AI Evaluation Settings

[RubeBaker]

This seems to be an annual tradition, doesn't it? The infamous AI Evaluation Settings Thread. I'm going to keep it short and sweet: default. I've experimented, tried, many different settings, some of which have been suggested on this here message board. Default works best for me. The most realistic, the best results, etc. Feel free to opine.

[PSUColonel]

I think you are fine with default. It’s probably the most realistic and most challenging. I could see the case for something like 55/20/15/10…but default is good. I think anything where your ratings weight is at least 55 works well.

I personally like the default (65/20/10/5) or 55/20/15/10

[Rain King]

I play mostly "God Mode" and have settled on around 35/35/20/10.

You don't see veteran players just get dumped like you do with the higher ratings weight...they do more of a fade out as they stop producing which is what I was looking for.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I play mostly "God Mode" and have settled on around 35/35/20/10.

You don't see veteran players just get dumped like you do with the higher ratings weight...they do more of a fade out as they stop producing which is what I was looking for.

Well, this is the argument: higher stats emphasis will allow for more of what Rain King wants, but like I said before anything less than 55 causes other issues in my opinion…such as wonky waivers, releases, contracts and even trades.

I think the question a single player must ask themselves when deciding what AI settings to use is this: am I more interested in realism or challenge? You may get more realistic results with a lower rating percentage, but I also feel the AI won’t be as challenging.

Personally, I’d rather have a good challenge. The simple truth is: you’re going to likely have to sacrifice one for the other. To me, 55/20/15/10 sort of tries to address both…but it’s very difficult.

[Rain King]

FYI, 65/20/10/5 is only the Default for the MLB Quickstart.

The default for fictional leagues is 30/50/15/5.

The MLB Quickstart adjusted to its' current default in an effort to combat the AI from making too many changes immediately after the game starts (i.e. to try to force them to place real life players into their expected real life useage). There is otherwise a lot of complaining about the moves that are made at the beginning of a new MLB Quickstart game.

I don't like 30/50/15/5 much either though as I think it overreacts to one good (or bad) season. I like 35/35/20/10 specifically because it will allow some players to stick around a little longer based on reputation, but also put young guys into the lineup whose ratings have them ready. I think it is a really realistic AI balance, but as PSUColonel mentioned, realistic doesn't necessarily mean challenging for the User depending on what information you have.

As I said, I mostly go God mode these days and just love to watch the world develop. However, when I am running a team I will also hide the Current Ratings (Other Ratings & Potential Ratings 2-8) so that I'm not getting that advantage on the AI and am also mostly going by the player stats.

If you want to play with Current Ratings or the 1-100 and/or 20-80 ratings scales...I definitely agree a higher Ratings weight is better to help out the AI.

[progen]

Originally Posted by RubeBaker

This seems to be an annual tradition, doesn't it? The infamous AI Evaluation Settings Thread. I'm going to keep it short and sweet: default. I've experimented, tried, many different settings, some of which have been suggested on this here message board. Default works best for me. The most realistic, the best results, etc. Feel free to opine.

Very good discussion on this here:

https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...settings+stats

[Sweed]

And the link to the discussion in the v22 forum.
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...light=settings

As I said in the 22 forum I was using 25\25\25\25 and have seen no reason to change.

I play out all of my games and have always played at a fairly slow pace. Since I retired at the end of May I take even more time to look around my league on a daily basis. My routine is to play my game, check other scores, look at standings, news, waiver wire, quick glance at the top prospects page, and read the "All Transaction" report. If there is a trade in the league I go to the trade report screen and look at all players involved. As I said I do this every game day and I'm not seeing much of anything that makes me go "huh?.

I get the normal crap trade offers from the AI trying to raid my minor league system. I'd say 8 out of 10 are immediate "no". But there are also some fair offers now and then too. Toronto just offered, and I accepted, a deadline trade that was a very good hitting (according to my scout, OSA did not have him as high) 2b-26 yrs old-switch hitter. They're not in the race and they asked for 2 P's and a SS from my minors. The SS and one of the P's should be MLB ready in year and a half or two years. The second P is probably a AAA ceiling but he only needs a slight talent increase to at least be serviceable at the MLB level. If their scout has the same opinion as OSA they probably think they got the better end of the deal. Seeing this guy hit in my lineup? I have to think I won the deal despite having to live with 4 range at 2b (something I almost never do).

I do like reading this thread every year. Right now, as stated, I see no reason to make a change in my league. Of the settings I see here, if I decided to try something else, I think I'd go with the 35/35/20/10 from Rain King.

My 2 cents.

[brotherblues]

Originally Posted by Sweed

And the link to the discussion in the v22 forum.
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...light=settings

As I said in the 22 forum I was using 25\25\25\25 and have seen no reason to change.

I play out all of my games and have always played at a fairly slow pace. Since I retired at the end of May I take even more time to look around my league on a daily basis. My routine is to play my game, check other scores, look at standings, news, waiver wire, quick glance at the top prospects page, and read the "All Transaction" report. If there is a trade in the league I go to the trade report screen and look at all players involved. As I said I do this every game day and I'm not seeing much of anything that makes me go "huh?.

I get the normal crap trade offers from the AI trying to raid my minor league system. I'd say 8 out of 10 are immediate "no". But there are also some fair offers now and then too. Toronto just offered, and I accepted, a deadline trade that was a very good hitting (according to my scout, OSA did not have him as high) 2b-26 yrs old-switch hitter. They're not in the race and they asked for 2 P's and a SS from my minors. The SS and one of the P's should be MLB ready in year and a half or two years. The second P is probably a AAA ceiling but he only needs a slight talent increase to at least be serviceable at the MLB level. If their scout has the same opinion as OSA they probably think they got the better end of the deal. Seeing this guy hit in my lineup? I have to think I won the deal despite having to live with 4 range at 2b (something I almost never do).

I do like reading this thread every year. Right now, as stated, I see no reason to make a change in my league. Of the settings I see here, if I decided to try something else, I think I'd go with the 35/35/20/10 from Rain King.

My 2 cents.

Range is huge in ootp for middle infielders (or so it's been for the last several versions). The ai probably sees him as a broken player, not good enough defensively for middle infield, not good enough offensively for 1B.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by brotherblues

Range is huge in ootp for middle infielders (or so it's been for the last several versions). The ai probably sees him as a broken player, not good enough defensively for middle infield, not good enough offensively for 1B.

Yeah, that's why I noted I rarely would play a 4 range at 2b but..

Switch hitter, 7 contact from R side, 6 from L. 7 gap. Is rated to play 1b and would be Keith Hernandez bat wise. While not Hernandez with the glove he still, I think, would in the running for a gold glove playing there.

With what the AI asked for in the trade I don't think I'd say they thought he was broke. Could be due to their scout's or GM's preferences the lack of power could have been a negative? Add in OSA has him 6 contact overall not 7. It's my scout that says 7.

His bat, so far, is carrying his fielding and I can always defensive sub once his bat has created some runs.

[krownroyal83]

Originally Posted by Sweed

And the link to the discussion in the v22 forum.
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...light=settings

As I said in the 22 forum I was using 25\25\25\25 and have seen no reason to change.

I play out all of my games and have always played at a fairly slow pace. Since I retired at the end of May I take even more time to look around my league on a daily basis. My routine is to play my game, check other scores, look at standings, news, waiver wire, quick glance at the top prospects page, and read the "All Transaction" report. If there is a trade in the league I go to the trade report screen and look at all players involved. As I said I do this every game day and I'm not seeing much of anything that makes me go "huh?.

I get the normal crap trade offers from the AI trying to raid my minor league system. I'd say 8 out of 10 are immediate "no". But there are also some fair offers now and then too. Toronto just offered, and I accepted, a deadline trade that was a very good hitting (according to my scout, OSA did not have him as high) 2b-26 yrs old-switch hitter. They're not in the race and they asked for 2 P's and a SS from my minors. The SS and one of the P's should be MLB ready in year and a half or two years. The second P is probably a AAA ceiling but he only needs a slight talent increase to at least be serviceable at the MLB level. If their scout has the same opinion as OSA they probably think they got the better end of the deal. Seeing this guy hit in my lineup? I have to think I won the deal despite having to live with 4 range at 2b (something I almost never do).

I do like reading this thread every year. Right now, as stated, I see no reason to make a change in my league. Of the settings I see here, if I decided to try something else, I think I'd go with the 35/35/20/10 from Rain King.

My 2 cents.

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.

[krownroyal83]

The current player evaluation settings I use are ones that were suggested awhile back and that's 50/30/15/5. I especially like this because I play a short season fictional league (68 games) so you're going to have some players putting up great numbers in that short span that they might not be able to maintain over a 162 game schedule so I want the AI to keep that in mind and still focus highly on ratings weight. However if a player can put up these kinds of great numbers over multiple seasons than the AI will then began to strongly put that into consideration when evaluating a player.

[Scipio Africanus]

Originally Posted by krownroyal83

I play a short season fictional league (68 games)

How many teams and what kind of league structure? I tend to play out every game so I like shorter seasons. I'm always on the lookout for new ideas on how to construct one.

[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.

[dward1]

along the same line of thought: does anyone know if the AI considers anything but league stats? I have many national team tournaments and tournaments with league teams so that a players league stats might be just 50% of their totals for the year. It seems to me that the AI doesn't even know about these other games at all which is a huge flaw

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by dward1

along the same line of thought: does anyone know if the AI considers anything but league stats? I have many national team tournaments and tournaments with league teams so that a players league stats might be just 50% of their totals for the year. It seems to me that the AI doesn't even know about these other games at all which is a huge flaw

Yeah, this is definitely something I would like to see improved in the future. It has prevented me from doing that kind of setup.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Sweed

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







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.

I still desperately want to use 4 25s…I think it makes the most sense for reasons we discussed in that thread. I just get spooked when I see the AI offer players for trade they normally wouldn’t with ratings below 55. I also see some bad waiver decisions at times which also spooks me.

I really do think 4 25’s is a more complete evaluation, and allows for individual staff members to show their preferences in a good way. The nice thing there is they will never “over value 2 years ago…and some staff members will be more stats oriented, while others will be more scouting oriented, still others will have a nice mix.

I think what I am talking about rears it’s ugly head when you “shop players” (a feature I am known not to be a fan of) or use the “make this work now” button (another not so favorite of mine).

So again I say…I really do love 25/25/25/25 for realism..but for challenge, I’m not sure it holds up as well as a 55/20/15/10 or a 65/20/10/5.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by dward1

along the same line of thought: does anyone know if the AI considers anything but league stats? I have many national team tournaments and tournaments with league teams so that a players league stats might be just 50% of their totals for the year. It seems to me that the AI doesn't even know about these other games at all which is a huge flaw

This is something else to consider…you you have all of the international leagues, tournaments and indies enabled, I think ratings becomes a better evaluator than stats. Just another variable to think about.

[PSUColonel]

I’ve never tried it, but I wonder how 55/15/15/15 might function?

[Magus978]

Been playing with 40/30/20/10 for years. Not gonna change now. Works for me, but probably *ONLY* works for me

[koohead]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I’ve never tried it, but I wonder how 55/15/15/15 might function?

See, this makes more sense in my mind. 25/25/25/25 seems to be heavy on the stats side of the equation..3x in fact. Whereas what you just threw out there is closer to 50/50 with a slight edge to Ratings (making the game more challenging)...yet not letting a good/bad year trick the AI into any hasty decisions.