20 points in one year and after having a great season to. Most players don't show a big decline in just one season. Most players show a decline for sever years not just a big drop in one year. If a player is a say 80 and drops by 20 in just one year that is like a 25% drop in just one year. This is starting to look like the bad regression issue that NBA 2k had before its patch. At the same time I am not to surprised though because sports games tend to have more major issues then they used to and its gotten to the point where just about ever sports game has some major issue in franchise mode that either never gets fixed or that you have to want sever months for it to be fixed. Patches have made things a lot worse then things used to be. If a guy is say 35 and he hits 30 HR and ends up with a 320 batting average changes are he is not going to all of a sudden hit only 10 HR and have a 220 average the next year.

[Grubster11]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

I seriously don't understand how anyone can be defending this regression. It makes absolutely no sense to have players in your franchise over the age of 35 with the current system. I agree they need to have some sort of regression for older players, but they need to find a proper balance, as it stands right now (and in past Shows), it makes no sense.

With the advertised "performance based progression" in this year's game, I was really hoping for this issue to have been fixed. I am a Jays fan and have a Jays franchise every year, but it is pointless to have Buehrle or Dickey on my team beyond the first month. Even Bautista drops off significantly by year 2 of the franchise. This is pretty ridiculous and for them to advertise a new progression/ regression system is a blatant marketing ploy.

[Instant C1a55ic]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

This is the same issue that plagued my franchise from '14 as well.

I get the point you dont want old timers hanging around which causes younger players to get clogged in the minors system, but R.A. Dickey proves the point most guys are trying to make. Once in a blue moon you get a 35+ guy that turns in a CY Young or MVP type season. You get those guys that stick around longer then they should, and I think the game needs to reflect that.

Its need to be a more balanced system. There is nothing wrong with having 8-10 guys spread out over multiple teams past age 35 stick around for a few more years then they should, you know hovering around 70-80 or so.

I also feel it ads to the vision that I control my franchise as well. If the new progression is based off performance, I should be able to take an aging pitcher, play all of his starts intentionally having him win most of them to have him stick around. Its my choice, my franchise.

All in all, it stinks. It stinks that I have to follow the philosphy from '14 and abondon ship when a guy even sees the slightest amount of decline.

[CujoMatty]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Sorry but this thread is kinda ridiculous.

In ANY sports game, AGE IS KING when it comes to regression. Always has been, and it always should be. Yes SCEA toned how much players regress but no sorry, a 39 or 40 year player is not going to stay the same in attributes.

It's just not going to happen, and it shouldn't.

I understand that the devs said in their stream that regression was tweaked some but not to the extent you're thinking of. Old players do not stop getting worse.

Based on your logic than SCEA probably should have rated dickey a 69 to begin with. If last year he regressed that much in mlb 14 by the end of the year why did they rate him 84 to begin with this year.. It doesn't make any sense. If they truthfully feel like the regression system is working properly and is realistic than dickey shouldn't be rated higher than he was last year.

If I did a year to year franchise with last year I'd be starting with dickey at 69 and then God knows what for next year. If thats truly what they think would happen in real life regression he can't be an 84 out of the box this year. So which is right? Should he be an 84 or 69 starting this year. I don't think anyone being at all realistic would say he's a 69.

[BrianU]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

I disagree. Statistics do not prove that skills have improved or not diminished. I really would like to see performance progression toned down a tad.

If you Sim in the future a little the league becomes dominated by pitchers rated 88+ with sub 3 eras.

I've seen players drop less than other Sims and maintain better in others.

You do great work when it comes to testing franchise year after year. I hope the devs read your posts!

In your tests, how many years would you say we can realistically play franchise before the ratings get out of control? 2 years? 5 years? 10 years? If they want to push Y2Y saves as a big feature this really should be addressed pronto.

[BrianU]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

The regression tied to age thing is frustrating because we have lots of solutions here in the community from people that test this one area hardcore. This is a great resource the answers are all here they just need to implement it. I know this is all subjective but as others mention, when you look at RA Dickey in MLB 14s rating beginning of the year in the first roster, then this year, he did not drop 15 points....

Why can't those 15 point drops just be 5 point drops? Seems like a very easy fix just changing an attribute in the game code. Also give a bit more boost to performance limiting the drop. Bingo Bango problem solved.

Don't get me wrong The Show has the best franchise mode in all of the sports games and next year with statistics getting upgraded it will be crazy addicting but it is frustrating when within 1 week of the game being released we have spotted these issues. I am sure they run franchise simulations at the office, how did they see this as not a realistic mechanic?

[jaysfan17]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

This. Plus I am curious what makes this an "Official Thread"?

I searched the forum to find topics about this feature and I couldn't find any so I created this thread to generate more views in hopes of minimizing the bandwidth. I know it's not technically "official", but I'm hoping some people read this thread instead of making their own.

I seriously don't understand how anyone can be defending this regression. It makes absolutely no sense to have players in your franchise over the age of 35 with the current system. I agree they need to have some sort of regression for older players, but they need to find a proper balance, as it stands right now (and in past Shows), it makes no sense.

With the advertised "performance based progression" in this year's game, I was really hoping for this issue to have been fixed. I am a Jays fan and have a Jays franchise every year, but it is pointless to have Buehrle or Dickey on my team beyond the first month. Even Bautista drops off significantly by year 2 of the franchise. This is pretty ridiculous and for them to advertise a new progression/ regression system is a blatant marketing ploy.

I am worried about Bautista too because it is completely unrealistic that he would decline 5-10 points on his overall rating. Players like Bautista who are physically fit (even in his mid 30's he look's like he's still 25-26 years old) and take good care of themselves seem to stay neutral or age gracefully as they get older. When I look at a guys like Trout, Harper, Pedroia, and Lawrie I can't help but think that they will decline quickly as they get into their mid to late 30's. I believe this because they play game hard every day and never have a clean jersey after nine innings. The fielding and speed will take a hit, but I think the hitting will still be there, whereas the problem here is every attribute decreases.


I strongly believe that the Durability attribute should be taken into account here. For example: Let's take Mark Buerhle, James Shields, Cal Ripken Jr, Mariano Rivera, and Craig Kimbrel. All these guys didn't or rarely were injured and they are relatively consistent year after year.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

You do great work when it comes to testing franchise year after year. I hope the devs read your posts!

In your tests, how many years would you say we can realistically play franchise before the ratings get out of control? 2 years? 5 years? 10 years? If they want to push Y2Y saves as a big feature this really should be addressed pronto.

Thank you. Yes they hear from me through different forms of communication and CD events. Trust me, when I say they want to make it perfect as well.

I would say that the pitchers get going a little crazy about 4 to 5 years into the future. Seems to really hit closers the hardest with a majority of them 95 plus. Again, it's a fine balancing act because as they pitch better the performance factors into progression causing an increased speed of progression.

The regression tied to age thing is frustrating because we have lots of solutions here in the community from people that test this one area hardcore. This is a great resource the answers are all here they just need to implement it. I know this is all subjective but as others mentions, I , when you look at RA Dickey in MLB 14s rating beginning of the year in the first roster, then this year, he did not drop 15 points....

Why can't those 15 point drops just be 5 point drops? Seems like a very easy fix just changing an attribute in the game code. Also give a bit more boost to performance limiting the drop. Bingo Bango problem solved.

Don't get me wrong The Show has the best franchise mode in all of the sports games and next year with statistics getting upgraded it will be crazy addicting but it is frustrating when within 1 week of the game being released we have spotted these issues. I am sure they run franchise simulations at the office, how did they see this as not a realistic mechanic?

I understand what you are saying about year one regression, but remember the system is set up for all years, not just year 1. As the franchise develops there are not such extreme drops, because they are regressing slowly as they age.

Until there is a progression/regression system tied to individual positions it will be difficult to accurately nail it. We all know shortstops and starters regress, as a whole, much quicker than loogy relievers and knuckle ballers.

[Knight165]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

I searched the forum to find topics about this feature and I couldn't find any so I created this thread to generate more views in hopes of minimizing the bandwidth. I know it's not technically "official", but I'm hoping some people read this thread instead of making their own.





I am worried about Bautista too because it is completely unrealistic that he would decline 5-10 points on his overall rating. Players like Bautista who are physically fit (even in his mid 30's he look's like he's still 25-26 years old) and take good care of themselves seem to stay neutral or age gracefully as they get older. When I look at a guys like Trout, Harper, Pedroia, and Lawrie I can't help but think that they will decline quickly as they get into their mid to late 30's. I believe this because they play game hard every day and never have a clean jersey after nine innings. The fielding and speed will take a hit, but I think the hitting will still be there, whereas the problem here is every attribute decreases.


I strongly believe that the Durability attribute should be taken into account here. For example: Let's take Mark Buerhle, James Shields, Cal Ripken Jr, Mariano Rivera, and Craig Kimbrel. All these guys didn't or rarely were injured and they are relatively consistent year after year.

Since you guys are bringing Bautista into it...how would you guys get a performance based system to get him from his 05-09 performances to his '09/'10 progression?

M.K.
Knight165

[Grubster11]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

Since you guys are bringing Bautista into it...how would you guys get a performance based system to get him from his 05-09 performances to his '09/'10 progression?

M.K.
Knight165

It would be impossible. They don't have any system in the game where an unknown player can become an all-star. But that's a completely different point altogether.

Thank you. Yes they hear from me through different forms of communication and CD events. Trust me, when I say they want to make it perfect as well.

I would say that the pitchers get going a little crazy about 4 to 5 years into the future. Seems to really hit closers the hardest with a majority of them 95 plus. Again, it's a fine balancing act because as they pitch better the performance factors into progression causing an increased speed of progression.



I understand what you are saying about year one regression, but remember the system is set up for all years, not just year 1. As the franchise develops there are not such extreme drops, because they are regressing slowly as they age.

Until there is a progression/regression system tied to individual positions it will be difficult to accurately nail it. We all know shortstops and starters regress, as a whole, much quicker than loogy relievers and knuckle ballers.

I have done many, many, many sims of my own franchises as well. While every player slowly regresses at a certain age, there is always, ALWAYS, one year where every player does the Dickey and drops from an 85 to a 65. Like I said before, if you were doing a fantasy draft, it would be utterly useless to draft anyone over the age of 33, even if they are one of the best players in the league.

[Knight165]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

It would be impossible. They don't have any system in the game where an unknown player can become an all-star. But that's a completely different point altogether.

My point however is guys arguing for performance based progression and regression as if that's the indicator of how things actually happen.
Some guys RAILED about the random factor brought into player performance/progression/regression but fail to see that more often than not....there is a huge randomness to year to year player performances.

IMO....SCEA doesn't have progression/regression TOTALLY right with it's mostly linear path to projected numbers, but even it's flawed system is light years better than a totally performance based or heavily influenced system for sure(IMO)

M.K.
Knight165

[Knight165]

Re: Preformance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

....and I'll also slightly disagree with your assertion that taking on 33+ age players is "worthless".
If you are "numbers hunting"....perhaps.(and one of the reasons that I beg for the day that we have the ability to NEVER see actual ratings and the GOD AWFUL TOTALLY IRRELEVANT video sports game phenomenon ...OVR.) back to topic....

In my 2014 franchise....I took a chance on two older players. Josh Willingham and Adam Dunn both regressed during the year and looking at their ratings.....you wouldn't really say you'd want them on your club. Especially their OVR.
But somehow through good handling(if I must say so myself) in pretty strict platoon play/PH......I got Dunn to hit .234 with 24 homers and Willingham to hit .295 with 18 homers at 1B.(traded Ike Davis and moved Duda to LF)
Not bad for two 33+ players.

M.K.
Knight165