Contract editing issue...

[johntait1]

Quote: Originally Posted by tabarnes19

The problem is the ratio would not continue past year one. Let's say you give a player a 10 million contract. In the offseason that same player would be signed by the cpu at 6 million. That affects the trade logic because the system sees the 10 million player as a 6 million player and the value is greatly reduced.

Yeah, but wouldn't it balance out? Because the players on contracts below market value would sign a lower dollar value contract.

The second part is intentional. A player like Edwin Jackson would have (hopefully) negative value because of a higher contract. A player like Chris Archer would have higher trade value than with the default rosters since he is on a team friendly contract.

Sorry if I'm missing something obvious. I'm just sort of confused, so could you explain this out a bit more? Thanks.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Quote: Originally Posted by johntait1

Yeah, but wouldn't it balance out? Because the players on contracts below market value would sign a lower dollar value contract. The second part is intentional. A player like Edwin Jackson would have (hopefully) negative value because of a higher contract. A player like Chris Archer would have higher trade value than with the default rosters since he is on a team friendly contract. Sorry if I'm missing something obvious. I'm just sort of confused, so could you explain this out a bit more? Thanks.

You are correct in players that you want to be difficult to trade(Jackson), but you will also have players that the game defines as a $7 million player making $10....which would dry the market up.

As far as balancing out, I don't know. The system seems to want to keep budgets rather proportional and strategies are tied to the budgets. If you raise everyones budgets through salary edits, most won't hit the goals and budgets will be cut and tighten. On top of that all the youg players that are arbitration and renewable in the game will be getting raises and driving the budget.

Also let's say for instance you make a scale. Real Players making $5 million will make $1.5 in game. Well that is the amount that arbitration players make, so it would mess the scale up.

I really think it would be more work than it is worth for what you will gain. After the first season the contracts would no longer be proportional and even the ones's that have "team friendly deals" may not be considered as team friendly by the engine.

The good thing about it being editable though is everyone can do what they want and edit it to their wants and/or needs.

I'm just going to edit a few players with bad contracts and even at that keep it around $15 million.

[johntait1]

Quote: Originally Posted by tabarnes19

You are correct in players that you want to be difficult to trade(Jackson), but you will also have players that the game defines as a $7 million player making $10....which would dry the market up. As far as balancing out, I don't know. The system seems to want to keep budgets rather proportional and strategies are tied to the budgets. If you raise everyones budgets through salary edits, most won't hit the goals and budgets will be cut and tighten. On top of that all the youg players that are arbitration and renewable in the game will be getting raises and driving the budget. Also let's say for instance you make a scale. Real Players making $5 million will make $1.5 in game. Well that is the amount that arbitration players make, so it would mess the scale up. I really think it would be more work than it is worth for what you will gain. After the first season the contracts would no longer be proportional and even the ones's that have "team friendly deals" may not be considered as team friendly by the engine. The good thing about it being editable though is everyone can do what they want and edit it to their wants and/or needs. I'm just going to edit a few players with bad contracts and even at that keep it around $15 million.

Oh ok that makes sense I guess. Thanks for the responses. I hadn't thought about the lower salaries getting too low. I might end up just editing some of the larger contracts I guess.

One thing I as wondering about how the budget would go up? The salaries would still add up to the current in game total so wouldn't budgets be the same? Thanks for the help.

[acdegnats]

Quote: Originally Posted by johntait1

Oh ok that makes sense I guess. Thanks for the responses. I hadn't thought about the lower salaries getting too low. I might end up just editing some of the larger contracts I guess. One thing I as wondering about how the budget would go up? The salaries would still add up to the current in game total so wouldn't budgets be the same? Thanks for the help.

I did something similar to what you suggested with one of the rosters created with accurate contracts. I was unable to do the entire league, did mostly just the AL and did a proportional scale. Contracts 25-30 million I reduced by about 25-33% contracts in the 18-25% range I reduce by 20-15% and so on and so forth. IT was nothing super scientific or exact however after just adjusting a few contracts in the AL I simmed several seasons four different times and never saw a star player still a free agent after the off-season. (Most of the time in fact it was players in the 70's or below left).

Again it was nothing exact however I tried to keep the salaries inline with the games starting budgets and it did help. IN all honesty I think simply lowering the amount of the mega contracts had the largest impact. Once the OFSM or possibly OFSM hybrid are out I plan on inputting the changes I made to the other roster and starting my franchise from there.

[johntait1]

Quote: Originally Posted by acdegnats

I did something similar to what you suggested with one of the rosters created with accurate contracts. I was unable to do the entire league, did mostly just the AL and did a proportional scale. Contracts 25-30 million I reduced by about 25-33% contracts in the 18-25% range I reduce by 20-15% and so on and so forth. IT was nothing super scientific or exact however after just adjusting a few contracts in the AL I simmed several seasons four different times and never saw a star player still a free agent after the off-season. (Most of the time in fact it was players in the 70's or below left). Again it was nothing exact however I tried to keep the salaries inline with the games starting budgets and it did help. IN all honesty I think simply lowering the amount of the mega contracts had the largest impact. Once the OFSM or possibly OFSM hybrid are out I plan on inputting the changes I made to the other roster and starting my franchise from there.

Oh ok glad to see that it worked out well. I might try something similar when OSFM and Hybrid get released.

[Unlucky 13]

So...

Seeing how far off the OFSM rosters are from reality, is anyone else planning on editing them to real life?

If there isn't one bouncing around to download, I guess I'm going to buckle down and do it myself. Should be a little easier doing it the second time through. I just can't deal with the fake contracts knowing that they can be fixed.

[geisterhome]

Idk why the contracts are off that much on the official rosters. As I remember the explanation was that they weren't supposed to resemble real life values due to problems with the MLB licence (?). But now OOTP is an officially licenced game too and the contracts are there way closer to real life, so I'm really not sure what is stopping them?

[HozAndMoose]

Quote: Originally Posted by Unlucky 13

So... Seeing how far off the OFSM rosters are from reality, is anyone else planning on editing them to real life? If there isn't one bouncing around to download, I guess I'm going to buckle down and do it myself. Should be a little easier doing it the second time through. I just can't deal with the fake contracts knowing that they can be fixed.

It breaks franchise down the road so be careful.