OOTP 9 Conversion/League File

[Guest]

Won't be able to buy the game/download the file for a little while. After my fine I'll have like $75 left in my bank account, so I really can't afford it at the moment.

[mahoney2]

Can you just download the trial and use that for the next 30 days? (Not sure if you are still on that 14.4k connection)

[Andrew]

Won't be able to buy the game/download the file for a little while. After my fine I'll have like $75 left in my bank account, so I really can't afford it at the moment.

When do you think you'll be able to get the game?

[Riverman]

Hey guys, was busy today, so I couldnt get on.

First, I downloaded the patch for OOTP9 and the new league file. Tried opening the game, but it wouldnt work.

So, then I just downloaded the whole game, which is already updated. This gave me the setup file on my desktop. I opened the setup and ran it all the way through, which updated everything I already had. Tried opening the game and this time it worked.

Hope that helps.

I think I did all of that. The only difference is that the button I clicked after the download did the setup immediately so when I went to my desktop the new patched version was ready to run. I am now running version 1.1.6. Could someone please confirm that this is correct.

Thanks

[Clay]

Yes. OOTP 9.1.6 is correct

[Clay]

- We need to decide on AI Evaluation %'s now that this feature actually works. The Default is 25% ratings, 50% this years stats, 20% last years stats, 5% 2 years ago stats. I think this is to heavily based on the current year, but am open to suggestions.

I'm thinking more on ratings and spread the others out a little more....

Like:

40 Ratings
35 This Year
18 Last Year
7 Two Years Ago

[Andrew]

I'm thinking more on ratings and spread the others out a little more....

Like:

40 Ratings
35 This Year
18 Last Year
7 Two Years Ago

Yeah my feeling is that this year and last year should be fairly close together. Reason being is I think it uses last year for the first month of the season then switches to this year. We might see some very funky things going on after that switch.

Either way, I think we need to make a decision today or tomorrow and get this in for the next sim since I believe it affects contract demands.

My thought is: 40 ratings, 30 this year, 20 last year, 10 two years ago.

I think this will keep the evaluation fairly static since a good chunk is based on ratings but will increase demands for players who are consistently good.

[Clay]

What about 45/30/20/5...

I'm afraid to put too much value on two years ago because these guys all play for so long.

[Riverman]

At the risk of being lumped with Jistic as a naysayer, I think performance should have a far greater priority than ratings. Something like - 20-35-25-20. I like the game to be modeled on reality as much as possible.

I can't imagine a real player advancing the notion in contract negotiations - "yeah, I know my stats for the last few years have really sucked but I have great ratings."

[Clay]

I think of ratings kind of like "reputation" or "career resume". People get paid all the time based on the player they were in the past or are on paper.

[Riverman]

I think of ratings kind of like "reputation" or "career resume". People get paid all the time based on the player they were in the past or are on paper.

What breakdown have we been using? Is it posted somewhere above?

[Guest]

When do you think you'll be able to get the game?

Whenever I land a job...I'm looking at the momenet.

[Andrew]

What breakdown have we been using? Is it posted somewhere above?

Whatever the 2007/8 default was but to be honest, I have no clue because changing the setting didn't really have an effect in 2007/8. Right now it's set to 25/50/20/5 which places way too much emphasis on current year.

I have no problem with going stats based, but if so I think it needs to be spread out over the 3 years rather than the majority lumped into 1 season. Your suggestion looks pretty good to me.

The one issue I see, and we might even have to test it (any volunteers??) is that in a more stats based system it might be very easy to sign good prospects who put up poor stats in the minors to long term deals for cheap money.

[Riverman]

Whatever the 2007/8 default was but to be honest, I have no clue because the setting didn't really have an effect in 2007/8. Right now it's set to 25/50/20/5 which places way too much emphasis on current year.

I have no problem with going stats based, but if so I think it needs to be spread out over the 3 years rather than the majority lumped into 1 season. Your suggestion looks pretty good to me.

The one issue I see, and we might even have to test it (any volunteers??) is that in a more stats based system it might be very easy to sign good prospects who put up poor stats in the minors to long term deals for cheap money.

After thinking about it a little more, I think I am starting to understand what has been going on with some of the contract demands. I've noticed that some players demands are very low early in the year and then go way, way up later. Sully has mentioned that he has seen the same thing with some of his players. I suppose this is because the current system puts a lot of weight on the current year and so if a guy gets off to a bad start, he doesn't demand much. This happened to me with Joe Delgado and others. In Delgado's case, when he first joined my team he had gone something like 2 for 34 to start the season for the team that traded him to me. Once he joined my team he wasn't asking for much at all on an extension but then he started hitting and his demands went way up.

With that in mind, I think the only good solution is to discount heavily current year stats since it permits cheap signings of guys who start out poorly. It is too bad that they can't be weighted more heavily later in the season though.

With regard to your point about signing guys to cheap long-term deals early in their careers, I haven't seen any of my players willing to consider long-term deals at that time. I know at least a couple of players did that on other teams early in the history of the league but I haven't seen any lately. We could always add a house rule prohibiting this kind of deal, if necessary. I don't think it happens much in real baseball if at all either.

[Andrew]

I think it uses last year's stats for the first month and then switches to current year. So if a guy has a bad April, he can be very easy to re-sign. But again, I really have no idea what values we were using. I still think current year stats should have the most value (since that is what players will use during FA). I just think last years and two years stats shouldn't be too much lower in order to avoid the issues you mentioned.