Hybrid Real/Fictional MLB

[PSUColonel]

I have to say, I have usually always stuck to real-world rules and setups for my saves. I am seriously thinking of changing that however. I want to keep things as close as I can, but I am now seriously thinking of doing things the way I think "they outta be".

I like the idea of keeping the main framework in place, but with rules and changes coming and going at such a fast and furious pace, I wonder if it's just time to set up a save/universe they way I think it should be and be done with it. It's just too much to keep up with to be honest lol.

So, that brings me to my question...keeping in mind, I am attempting to keep things within the realm of reality...what types of rules do people implement?

For example, with the Luxury Tax now growing each year, is it time to just implement a salary cap and be done with it? There probably should be one anyway, but the MLBPA will just never go for it. How does it work within OOTP? Does it affect the AI in any positive or negative way?

This is why I hesitate to make drastic changes sometimes, because the AI is setup to work a CERTAIN WAY, and throwing wrenches into the machine (or a combination of them) can affect things I am sure.

I am also considering limiting each organization to one complex team, and one International team (Dominican).

I like having a 20 round draft, and want the full international experience with all leagues enabled. I wish I could implement an international draft (I think it will happen) and like signing day in January instead of July.

Just throwing some things out there. I'm curious to see what others do and think.

[jtnlange]

I kinda of already do that in my save. It is fictional teams but I try to keep real rules as close, except for DH, NO DH EVER. LOL. I havent tried a salary cap yet though maybe will try it this year and see how it works.

Trevor L.

[Bluenoser]

I always say try new things, if they work, great. If not, try something else.

My league is MLB expanded to 36 teams, all fictional players. 85 for stats.

I do things like set all teams to have a decent Market size, a strong fan base. I set all owners to 7 or higher for spending. I set all owners to 4 or 5 for win now. Every team tries to win every year, every team tries to sign good FA's. Every team turns a profit.

I do lots of things that may be unrealistic, while maintaining a good level of realism.

I set FA to 5 yrs, arby to 2 yrs. Let players get paid while they're young.


For OOTP 23 I'm going to try something a bit different. I plan to take opening day MLB, abolish the 2 leagues and have just 1 league with 6 divisions of 5 teams. Since there's interleague play and universal DH, they pretty much took away any differences between the 2 leagues, so why do we need 2 now?

This will just be a short run league for a fun adventure, maybe 50 seasons. I figure with that setup, depending on how the play-offs shake out, you could actually wind up with a Dodgers/Giants or Cubs/Cardinals, or Yankees/Red Sox World Series.

Highly unlikely, but possible.

It would be neat to see though.



Anyway, I guess my point is, if you get an idea in your head, try it out. To me OOTP is a bit like a digital camera in that sense, don't like how it turned out - hit the delete button and try again

[UltimateAverageGuy]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

I always say try new things, if they work, great. If not, try something else.

My league is MLB expanded to 36 teams, all fictional players. 85 for stats.

I do things like set all teams to have a decent Market size, a strong fan base. I set all owners to 7 or higher for spending. I set all owners to 4 or 5 for win now. Every team tries to win every year, every team tries to sign good FA's. Every team turns a profit.

I do lots of things that may be unrealistic, while maintaining a good level of realism.

I set FA to 5 yrs, arby to 2 yrs. Let players get paid while they're young.


For OOTP 23 I'm going to try something a bit different. I plan to take opening day MLB, abolish the 2 leagues and have just 1 league with 6 divisions of 5 teams. Since there's interleague play and universal DH, they pretty much took away any differences between the 2 leagues, so why do we need 2 now?

This will just be a short run league for a fun adventure, maybe 50 seasons. I figure with that setup, depending on how the play-offs shake out, you could actually wind up with a Dodgers/Giants or Cubs/Cardinals, or Yankees/Red Sox World Series.

Highly unlikely, but possible.

It would be neat to see though.



Anyway, I guess my point is, if you get an idea in your head, try it out. To me OOTP is a bit like a digital camera in that sense, don't like how it turned out - hit the delete button and try again

You’ll have no All Star Game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[koohead]

Originally Posted by UltimateAverageGuy

You’ll have no All Star Game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Believe as long as you have 2 or more divisions you'll be able to schedule an All Star game. Not sure how it'll divide up the players/teams...I'm guessing by division?? Would be cool if you could do a World/US type all star game similar to the Future Stars.

[UltimateAverageGuy]

You definitely need 2 leagues for an All Star Game.

[Bluenoser]

It is possible to do an all star game with 1 league.

Having said that, an All Star Game is not part of my plan, so I'm not worried about it.

[koohead]

A few things I have done recently
- Reduced draft to 20 rounds. Also I negotiate bonuses for all rounds
- Standardized minors so every team has the same number of minor league teams.
- I always have 2-4 Independent leagues..gives remaining FAs somewhere to play if not picked up.
- Financially I chopped everything so that 10M is a lot of money...100M payrolls only exist for 2 or 3 teams in the league. Personal preference, but seeing double digit salaries annually for the top players in the league is easier to wrap my head around then differentiating between a 30M/yr and a 20M/yr player.
- I have enabled draft pick trading in some of my fictional setups. does complicate things a bit...and not always worth it, but makes trading a bit more interesting
- a minor thing, but on the Stats&AI tab, I always drop the # of relievers and position players by one, which gives the AI 2 slots to use how they want. NO idea how this impacts the outcome but wanted to add a bit of randomness and variability to roster construction.

[Syd Thrift]

I do a "real" league with all fictional players, set in the past (currently 1970), and with transactions that mirror real life as closely as I can. Pre-free agency financials are really, really wonky so I need to inject cash into teams a fair amount, and otherwise I control all the teams as GM and play out games from the 7th inning on. This is all about you doing your own thing of course but I like the slightly slower pace this brings.

For me, too, specific to this era I have the defaults set to 4 man rotations. The game wants you to use 5-man but IME it's easier to run 5 man rotations with league strategy set to using a 4-man than the reverse (and there are a few noted instances of teams even dropping to 3-man rotations during this approximate time period). I'm successfully seeing starters leading the league with 38-40 starts instead of the 33-35 you get with the 5-man; IME using the as-played schedules forces most teams to adopt a 4 1/2 man rotation in July and August during this time period due to the sheer number of games being played (it's not unusual to see teams with 30+ games on their schedule in August and 28+ in July in spite of the All-Star break; factor in double-headers in that mix and you'll find yourself needing to carry or call up a spot starter to handle the inevitable situations where no starter has 3 days rest or the one guy that does threw 130 pitches in his last outing and is still gassed).

Otherwise, because, well, this is my game, I have TCR bumped up to 120, aging down to 0.8 (because a. I think players age out too quickly and b. I also think that a lot of older players who can still play IRL get booted for reasons beyond their talent level, and since I'm GMing I just act that way), and also I bump development up to I think 1.2 so that my league isn't all 30+ year olds. I *think* it's still a year or two older than it "should" be but it's fine for what I'm doing.

Otherwise, TBH I like not being attached to actual players' history. Yes, it's true that if you turn off auto-recalc, your Tony Armas need not bear any resemblance to real Tony Armas, but the comparison still exists in my brain. The one thing I think this misses is personality, implied or otherwise, though I'm working on adding scouting report stuff to the english.xml file that should add a bit more flavor. I'm making a point to add a lot of conditionals so that you have more "player X could be great if he could just get his head into the game" or "player Y is a dead pull hitter and pitchers can get him out with fastballs on the outside corner".

[Curve Ball Dave]

The way you play should always the way you enjoy it. One of the great things about OOTP is you can do practically anything your imagination can come up with. My universes are always fictional but based on fact. That's the way I like it. If someone else plays all real and they are happy, that's how they should play, same if a universe is all fictional.

There is no "right" way to play. Do what you feel you will enjoy, and enjoy it.

[Bluenoser]

nm

[Dave Stieb II]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

I do a "real" league with all fictional players, set in the past (currently 1970), and with transactions that mirror real life as closely as I can. .

Syd, this is not the first time you've mentioned this and I'm as confused today as every other time. LOL
I'm obviously missing something, but this time I feel compelled to ask what it is, exactly, I'm missing.
So here goes.....
If you are using all fictional players, how do you have transactions that mirror real life (as closely as you can)????
There is a disconnect there that I just can't wrap my head around.

[pauwoo]

I like doing a 24t, 2SL, 2D, 6t setup using 1986 for stats… always set in the real world with universal DH and 3 levels of Minors… also dig on using an ncaa feeder with a 12t Indy league to give the rejects something to do.

[low]

I like having the best of both worlds. I always start a present-day MLB world and then over time it naturally turns into a fictional league (obviously, with players) but I also move a bunch of teams and change up rules on frequent occasions.

[PSUColonel]

Some good stuff here for sure.

1. I like the idea of each organization only having two rookie teams

2. I’d love to expand by two teams and have a four team four division setup in each league.

3. Only division winners qualify for the playoffs.

4. All playoff series are 7 games

5 no DH in either league

6 no 3 batter minimum

7 no ghost runners

8 All RL MiLB roster rules enabled

9 only a 150 or 132 game schedule…not sure yet, but definitely fewer games


More may come to mind,,,but this seems like a decent starting point

[jg2977]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

The way you play should always the way you enjoy it. One of the great things about OOTP is you can do practically anything your imagination can come up with. My universes are always fictional but based on fact. That's the way I like it. If someone else plays all real and they are happy, that's how they should play, same if a universe is all fictional.

There is no "right" way to play. Do what you feel you will enjoy, and enjoy it.

Well said. I like it when my dynasty has high-powered offenses and lots of home runs. It might not be the right way to play, but I’m enjoying it at the moment. If I get sick of it and want more typical scores again, I can always tone the offensive modifiers back down. That’s the beauty of it.

[darkcloud4579]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I have to say, I have usually always stuck to real-world rules and setups for my saves. I am seriously thinking of changing that however. I want to keep things as close as I can, but I am now seriously thinking of doing things the way I think "they outta be".

I like the idea of keeping the main framework in place, but with rules and changes coming and going at such a fast and furious pace, I wonder if it's just time to set up a save/universe they way I think it should be and be done with it. It's just too much to keep up with to be honest lol.

So, that brings me to my question...keeping in mind, I am attempting to keep things within the realm of reality...what types of rules do people implement?

For example, with the Luxury Tax now growing each year, is it time to just implement a salary cap and be done with it? There probably should be one anyway, but the MLBPA will just never go for it. How does it work within OOTP? Does it affect the AI in any positive or negative way?

This is why I hesitate to make drastic changes sometimes, because the AI is setup to work a CERTAIN WAY, and throwing wrenches into the machine (or a combination of them) can affect things I am sure.

I am also considering limiting each organization to one complex team, and one International team (Dominican).

I like having a 20 round draft, and want the full international experience with all leagues enabled. I wish I could implement an international draft (I think it will happen) and like signing day in January instead of July.

Just throwing some things out there. I'm curious to see what others do and think.

This the only way I play, I almost prefer entirely a MLB setup with fictional players even. International draft is possible so long as you have international feeders, I have 8 different feeder leagues and change up the intake composition at different times in the dynasty.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Dave Stieb II

Syd, this is not the first time you've mentioned this and I'm as confused today as every other time. LOL
I'm obviously missing something, but this time I feel compelled to ask what it is, exactly, I'm missing.
So here goes.....
If you are using all fictional players, how do you have transactions that mirror real life (as closely as you can)????
There is a disconnect there that I just can't wrap my head around.

I just pull up the transactions on a given day and more or less try to approximate them for each team. Like, if I have a transaction like this:

The Cubs traded Ted Abernathy to the Cardinals for Phil Gagliano.

I start with... "the Cubs trade a good if aging reliever to the Cardinals for a middle-aged 4th outfielder/pinch hitter" and then I go from there. Rarely if ever, of course, are there exact matches because that's not how fictional leagues work; however, what I do is I try to take the general talent level from both sides, fit strengths and weaknesses (and also, if applicable, chemistry issues or the fact that I'll try and move a disgruntled player more easily than a... gruntled one). Sometimes TBH the value of the trades varies quite a bit from real life, like a minor deal winds up being a kind of big one, or for a counter example the equivalent of the Curt Flood/Dick Allen/Tim McCarver trade wound up being a little "meh" in my league.

It's more of an "art" (I don't want to call it an art, haha) than an exact science and the main impetus is to keep transactions flowing through the league at about the same rate as they happened in real life when I'm acting as the GM of all teams. It also forces individual ballclubs to often try and make do with what they've got in their minor league system rather than patch up every hole they have with a trade, which I'd probably do for some teams if I didn't impose this upon myself.

Just as an aside, I looked it up and in retrospect I sort of messed up that "Ted Abernathy" move, heh. Not sure how I managed to mess that up... but I moved Chad Nies, the Cubs' stopper, a 1969 All-Star, and, unlike the real-life Abernathy, a 26 year old, to the Giants, not the Cardinals, for a starting pitcher named Jason Sanders. I always trade between the right teams unless I made a mistake, so clearly I did. Talent-wise, Sanders is *miles* better than Gagliano but the Cubs don't really have any holes in their lineup (in fact, at the time their 4th outfielder was a former All-Star himself) that the Giants had any ability to fill and Nies is, in truth, really, really good (13-7 last year, led the NL in saves and games in relief, 2.53 ERA). I still probably gave up too much for him but... these are the thought processes I have when I make these kinds of deals.

[Dave Stieb II]

Now I understand. Thanks.
Wow. You truly are 'fully immersed' in your OOTP adventure.
Just another example of the versatility the game offers.

[BirdWatcher]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

I just pull up the transactions on a given day and more or less try to approximate them for each team. Like, if I have a transaction like this:

The Cubs traded Ted Abernathy to the Cardinals for Phil Gagliano.

I start with... "the Cubs trade a good if aging reliever to the Cardinals for a middle-aged 4th outfielder/pinch hitter" and then I go from there. Rarely if ever, of course, are there exact matches because that's not how fictional leagues work; however, what I do is I try to take the general talent level from both sides, fit strengths and weaknesses (and also, if applicable, chemistry issues or the fact that I'll try and move a disgruntled player more easily than a... gruntled one). Sometimes TBH the value of the trades varies quite a bit from real life, like a minor deal winds up being a kind of big one, or for a counter example the equivalent of the Curt Flood/Dick Allen/Tim McCarver trade wound up being a little "meh" in my league.

It's more of an "art" (I don't want to call it an art, haha) than an exact science and the main impetus is to keep transactions flowing through the league at about the same rate as they happened in real life when I'm acting as the GM of all teams. It also forces individual ballclubs to often try and make do with what they've got in their minor league system rather than patch up every hole they have with a trade, which I'd probably do for some teams if I didn't impose this upon myself.

Just as an aside, I looked it up and in retrospect I sort of messed up that "Ted Abernathy" move, heh. Not sure how I managed to mess that up... but I moved Chad Nies, the Cubs' stopper, a 1969 All-Star, and, unlike the real-life Abernathy, a 26 year old, to the Giants, not the Cardinals, for a starting pitcher named Jason Sanders. I always trade between the right teams unless I made a mistake, so clearly I did. Talent-wise, Sanders is *miles* better than Gagliano but the Cubs don't really have any holes in their lineup (in fact, at the time their 4th outfielder was a former All-Star himself) that the Giants had any ability to fill and Nies is, in truth, really, really good (13-7 last year, led the NL in saves and games in relief, 2.53 ERA). I still probably gave up too much for him but... these are the thought processes I have when I make these kinds of deals.

This is the sort of thing that it would never have even occurred to me to do, and I love it that you do this.

Granted, I have my own unusual approaches to immersion for my fictional league, including the identification of players (including their primary entry position and player type- slugger, utilityman, defensive whiz, speedster, etc, as an example of just a few position player types) who will later enter the baseball universe who are related to someone already in that universe (brothers, cousins, sons, sons-in-law, grandsons) as well as identifying the date and cause of death of former big league players and big league managers in my fictional baseball universe. (This second process happens on January 1st of the W.P. Kinsella League calendar, and that is where I am right now, so it is big day as after I make my morning coffee I will be finding out which former players and/or mangers we will be losing during 1986.)

Point being, I love not only how customizable OOTP is, but also how creatively this community interacts with the game. What you have described above is one of the more interesting approaches I have read about here in some time.