Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 84

Thread: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise [Fixed BB2K11]

  1. #46
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Ok. Graphs like this are a huge improvement over graphs like this. But they are still missing something.

    All these were done going 20 years into the future, but not looking at any of the intermediate steps.

    I did similar tests but took data every 5 years.

    The problem that I found is that you can adjust the talent levels for players in the draft, but not for the players that are created when the game begins. HGM's tests showing distributions in 2009 missed these players because most of them had retired when he took the data.

    In my tables Top 30 is the average overall rating of the highest rated 30 players, Top 100 is the highest 100 and Top 300 is the highest 300.

    In the first table I used Fictional Players = -100% in player creation settings. Still, you can see the talent shift upwards in the first 5 and 10 years.

    From 84.5 to 90 for the top 10, for example.

    The numbers don't get back to normal until 15 years later.

    In the second graph, I looked at peak values as well. This looks like the cause of the problem.

    With fictional players set at -30% the game still creates enough 100 peak players to have the average of the top 30 to be 99.7. Because these initial peaks are so high the talent shoots up from an average of 84 for hitters and 87 for pitchers to 94 and 93 respectively in 10 years.

    Since altering the Player Creation settings in the game does nothing to the players that have already been created, there's no way around this problem that I can see.

    And 4-5 years into the game, It is basically pointless to play.
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    The rosters apparently need serious adjustment. I've raised this issue repeatedly, but HGM just dismisses it as "much improved, let's move on." I agree with Fili here -- as is, there's no point in starting a dynasty with current year rosters. It doesn't take 5 years to blow up, either -- things are out of control after 2 years.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    How would you suggest changing the current year rosters, then?

  4. #49
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Lower the peak values

    There's 30 guys whose peaks average out to 99.7

    That's too much

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Default rosters?

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    But, I mean, not with, say, my rosters, right? My rosters don't have anybody with a peak above 98...and that 98 peak is someone who has already reached it (Tim Lincecum).

  8. #53
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    No, not your rosters. Fictional rosters

    And what the hell happened between 2007 and 2010

    Check this out, after 12 years of simming

    http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showpos...3&postcount=48

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    I just simulated 4 years (2009 through 2012) using HGM's rosters. The NL average overall team ratings ballooned from 79 to 94. The number of ML non-pitchers with an overall rating of 90+ went from 20 to 85. Completely unplayable as far as I'm concerned.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Uptown Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,832

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    What settings did you use?

  11. #56
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    It doesn't matter the settings, IMO.

    The only settings you can alter are for creating players in the draft. These aren't newly drafted players that are causing the problem.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by filihok View Post
    The only settings you can alter are for creating players in the draft. These aren't newly drafted players that are causing the problem.
    They're part of it. Yes, it occurs early so it's not just the newly drafted players, but it persists into the future as well.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonGM View Post
    They're part of it. Yes, it occurs early so it's not just the newly drafted players, but it persists into the future as well.
    Into the future you can scale it back. Set the settings to 0% and you'll have an average player with an overall of 60. That's a lot better than an overall of 90

    I'd guess that it was the same problem, but into the future you have a chance to change it by altering the settings. But those setting don't take effect until 10-15 years down the road.

    We need an option to alter the settings when setting up the game, not afterwards.

    Or, the problem could be fixed...that'd work too

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    I'm using 12.08, the last patch where the settings make a difference (at least according to some other posters; apparently the "career paths" option in 12.09 disabled all the other settings that affect the draft.) My Rookies.ini file has everything set to 100. I increased amateur talent 20% and reduced Peak Value 20% to compensate. I've tested multiple drafts with those settings and they appear to be fine; it's the existing players in the default or HGM's rosters that cause the problem. All (or a very high proportion) of the potential stars like Jay Bruce and Colby Rasmus jump up to 95 or so, with virtually no decline among existing stars. Since it is possible to control the draft talent problem in 12.08, I believe the talent inflation could be fixed by a drastic reduction in peak values in the rosters (for players who are not yet at peak.) But it would be better if we had settings to control that. Somewhere around BM 2008 or so player development was accelerated with no adjustment to the guidelines used for roster creation and it's ruined the game IMO.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,804

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    We need that option when setting up that game.

    If we could drop peak value's 20% (or whatever) when setting the game up, I think the problem would be next to fixed.

    Another problem that I've noticed when checking these settings is even if you drop the talent down to -100% you still end up with too many upper echelon players. The overall talent of the league will drop down into the 70's or even 60's but

    Too many 95+, too many 90+, and way too many 85+

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •