MLB 12 The Show Franchise Mode Improvements

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by metal134

But sometimes, they DO become a better player. Sometimes, you do have a guy who hits .250 every year till he's 30 and then goes on to win MULTIPLE batting titles. Sometimes a guy averages 10 homeruns a year, suddenly hits 50 and goes on to hit 30-40 every year. So it does happen occasionally and I would like to see video games reflect that fact a bit better. Not just the Show, but all sports games need to do a better job in this department.

One thing you shouldn't confuse is this:

(1) The guy got suddenly better. He happened to perform in that breakout year by accident, and for some reason having that great year affected his ability to perform in subsequent years.

(2) The guy got suddenly better. He just worked on his skills off-season (or whatever that could improve him), and his stats in that breakout year and subsequent seasons just reflect that.


Think Bautista.... He performed better not because he happened to have a good year by chance and felt good about it. His ability actually made a sudden jump for some reason. The stats merely reflect that. (1) is not likely to happen unless having good stats have such a profound and staggering effect on the psychology and ability of players.

[MetsFan16]

When you're at the player card and you're looking at the advanced stats, does it tell you what they mean? Because I remeber seeing a screenshot of the player card and there was a stat that I had no idea about.

[Knight165]

Well...I've proposed(to Kolbe...so I'll resend it to Aaron) a system that would be something like this.....
(it's "stolen" from Minor League Analyst....but I think it's perfect for gaming)

Potential would be....
10. Hall of Famer(VERY few would get this rating)
9. Elite Player
8. Solid regular
7. Average player
6. Platoon player
5. MLB reserve
4. Top Minor Leaguer
3. Average Minor Leaguer
2. Minor League Reserve
1. Roster Filler

Then there would be a probability rating of that potential and how likely a player would be to reach it. This would drive his range of growth as well(better rating...better the likely jump)
A. 90% chance of reaching potential
B. 70% chance of reaching potential
C. 50% chance of reaching potential
D. 30% chance of reaching potential
E. 10% chance of reaching potential

There would also be a +/- to that letter to fill in between chances.

This would make every aspect of player evaluation much more intriguing.

At draft....Draft the 9C player....who might be the next Verlander....the next Hamilton
or go with the 8A guy who is a "lock" to get to the MLB level and contribute solidly to your ballclub

It could be dynamic.....and also be dependent on how good your scout is too see such a rating.

So...I still think that progression should be programmed in ......but how that progression/regression is handed out should be dependent on some new criteria.

M.K.
Knight165

[tabarnes19_SDS]

I like it!!!

[Marino]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

I'll bet you it does on his check! M.K. Knight165

Oh I bet, haha.

Sent from Hayden Panettiere's #1 fan

[MetsFan16]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

Well...I've proposed(to Kolbe...so I'll resend it to Aaron) a system that would be something like this..... (it's "stolen" from Minor League Analyst....but I think it's perfect for gaming) Potential would be.... 10. Hall of Famer(VERY few would get this rating) 9. Elite Player 8. Solid regular 7. Average player 6. Platoon player 5. MLB reserve 4. Top Minor Leaguer 3. Average Minor Leaguer 2. Minor League Reserve 1. Roster Filler Then there would be a probability rating of that potential and how likely a player would be to reach it. This would drive his range of growth as well(better rating...better the likely jump) A. 90% chance of reaching potential B. 70% chance of reaching potential C. 50% chance of reaching potential D. 30% chance of reaching potential E. 10% chance of reaching potential There would also be a +/- to that letter to fill in between chances. This would make every aspect of player evaluation much more intriguing. At draft....Draft the 9C player....who might be the next Verlander....the next Hamilton or go with the 8A guy who is a "lock" to get to the MLB level and contribute solidly to your ballclub It could be dynamic.....and also be dependent on how good your scout is too see such a rating. So...I still think that progression should be programmed in ......but how that progression/regression is handed out should be dependent on some new criteria. M.K. Knight165

I really like this idea. For the scouting aspect. Depending on how good your scout is you'll see a range of numbers and letters. If you have a bad scout you might get a 4B-9C. If you have an average scout you'll see a range like 6B-9A and if your scout is very good you could get a range of 2 numbers or one number.

[ty5oke]

What I certainly wouldn't have it coded to drop 30 overall in 1 year. I'm thinking more of a +3 or +5. It would be nice to have an above average player like Adam Jones, rated 80 overall and...

Scenario 1:
Year 1: .350 40 HR 120 RBI (+ 3, 83 overall)
Year 2: .360 45 HR 125 RBI (+5, 88 overall)

Scenario 2:
Year 1: .210 15 HR 80 RBI (-2, 78 overall)
Year 2: .205 14 HR 75 RBI (-3, 75 overall)

Scenario 1, we saw an above average player put together 2 great seasons and is now rated close to superstar status and in scenario 2, we see him regress due to 2 bad years in a row. I would have multiple factors with overall progression, the original thought was more for specific attributes. I also understand Knights point and can see how this could be difficult to implement. It would be the way I would try and program it though, I prefer my franchise to be more dynamic than static.

[Knight165]

Quote: Originally Posted by MetsFan16

I really like this idea. For the scouting aspect. Depending on how good your scout is you'll see a range of numbers and letters. If you have a bad scout you might get a 4B-9C. If you have an average scout you'll see a range like 6B-9A and if your scout is very good you could get a range of 2 numbers or one number.

Exactly.....or just one set.....but if he's not that good a 7C player he might rate as 9B or vice versa .......

For scouts....just go to the 20-80 scale for ratings at each skill

80.....39+ HR...... .320+ BA..... 3.9 Speed
70.....32-38...... .300-319....... 4.0
etc.....


M.K.
Knight165