Development Engine vs. Re-calc

[splat58]

Question regarding playing historical leagues. I've been playing some with the development engine and talent change randomness set to other than 100, & playing others using re-calc.



Does it make sense to use the development engine AND re-calc? Does using re-calc overwrite and erase any development that has taken place?

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by splat58

Does it make sense to use the development engine AND re-calc?

Yes, if you are looking for outcomes that can vary from reality. It allows players that retired early to remain viable for longer careers. For example, Sandy Koufax will remain an ace for several more years after his 1966 retirement date. It can also help smooth out inactivity in the war years.

Originally Posted by splat58

Does using re-calc overwrite and erase any development that has taken place?

Yes, until there is no more real data to use in a recalc. At that point, the development engine takes over.

[splat58]

Originally Posted by Orcin

Yes, if you are looking for outcomes that can vary from reality. It allows players that retired early to remain viable for longer careers. For example, Sandy Koufax will remain an ace for several more years after his 1966 retirement date. It can also help smooth out inactivity in the war years.

Yes, until there is no more real data to use in a recalc. At that point, the development engine takes over.

If I'm understanding you correctly, this means that:


In Year 1 the development engine may cause player performance to vary. After Year 1 re-calc will erase the player development.



In Year 2 the development engine may cause player performance to very. After Year 2 re-calc will erase the player development.



And so on until there's no more real data.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by splat58

If I'm understanding you correctly, this means that:


In Year 1 the development engine may cause player performance to vary. After Year 1 re-calc will erase the player development.



In Year 2 the development engine may cause player performance to very. After Year 2 re-calc will erase the player development.



And so on until there's no more real data.

Yes.

[splat58]

Originally Posted by Orcin

Yes.

Thank you for explaining that. Your point about keeping active the short career players like Koufax is an especially desirable option.

[4maddux_cy's]

I am having trouble finding these setting. Can someone assist?

[thehef]

Originally Posted by 4maddux_cy's

I am having trouble finding these setting. Can someone assist?

Click on the Game dropdown and select Game Settings
Click on the Players & Facegen tab
About two-thirds of the way down on the left you will find the Player Development Settings, including Talent Change Randomness, and the ability to Disable Player Development

Also...
Click on the Game dropdown and select Game Settings
Click on the League Settings tab
Click on the Historical tab
On the left, you'll find the options to Retire Players According to History and Players Miss Seasons Accdg to History... On the right are the Recalc settings...

Very important note, as it sounds like you are interested in the types of scenarios where Koufax doesn't retire when he did in real life: The two functions - Retire Players Accdg to History and Players Miss Seasons Accdg to History - will not work if you using historical transactions. IOW, it doesn't matter what any of your other settings are, if you are using historical transactions, Koufax will retire after the 1966 season.

Several years ago, both of these functions could be used in conjunction with historical transactions, which made for some fun scenarios. However, for some reason, it was decided to limit that functionality.

[4maddux_cy's]

Thank you for the assist. Can this also prevent a player from falling off a cliff since they have real data left? Like could Dale Murphy have continued being an All Star type player or a Grady Sizemore from falling off like he did?

[thehef]

Originally Posted by 4maddux_cy's

Thank you for the assist. Can this also prevent a player from falling off a cliff since they have real data left? Like could Dale Murphy have continued being an All Star type player or a Grady Sizemore from falling off like he did?

Possibly. A 3- or 5-year Recalc should smooth out Murphy's descent (and his ascent), but could dilute some of his top-producing seasons.

Development on and set to a high number would be unpredictable (by definition). Recalc would bring him back to ratings based upon each new season; recalc off would take him in whatever direction the game decides: Murphy could take off or crash n burn. Or both at varying times.

If you're looking for Murphy to remain an all-star for a year or two longer, and not have a such a precipitous dropoff, then a 3- or 5-year recalc will likely accomplish that. Keep in mind, though, that not only are down years smoothed about by the great ones, but great ones are smoothed out by the down ones...

If, OTOH, you are looking for Murphy to remain an all-star well into his late-30's, then your best bet is to have development turned off and to edit his ratings. Development on and recalc off *might* accomplish this, but it would be just as likely to send him in the other direction.

I'd suggest you run a few tests and see if you like the results. Start with something like 3-year recalc, double weight of current stats, development set to 50. Devel at 50 will cause some players to deviate from their real-life performance, but not to shocking degrees. The 3-year recalc with double-weight will then bring players' ratings in line with the next season, but any real-life drop-offs or explosions should be smoothed out a bit, but not a lot.

Finally, I'll note that there others on this board who know this stuff better than I do. You might get some replies with more info or some different answers, from those who have tinkered with this stuff more than I have...

Good luck!

[rwd59]

Never mind, I found it in the manual>

If I am using 3 year recalc in a historic game, which 3 seasons will it draw from? For example if I move into the 1970 season after completing 1969, which 3 years will it draw stats from? Would it be 70,71,72 or 69, 70,71 or 68, 69, 70?

Also, lets say I have a rookie who enters in 1970 does not play in 1971 or 1972 then comes back up in 1973. Does it just use his rookie year stats?

[thehef]

Originally Posted by rwd59

If I am using 3 year recalc in a historic game, which 3 seasons will it draw from? For example if I move into the 1970 season after completing 1969, which 3 years will it draw stats from? Would it be 70,71,72 or 69, 70,71 or 68, 69, 70?

In this example in-between the 69 & 70 seasons, it will use 69-70-71 for 3-yr recalc.

Originally Posted by rwd59

Also, lets say I have a rookie who enters in 1970 does not play in 1971 or 1972 then comes back up in 1973. Does it just use his rookie year stats?

Not sure. Good question.

[CBeisbol]

I'll steal this thread to ask a, hopefully, quick question

I've long had the "problem" that low-level minor league players develop too fast in-season.

For example, I just finished a 1989 season using 3-year recalc with the current season weighted twice. There's a player who, IRL, hit ..899 (OPS) in his first season of rookie ball in 1989. In 1990 he hit .764 at A level.

His projected stats in the editor are for a .749 OPS at the major league level. This is too high. An .899 rookie level OPS and .764 A-level OPS should not produce a .749 MLB OPS.

My question, I've turned off player development, and am wondering what to do about coaching. Will coaching continue to effect player development during the season (I know the players will be recalced between seasons) if development is off?

I've thought it'd be easier just to turn coaching off, but I don't like the idea of erasing those people from my universe's history. I also like the different flavor managers give to team strategies. But, if that's what I need to prevent players developing unrealistically during the season, I'll have to sacrifice them.