Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 84

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

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    207

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    ^What are the optimum settings to reduce the fictional draft issue, with this new version (12.08)

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    The sim I did in that above post was with the default settings.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    207

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Version 12.08, even with ameteur draft talents set very high, in most years is making the #1 pick in the draft with peak around 90-92 (as opposed to mid 90s in previous versions). My scouting high a lot of $$$ allocated to it, so I don't believe it to be a scouting issue. Anyone else notice this?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    On the ice blue line of insanity.
    Posts
    3,431

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by Surefire View Post
    Version 12.08, even with ameteur draft talents set very high, in most years is making the #1 pick in the draft with peak around 90-92 (as opposed to mid 90s in previous versions). My scouting high a lot of $$$ allocated to it, so I don't believe it to be a scouting issue. Anyone else notice this?
    Well, this whole thread is about there being too much talent in the draft, leading to too many 90+ players after several years of simming. I mostly fixed that in 12.08 by lowering the amount of talent available each year.

    As you can see from HGM's graph, there is still a decent amount of 90+ talent in the draft. But, as would be realistic, you can't always identify it on draft day. The player with a Peak of 92 might flatten out at 87. And another player with a Peak of 85 might go all the way to 95.

    If you would like to see more 'Peak' talent on Draft Day (more like the game was before 12.08), you should increase the 'Potential (Upside)' option in Player Settings.

    Before the Player Settings dialog was added, "Amateur Draft Talent" (ADT) was the only way to control the talent level. Now you can use ADT to adjust the talent level *on draft day*, and use "Potential (Upside)" to adjust how much players tend to improve AFTER Draft Day.

    Clay
    Clay Dreslough, Sports Mogul Inc.
    cjd at sportsmogul dot com / blog / twitter

    Forum Rules
    Bug reports and roster corrections: support@sportsmogul.com

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    207

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    ^Thanks for the explanation.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonGM View Post
    Just players on MLB roster, as I did in post #9:

    2009:
    95+ - 6, 0.8%
    90-94 - 40, 5.3%
    85-89 - 87, 11.6%
    80-84 - 201, 26.8%
    75-79 - 278, 37.1%
    70-74 - 127, 16.9%
    65-69 - 11, 1.5%

    2029:

    95+ - 13, 1.7%
    90-94 - 45, 6.0%
    85-89 - 114, 15.2%
    80-84 - 298, 39.7%
    75-79 - 218, 29.1%
    70-74 - 60, 8.0%
    65-69 - 2, 0.3%


    Needless to say, much improved.
    Still a big shift upward, just not as drastic. So what needs adjustment -- turing down the Peak setting?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    It's nowhere NEAR as drastic. I'm fine with the way it is now, but, yes, turning down the Peak setting in Player Settings would probably be what you're looking for.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonGM View Post
    It's nowhere NEAR as drastic. I'm fine with the way it is now, but, yes, turning down the Peak setting in Player Settings would probably be what you're looking for.
    From your chart, it appears the "mode" (most common rating) rises from around 77 to around 83. I'm playing BM 2009 with your rosters and there seems to be a nice balance of talent. Team average ratings are around 77 and I'd like it to stay that way.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    My only concern is if you lower the peak too much, it might make the mode more accurate, but leave less stars (90+) than there should be. Of course, feel free to play around with the settings.

    If I get around to it, I'll do two sims over night with the peak -10% and also -30% and see what the results are like.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    45,249

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Simmed to 2029 with Potential/Upside at -20%:

    Not too much different from the default, but a bit better still:
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    784

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    You want some variation from the base anyway. Multiple snapshots might be the better tool for this.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Now that I understand how the Player Settings work, I've been using the Generate New Players button and looking at the resulting Amateur Draft. (Note -- you have to do this sometime prior to the draft date in June.)

    What I'm seeing is that with Amateur Draft +20% and Peak -20%, there's a plausible number of 70+ Overall players (though 80+ is extremely rare) and a plausible number of 90+ Peaks. But there are way too many 80-89 players. I'm pretty sure the problem is that the game uses some sort of normal distribution to generate the draft, but major league talent does NOT follow that distribution. Using HGM's data, the number of 80-84 players on major league rosters jumps from 201 in 2009 to 298 in 2029 -- almost a 50% increase. The adjustments we can make in 12.08, turning down peak talent and/or fictional talent, practically wipe out the 90+ players. We need to be able to turn down the mean/median/mode without also reducing the high end.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    761

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Logan View Post
    We need to be able to turn down the mean/median/mode without also reducing the high end.
    I'm going to quote my favorite baseball article of all time as it can explain better than I can why this is exactly right. And yes, I know it's an old article and there's been some refinements since then, but the basic idea is sound.

    Baseball is a zero sum game. One team always wins at the expense of another. It is not possible for one team to win without another losing. In order to win, a team must be able to produce more runs (or prevent runs from scoring) than the opposition. It's success in producing wins is directly tied to its ability to produce more runs than its opponent. Any competitive advantage a team has must, in some way, translate to better on-field performance to be valuable.

    A commodity which is easily available to all teams at no or low cost confers no competitive advantage, and therefore is of minimal value. Thus, baseball value comes from scarcity.

    The talent distribution in baseball can be summed up as follows: there are very few "superstar" level players, a somewhat larger number of "average" producers, and a practically unlimited number of "scrubs". This is usually represented as the tail end of a bell curve or normal distribution, with the vast majority of the overall population already weeded out through other factors prior to reaching professional ball.
    (emphasis added)
    http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm
    I saw Andre Dawson. And let me tell you something. There were only two players in my lifetime whose teammates held them in awe. One was Mickey Mantle. The other was Andre Dawson. If you were around, if you saw them play, you know that. But the numbers don't tell you that.
    - Jerome Holtzman


  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Edison, NJ
    Posts
    15,878

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Yes, of course, but Mogul is only generating 6 rounds of draftees pre year (vs. 60+ in real life). 3/4 of those players are supposed to make it to the major leagues, by design.
    You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Republic of Georgia
    Posts
    12,805

    Re: 12.03 / Into the future, overall ratings rise

    Bump

    I'm going to post some results here later, and don't want to have to spend another 15 minutes looking for the thread

Posting Permissions

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