Internal Player Ratings creeping higher

[RunBlakeRun]

So, question about player creation modifiers, with the understanding that my save is currently in the year 2044 and this is otherwise all MLB as it is played in the 2020s (run environment, strategy, etc.):

If I wanted to bring down the *average* MLB league ratings (the ones you'd see in the editor for example, the 1-600 scale), would the way to do that be to lower the default player creation modifiers? I've noticed that the average ratings for the league have crept up considerably from where it began in 2026 and I wanted to kind of taper it back down so players don't have 500+ ratings so regularly.

My thought was to lower those creation modifiers and keep them there for the next few seasons, that way the players populating the draft pool, international FA, scouting trips, etc. would begin to bring down those average ratings and bring the game more in line with player average ratings as they might be in the 2010s/2020s.

Has anyone else messed around with these?

[Todd R]

You don't need to change the player creation modifiers Auto-calc will make your league perform like the selected season.

[snepp]

My current fictional league (45 seasons) has settled into most ratings having an average around 350. I don't use any international talent, which is likely why mine has lowered over time. I'd never guess if I hadn't gone in to look.

[RunBlakeRun]

Interesting, interesting. Maybe I just like the idea of the average ratings sort of staying the same over time to maintain the athleticism quality of the current MLB. But perhaps this isn't something to worry about since it's the 2040s and theoretically the athletic ability of players will be even higher/greater than it is now.

[Todd R]

Originally Posted by RunBlakeRun

Interesting, interesting. Maybe I just like the idea of the average ratings sort of staying the same over time to maintain the athleticism quality of the current MLB. But perhaps this isn't something to worry about since it's the 2040s and theoretically the athletic ability of players will be even higher/greater than it is now.

Note snepp said that he hadn't noticed anything yet the ratings in his league declined. This is confirmation of my previous post saying that auto-calc over rides unrealistic ratings. As long as you're using auto-calc you don't need to change your ratings. Lower or higher ratings don't affect league output.

It seems auto-calc is seen as fine tuning the output. Actually its most important function is over riding large errors in the game.Things like development and player creation resulting in unrealistic aggregate ratings and coaching on giving a huge boost to SB attempts.

[locuspc]

There's a reason the displayed values are relative to other players in the league. The "underlying ratings" shouldn't be taken as representing an abstract notion of how good an athlete a player is, you're not supposed to look at them at all. The underlying ratings are an intermediate value for the computer's benefit, and the algorithm combines them with the league modifiers to produce simulated outcomes. As long as the actual results are in line with what you want, it's not worth worrying about the level of the "underlying ratings" at all. They're just one factor in the algorithm.

[RunBlakeRun]

Fair enough on all counts. Thanks for the feedback, y'all. :P

[snepp]

Originally Posted by Todd R

Note snepp said that he hadn't noticed anything yet the ratings in his league declined. This is confirmation of my previous post saying that auto-calc over rides unrealistic ratings. As long as you're using auto-calc you don't need to change your ratings. Lower or higher ratings don't affect league output.

Indeed, pretty sure I've had it enabled from the very start (50 seasons now). Sometimes I let my outputs drift for a while without running a recalc, but I locked my league totals on one of the mid-80's outputs and let it run every year this time.

[Matt Arnold]

As to the original point, you could lower the player creation modifiers, or also adjust the development or aging modifiers.

The game is balanced so that with a default setup, the averages should stay relatively consistent through time. However if you have extra draft rounds, or play with a larger feeder system, or have otherwise adjusted the development or aging speeds, your averages could vary more. Although even there, it generally would stabilize to a certain level (eg your league averages might end up at like 420), and won't necessarily continue off forever.

Although as well, if both batters and pitchers grow at the same levels, then you might not even notice the changes. Since if the average batter is 10% better in HR Power but the average pitcher is 10% better in their movement rating, that will effectively balance out.

If you are going to adjust the player creation modifiers, I would always suggest to be very careful. You don't want to starve the pools. And do note that by default the game tends to create players a few years out, so adjusting a PCM you might not even see the changes for a few years in the draft pool.

[RunBlakeRun]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

As to the original point, you could lower the player creation modifiers, or also adjust the development or aging modifiers.

The game is balanced so that with a default setup, the averages should stay relatively consistent through time. However if you have extra draft rounds, or play with a larger feeder system, or have otherwise adjusted the development or aging speeds, your averages could vary more. Although even there, it generally would stabilize to a certain level (eg your league averages might end up at like 420), and won't necessarily continue off forever.

Although as well, if both batters and pitchers grow at the same levels, then you might not even notice the changes. Since if the average batter is 10% better in HR Power but the average pitcher is 10% better in their movement rating, that will effectively balance out.

If you are going to adjust the player creation modifiers, I would always suggest to be very careful. You don't want to starve the pools. And do note that by default the game tends to create players a few years out, so adjusting a PCM you might not even see the changes for a few years in the draft pool.

Thanks for the info, Matt! Yes, I changed course and put them all at default. I think I was overthinking it, so I made the dev lab harder and brought TCR back to normal (it was around 110).

[Todd R]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

As to the original point, you could lower the player creation modifiers, or also adjust the development or aging modifiers.

The game is balanced so that with a default setup, the averages should stay relatively consistent through time. However if you have extra draft rounds, or play with a larger feeder system, or have otherwise adjusted the development or aging speeds, your averages could vary more. Although even there, it generally would stabilize to a certain level (eg your league averages might end up at like 420), and won't necessarily continue off forever.

Although as well, if both batters and pitchers grow at the same levels, then you might not even notice the changes. Since if the average batter is 10% better in HR Power but the average pitcher is 10% better in their movement rating, that will effectively balance out.

If you are going to adjust the player creation modifiers, I would always suggest to be very careful. You don't want to starve the pools. And do note that by default the game tends to create players a few years out, so adjusting a PCM you might not even see the changes for a few years in the draft pool.

"The game is balanced so that with a default setup, the averages should stay relatively consistent through time."


How do I achieve this? I have a career mode save. The output was so implausible I had to use auto-calc.

[Todd R]

Originally Posted by Todd R

"The game is balanced so that with a default setup, the averages should stay relatively consistent through time."


How do I achieve this? I have a career mode save. The output was so implausible I had to use auto-calc.

In RunBlakeRun's save ratings increased. In snepp's save ratings decreased. I know my save isn't default and expect their saves aren't either. I am unable to obtain balanced ratings in tests. Fortunately auto-calc makes the output plausible.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Todd R

In RunBlakeRun's save ratings increased. In snepp's save ratings decreased. I know my save isn't default and expect their saves aren't either. I am unable to obtain balanced ratings in tests. Fortunately auto-calc makes the output plausible.

I wonder what the ratings are in Goldilock's game?

[Todd R]

The bears are rated higher.