Right aging and random talent modifiers for modern day MLB League

[phightin]

Originally Posted by RchW

It doesn't matter if you get the top players in any particular category right. If the rest of the players in the league don't match the raw real life age distribution of the year or series of years desired then the league will not be right. I'm not being sarcastic but I don't know how to explain it more clearly. Once you get the raw age distribution right then if category leaders don't match real life results you have a legitimate beef about the talent distribution and modifiers. It is a chicken and egg situation.

It's also important to note that real life baseball age distribution is undergoing a massive shift due to an injection of cheap high end talent and the end of rampant steroid use. We could see the peak age for players move from almost 27 to 24-25 by the end of next year. That is a huge change.

Exactly which is why Eiskrap's charts that showed the average age ranges of players based on ABs and IPs proves what everyone on here was talking about. He took into account the age distribution based on ABs and IPs and there was distinct differences in the averages from real life to OOTP. He did quite a few of them. I really do not understand how you fail to see just how blatant this is. It's not simply a one or two "cherry picked" category solution. It's the standard of the average age of your entire league based on WHO IS ACTUALLY PLAYING and PERFORMING!

Also, while modern day MLB numbers have certainly dropped off from the steroid era and is trending a little younger I fail to see hitting numbers going back to where they were decades ago. With modern day legal supplements, strength routines, hitters parks, etc I think this is pretty much the new standard. Also, IMO the goal for modern day settings should not be to predict future trends. I want a true to life current experience of MLB Baseball as it is right now and has been over the past few years.

[VanillaGorilla]

The insights offered of popular players sticking around longer after their prime days are very accurate, imo, reflecting the discrepancy of older RL players compared to OOTP.

Though I hate the phrase "This happens wayyyy too often in OOTP..." but....

I just had Tim Keefe retire with 299 wins, and he did not suffer an injury. Yes, he was 46 yo, but in his last season he got 1 win in ZERO starts and 17 IP. IRL a team will give him a chance to hit the important milestone. In this same league I have Al Pratt retire without injury while sitting at 3999 strikeouts.

I was at Arlington Stadium opening night in 1989 to see a recently reacquired Bubby Bell collect his 2500th hit. BTW, Charlie Hough pitched a shutout that night.

Buddy Bell was through, and retired shortly thereafter with 2514 hits.

The Rangers were not expecting him to replace Steve Buechele, or realisticly thinking he would be a productive DH for them, but they brought him back for the milestone and the standing ovation of a sold out home opener.

Wade Boggs got a contract to play for Tampa Bay in order to get to 3000 hits.

A little coding tweek to give preference to players nearing important milestones would have a bit of an impact on more veterans sticking around later in their career. Having teams more willing to sign and play such players, and having the players more willing to take less pay to reach the milestone would be a realistic feature, imo.

Here it goes....I have seen players retire one hit, HR, win, K away from an important milestone WAYYYY too often in OOTP, and this needs to be fixed!

Important Milestones I would suggest giving preference to reaching are:

2000 Hits, and every 500 after

500 HRs and every 100 after

2000 Ks and every 500 after

200 wins and every 50 after


I also would have the same preference for players playing for less and teams more likely to sign and give playing time to players approaching league records in each of these categories.

I love OOTP, and I much appreciate any review and attempt to implement this suggestion by the OOTP team.

[Markza1839]

What exactly does Dev Speed do? Because I'm seeing a lot of good players that aren't reaching the majors until they're 25. If I increase this value do they develop quicker so they don't spend 5 or 6 yrs in the minors?
It seems to be even worse with pitchers so that .900 value seems questionable.

[Cras]

This is always something that sits in the back of my mind, I never seem convinced I am using the best settings.

Could y'all post your current settings for Age/Dev and TCR and say how you think they are working?

[GiantYankee]

Originally Posted by Cras

This is always something that sits in the back of my mind, I never seem convinced I am using the best settings.

Could y'all post your current settings for Age/Dev and TCR and say how you think they are working?

What are you guys currently using?

[RonP]

Originally Posted by Cras

This is always something that sits in the back of my mind, I never seem convinced I am using the best settings.

Could y'all post your current settings for Age/Dev and TCR and say how you think they are working?

LOL. "Oh, what a spin I'm in."

[easedel]

So what was/is everyone using?

[snowymagician]

Originally Posted by easedel

So what was/is everyone using?

Bump.

[hitmanwa]

Are these settings still relevant?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by hitmanwa

Are these settings still relevant?

No settings are relevant from version to version. They should be close to 1.