Does anyone here actually enjoy playing offline mode?

[wodi]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

No, it only change talent aka potential. Superstar players are already developed.

You’ll see more early round busts and late round steals. But nothing at extreme levels.

Perfect, thank you!

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by quillenl

Even at 100 some real life hall of famers will be busts. In my most recent league Walter Johnson was a borderline 5th starter by the time he turned 26. That example is what I believe the poster is concerned about.

[edit] https://statsplus.net/asahi/reports/...yer_14038.html
Link above is to the report for Walter Johnson in a recent Online League I was in where TCR is set to 100. This is not unusual. If that would bother you playing a historical league then you need to lower TCR to near 1 or play with Recalc on.

Well yea if you’re playing historical, prospect’s potentials are going to change.

Players over the age of 26 rarely get a talent change and if they do, they have already reached their development.

If you want things to play out in historical as they did in reality, you probably should decrease TCR. I never play historical so I’m not really sure about that area of the game...

In my example, I’m speaking about players in their prime all of a sudden becoming terrible. This doesn’t happen with TCR. Bryce Harper will not become a scrub unless it’s due to injuries or any storyline effects.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quillenl]

My bad... that explains my disconnect. Original Poster was referring to historical database and I let it muddle my brain

[Ty Cobb]

Originally Posted by David Watts

So you do have a team in Paradise. So cool. You may already know, but Alex Mcknight is a private detective an a series written by Steve Hamilton The stories take place in Paradise. Mcknight is an ex minor league catcher.

because inside references are cool. When I expand into the Mitten, I'll probably put a team in Starvation Lake as well. There's a series of detective stores set there.

[progen]

Originally Posted by DustyElbows

I exclusively play with expansion teams. You can make the expansion draft arbitrarily hard. Your farm system will suck for a long time and it will basically never have depth. You'll probably be in a small market and thus have little money to spend. Your owner will slowly lose patience with during the inevitable two years (or more) of being really bad at the start. It's a great challenge and a fun way to play with fictional teams.

Agree. When I do the expansion draft, I allow teams to protect 29-30 players, and the expansion teams cannot draft any player with 4 years or less in service(think that's what it's called). The default is 3, but I've found in the past, that allows some really good, young players to be available, which isn't reality. Like you, I want to make the expansion experience as hard as possible.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Ty Cobb

because inside references are cool. When I expand into the Mitten, I'll probably put a team in Starvation Lake as well. There's a series of detective stores set there.

Oh man, that's a good series as well.

[Scottiedog43]

Boosting the TCR is definitely one of the biggest ways to increase the unpredictability of the game and increase the difficulty for a human player.

If you boost the TCR to 200 and also either turn off visible ratings or at least use a smaller ratings scale like 1-5 (and if you want, along with that can even have the ai use ratings more in its evaluations at the same time), those are probably the two biggest things you can do to make the game much more challenging.[/QUOTE]


That’s what I do. I’ve played this way forever.
It makes the game more fun and challenging.
That’s why I only play solo now.

[naturaldopamine]

Alright so are the developers going to address these bugs in the next game? I wouldn’t think it would be difficult to create some kind of simple algorithm that protects any prospects rated in the top 500. And it should also protect anyone who has 50 (average) MLB potential. Have the AI remove the 35-40 rated guys & add the 50 rated guys to the 40-man roster after every season. I mean it sounds like common sense...

This is a flaw in the game and it needs to be fixed. No amount of setting configuration can fix this. It is a bug it must be addressed by the developers of the game.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

Alright so are the developers going to address these bugs in the next game? I wouldn’t think it would be difficult to create some kind of simple algorithm that protects any prospects rated in the top 500. And it should also protect anyone who has 50 (average) MLB potential. Have the AI remove the 35-40 rated guys & add the 50 rated guys to the 40-man roster after every season. I mean it sounds like common sense...

This is a flaw in the game and it needs to be fixed. No amount of setting configuration can fix this. It is a bug it must be addressed by the developers of the game.

Have you reported in the bug forum?

I personally don’t have any house rules and am not seeing top prospects being left unprotected in my save. Waiver wire commonly have people on it rated 50 and lower.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

Have you reported in the bug forum?

I personally don’t have any house rules and am not seeing top prospects being left unprotected in my save. Waiver wire commonly have people on it rated 50 and lower.

Same. OP should post in the bug forum with either screenshots of settings or, better yet, uploading files. Similar complaints crop up from time to time, so there's probably some fairly common combination of settings that causes this problem, but not common enough that it's widespread.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

I wouldn’t think it would be difficult to create some kind of simple algorithm that protects any prospects rated in the top 500. I mean it sounds like common sense...

This is a flaw in the game and it needs to be fixed. No amount of setting configuration can fix this. It is a bug it must be addressed by the developers of the game.

Real MLB teams don't even protect all the top 500 prospects from the Rule 5, so I have no idea why you would expect the AI to do something MLB teams do not do in real life.

You can see here how many top prospects were left unprotected for last year's rule 5 draft: https://www.mlb.com/news/rule-5-draft-2019-preview

Now if you want to talk about the top 50 or 100 prospects or so, then that's probably worth talking about and I'm sure we'll take a look at making some adjustments there where needed.

However, what happens here also depends on your settings, how much you have the ai taking ratings into account for example, as opposed to stats and whether you are using the dynamic or the annual prospect rankings.

Add in the fact that that roster logjams can and do happen, like the one Tampa Bay will likely be facing this year in real life, and it's probably not possible just to have the ai blanket protect even every top 100 prospect without screwing something else up.

Which is not to say the logic can't be improved and I'm sure we will do so. But it's not as simple as just forcing the AI to protect every top prospect regardless of circumstances.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

Have you reported in the bug forum?

I personally don’t have any house rules and am not seeing top prospects being left unprotected in my save. Waiver wire commonly have people on it rated 50 and lower.

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Same. OP should post in the bug forum with either screenshots of settings or, better yet, uploading files. Similar complaints crop up from time to time, so there's probably some fairly common combination of settings that causes this problem, but not common enough that it's widespread.

This is another thing, because in our testing, what the OP is describing is not something we see. The AI might leave some borderline top 100 guys exposed, but I've personally never seen the AI leave a top 10 prospect, for instance, exposed in the rule 5 that I can recall.

So if this is happening, I would guess that there is something in the specific setting combinations in the leagues where that's happening that's causing it.

In which case, we'd really need to see the league files for a league where it is happening (preferably files both from before the AI finalized the protected list and from after the draft as well) to be able to see what can be done to fix it.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

Alright so are the developers going to address these bugs in the next game? I wouldn’t think it would be difficult to create some kind of simple algorithm that protects any prospects rated in the top 500. And it should also protect anyone who has 50 (average) MLB potential. Have the AI remove the 35-40 rated guys & add the 50 rated guys to the 40-man roster after every season. I mean it sounds like common sense...

This is a flaw in the game and it needs to be fixed. No amount of setting configuration can fix this. It is a bug it must be addressed by the developers of the game.

Just curious... do you have roster limits turned on in your minor leagues?

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

What house rules do y'all use? If I ever played an offline league again I would probably play in commissioner mode just to ensure that all of the best players/specs were protected

how incredibly tedious though

As recurring visitors of my Raccoons madhouse will know, i have won just four titles in 60 seasons. I play stupid and emotional, become attached to great players even when they are no help anymore (most recently Cookie Carmona), attached to weird quirky players that are never any help (Jimmy Wallace got a 5-year deal?? oh boy!), and sometimes players that have nothing more to offer than a funny name (Preston Pinkerton!), and which I will drag from year to year regardless. I will show undying loyalty to scrubs from Santa Banana that made it from a $20k bonus in the July IFA period to a .210 clip during a September callup seven years later (Daniel Bullock!). I will go to great lengths to have five players each playing five positions on the roster (again, Pinkerton), and I can't draft a star for the sake of my own arse. I cherish RBI as a stat to measure the value of middle-of-the-order batters. Strikeouts and ERA are fine enough to evaluate pitchers. And I will forego a shrewd and maybe strong move if I can get a bad pun into the weekly report instead (oh, wow, Daniel Bullock...!).

That's the main points, but there's probably more. It is obviously enough for a mediocre run.

[Ty Cobb]

I love it when I see guys ferociously attached to their leagues! That's what it's all about.

[wallewalls]

The way I've been playing the game, it has been too easy for a while. I share a lot fo the OP's opinion, but saying things like "make the game protect top-500 prospects" isn't really productive and probably would bring up more problems. (is the 500th overall prospect worth protecting? I don't have the data in front of me, but the answer is probably a hard no). I might try to change the TCR settings, and maybe even going stats-only to make it harder.

[too_on_too_out]

I played online (fantasy draft leagues) years ago. I soon discovered that only the fanatical prospered (eg. I joked about having to get up at 3am to beat others to signing a particular FA. No one laughed. Ya, if getting up at 3am is what it takes then....). I like OOTP. But it has a habit of breaking my leagues somehow.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

The way I've been playing the game, it has been too easy for a while. I share a lot fo the OP's opinion, but saying things like "make the game protect top-500 prospects" isn't really productive and probably would bring up more problems. (is the 500th overall prospect worth protecting? I don't have the data in front of me, but the answer is probably a hard no). I might try to change the TCR settings, and maybe even going stats-only to make it harder.

TCR is worth a try. I sometimes find myself getting attached to players that i drafted high who ended up becoming a bust.

I remember drafting a HS SS who looked awesome. Great range and glove, not much power but could become a .280 hitter.

Well, he had an underwhelming career in the minors leagues offensively. I debuted him at the major league level at the age of 25 but he never developed the bat. He bounced around a few teams for a couple of years before settling at Indy ball. He went from looking like my team’s future all star to a defensive SS who can’t hit at the next level.

[Art Deco]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

Add in the fact that that roster logjams can and do happen, like the one Tampa Bay will likely be facing this year in real life.

Welcome to my world:


https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=316862


I have a question in this regard when it comes to prospects. In my save, BNN or OSA or whoever has the Dodgers' Luke Heyer ranked as the #1 overall prospect. He has 4-star potential and the scouting report is glowing, but he's 25, has played the last two years in the Midwest League with pedestrian numbers, and the Dodgers had no trouble throwing him into a trade with me. Meanwhile, when I shop him I don't seem to get offered very much, and he barely moves the needle when I add him to a deal to try to get a decent established MLB player. None of this sounds like the pedigree of the #1 prospect in baseball. Any idea what's up there?

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Art Deco

Welcome to my world:


https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=316862


I have a question in this regard when it comes to prospects. In my save, BNN or OSA or whoever has the Dodgers' Luke Heyer ranked as the #1 overall prospect. He has 4-star potential and the scouting report is glowing, but he's 25, has played the last two years in the Midwest League with pedestrian numbers, and the Dodgers had no trouble throwing him into a trade with me. Meanwhile, when I shop him I don't seem to get offered very much, and he barely moves the needle when I add him to a deal to try to get a decent established MLB player. None of this sounds like the pedigree of the #1 prospect in baseball. Any idea what's up there?

Definitely sounds odd. Offhand I do not know. Probably another case where we'd need to see the league files to really figure out what might be happening.

EDIT: One thing that occurs to me, are you using the annual or the dynamic list? If the annual, he may simply have fallen off since the rankings were made and the ai is reacting to him in a way that reflects his current abilities, not the old prospect ranking.