[Sweed]

Originally Posted by krownroyal83

First I want to say if it's not broke for you then why fix it but I'm wondering what made you start using 25/25/25/25 to begin with. Having stats from two years ago vs current year with the same evaulation weight seems off to me.

I'll post three quotes from last years thread that I linked. https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...light=settings
I think you'll get the gist but may want to go to that thread for the full context to make sense of it all. IE one user wondered if going with all 25's amounted to "turning off" the ratings evaluation. So, you'll see me saying things like "Level out to me does not mean turns off." Reading through last years thread will put this in context.

Also to be clear the whole 4- 25's was not my idea. SMJ gets credit for that. I just tried it, liked it, and have continued to use it

Originally Posted by Sweed

SMJ has done more to look into this than anyone who's work I have read. The purpose of the 4-25's is to get the AI to make the best decisions. His experience is this rating works best. Like all things OOTP that is subjective and the best I can add is it works for me. Could be my very slow style since I play out every inning of every game?

Level out to me does not mean turns off. What it does IMHO is to not let the AI overreact to any one category and make poor decisions because of that overreaction. A player could hit into bad luck this year with career low babip and, if an average player, be sent down or cut. With level evaluation that will hopefully not happen as the other two years plus ratings can save the AI from itself. Reverse that and he has career high babip and now instead of being cut the AI gives him a long term deal as it's his FA year. Again the other two years of stats and ratings can put this all in context for the AI.

Another way it helps the AI is when the AI did not take stats into account then, of course, it only reacted to ratings. You could have a reigning MVP take a ratings hit the following season half way through and be released even though he was still putting up good numbers. Some would argue that is a good thing as the AI needs all the help it can get. Others would argue IRL as long as that player was putting up numbers he would never be benched or released. Imagine an aging Reggie Jackson with 20 HRs at the All Star break being released the following week because his ratings went down. I think this is the type of thing these settings are trying to avoid.

Also consider the AI prorates some of these evaluation numbers when the sample size is still small. IE a hot first 2 weeks of the season does not get the "benefit" of the full 25% evaluation.

Too me I don't know why one would want to go more than 2 years back? If the AI is evaluating an aging Harmon Killebrew in 1973 I would argue it should not care how he hit in 1963 or 1970 for that matter. The idea, I think, is to get the AI to look at the player as he is today and recently so it can make a good decision on extensions, trades, non-tender, cut etc. I'm not a statistician but IIRC, when these weights were added to the game and talked about in the forums, 3 seasons was deemed a good sample size to get a look at where a player has been and is going.

Then at the end also consider that each AI GM/scout has their own interpretation on how to evaluate players. This then gets mixed into the 25/25/25/25 to vary things even more. At least that is the theory from SMJ as I understand it. He can correct me I'm not understanding him.

IMHO SMJ's 4-25's works well in helping the AI with handling it's rosters. This means I get a more realistic world in regards to the transactions I see.
You might try it and not agree and that is fine. There is no right answer

Originally Posted by Sweed

I think we are talking past each other semantically. You regard it as "turning off" where I and PSU are saying leveling is "turning on" the best way for the AI to proceed.

I look at it this way... ratings\current\previous\2 yrs ago

55\20\15\10 means no matter what the current ratings drive how the AI will make it's decision. Some may like it that way and that's fine but... That is what can lead to the Reggie Jackson example I posted. IE reigning MVP, with 20 HR at All-Star break released because the AI scout determined he had a ratings reduction. In this scenario stats can only be 45% of the decision making process for the AI. Then there is the other side of the coin. Reggie is hitting .235 with 8 HR at the AS break but gets an extension with a nice raise because his ratings increased.

Now go..
45/30/15/10 and the ratings can only be 45% of the decision making process. Now you get the guy outperforming his ratings, due to some luck, in his FA year. Now Reggie Jackson, in the same All-Star example, with declining ratings, but good stats gets an extension instead of released.

with 25\25\25\25 as PSU noted no single category is emphasized over the others. The AI sees the whole picture on a level field. Nothing is turned off. Everything is weighed the same. This is what, in theory, leads the AI to make the most realistic roster decisions.

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This is not true because different staff members value things differently also. What it does do is take out the artificial emphasis of one area over another.

I know from reading more recent posts from PSU that he has moved off of the 4- 25's but, this post still sums up the reasoning of using 4- 25's.