10.31 Inflation-adjusted FA asking prices are undervalued [Fixed 10.33]

[jonnymo]

In a game started in 10.31, I'm seeing something bizarre that I do not remember ever seeing in this forum. Using default settings, all FA of note are signed on the first day of the free agency period. Screenshots #1 (before) and #2 (after) are sorted by "Seeking."

Unlike my other new bug report, this effect still exists after the second year. Reducing "League Revenue" from the default +20% to +0% does not change this. Only by changing "Salary Demands" to +100% (while leaving "League Revenue" at +20%) could I keep everyone from being signed on Day 1 (screenshot #3).

I have attached the .mog, game date 11 Nov 1984.

[jonnymo]

Anyone have any ideas? Am I the only one who has seen this?

[ohms_law]

Doesn't happen much in 2007 or later. This is mostly an issue with historic games.

[jonnymo]

Doesn't happen much in 2007 or later. This is mostly an issue with historic games.

Aha! Looks like this thread should be renamed. This isn't a hyperactive-AI bug: it's an inflation-based game-balancing bug.

I opened the saved file, then changed Inflation Index to the default 2007 value (25600). Next I reset prices and recalculated salaries. The screenshots are before and after Day 1 of Free Agency.

[ohms_law]

Yea, good call testing that out. The inflation system definitely needs work.

...what should I rename the thread as?

[jonnymo]

...what should I rename the thread as?

How about "AI Misinterpreting Historic Inflation-Adjusted FA Asking Prices As Undervalued"?

Does this affect any areas of the game other than FA salaries? If so, I haven't noticed.

We have seen what the AI does w/ players from 23 yrs ago. Does the AI sign fewer FA than expected w/ inflation on in, say, 2030? If so, then it doesn't just affect historic leagues.

[ohms_law]

I'm not really sure. It would be a good ting to check out, though.

[BM_MAN]

I just set it Once and Keep it there.

That should fix the Problem

[jonnymo]

We have seen what the AI does w/ players from 23 yrs ago. Does the AI sign fewer FA than expected w/ inflation on in, say, 2030? If so, then it doesn't just affect historic leagues.[/FONT]

Yes, I just quoted myself. How lame.

I see that this is fixed in 10.33, but I ran the future test on 10.31, and I wanted to report the results. (I know that a lot of people are still playing w/ v10.31.) After 34 years, there does not seem to be much of a difference in the FA market if inflation is turned on or off.

There were 81 FA (43 hitters/38 pitchers) asking for more than the minimum salary. The number of available FA after 1, 8, and 31 days of the FA period:

Inflation index=99477 (ML min salary=$1.45M)
Day   Hitters   Pitchers
 1      43          36
 8      42          35
31      22          31

Inflation index=25600 (ML min salary=$380K)
Day   Hitters   Pitchers   Change
 1      43          32      - 5%
 8      39          28      -13%
31      24          24      - 9%

When I adjust the league down from 99477 to 25600 and change all of the prices and salaries, one thing doesn't change: cash on hand (more than half of the league has cash or debt in excess of $100M). This is just one test; it's possible that w/ add'l testing, we would see that the slightly increased number of FA signings is actually due to all of the extra cash.