[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by MB.Pelicans

If it leads into your ideas for league affliliations, then I loved what I've read so far...

Basically, I was going to remark on Nutlaw's comment about the need for a better league heirarchy structure.

While perhaps in the short term that might solve the immediate issues, I think in the longer term that addressing things in terms of heirarchy actually misses the point of how a league envirnonment ought to be set up. What really matters is not the standing of a league within a given heirarchy, but rather the specific way in which one league relates to and interacts with another. And that manner of interaction is independent of the particular classification or ranking of a given league.

If one looks at baseball history, one can define several different ways in which leagues have chosen to govern their interactions with other leagues. The main ones would be the following:

No relationship. The leagues have no formal relationship. This means neither league respects either the player contract reservation nor territorial rights of the other. Teams of one league are thus free to put clubs in cities of the other league, are are free to raid the rosters of teams in the other league to lure players away. Think MLB-Federal League in 1914-15 or MLB-Mexican League in 1946 for an idea of what it's like.

Mutual recognition. Each league recognizes the other, and agrees to respect the other's territorial and player reservation rights, but beyond that, have no rules governing how players move between the leagues via trades or sales. Likewise, there are no provisions for a common player draft (either amateur or Rule 5).

Posting relationship. Leagues have mutual recognition, as described above, plus there are rules which allow players to be moved between leagues via the 'posting' system, as currently used to govern how players move from the Japanese leagues to MLB clubs. (The posting system is very similar to the transfer system used in European football [soccer].)

Associated relationship. Leagues mutually recognize each other, and have rules which allow players to be freely traded or sold from one league to the other (within the relevant waiver limitations). The leagues can also hold a common player draft, be it amateur or Rule 5. The AL-NL relationship since 1903 is the main example. (Ideally, you'd put leagues together in dedicated assocations in OOTP rather than select this relationship category specifically. Having assocations would make it easier to organize and manage leagues in the game.)

Developmental relationship. Leagues mutually recongnize each other's territory and player rights, but one league willingly chooses to subordinate itself to the other league and serve as the developmental arm of the other league. The higher level league can choose to option players to clubs in the lower league, and can form working agreements/player development contracts with clubs in the lower status league. In other words, the relationship between MLB and the National Assocation and its member minor leagues.

There are probably a few other relationship categories one might define, depending on how exact one wants to get.

The independent leagues fall somewhere between the no relationship/posting relationship categories. MLB teams could, theoretically, raid the rosters of independent clubs, unless there is some sort of agreement between MLB and independent leagues not to do so (I'm not sure if there is, but if there is, I'd very much like to see what specifically it says). In earlier times, independent leagues were called outlaw leagues since they were outside the rules and regulations of organized baseball, that is, the agreements which existed between MLB and the NA.

The point of all this is that OOTP should recreate this fundamental aspect of how real-world leagues interact by allowing the user to select, for each league or association, the specific way it will interact with each other league or association in that particular OOTP universe. Thus, you could choose to have League A relate in one manner to League B while interacting in a different way with League C. This method best emulates how leagues have interacted in the real world.

Originally Posted by MB.Pelicans

...do you think bits and pieces could be brought in to allow things like purchases and loans now, without a total overhaul since that doesnt seem possible for version 10?

Only Markus knows for sure. I've long since stopped trying to predict what's easy or hard for him to code.

But having a longer view roadmap as to what could be or should be added to the game is still useful in my view. And threads like this are great for stimulating that kind of discussion.

Originally Posted by Dr. P.R. Park III

How about a checkable box in Game Options for "Allow Purchase of Players from Unaffiliated Leagues." With that checked, another group of drop-down menus pop up...where the user picks the number of and which Unaffiliated Leagues allow Purchase of Players. If an unaffiliated league is unselected, by default, that league would reject all purchase offers. If they are selected, they will negotiate amount.

To actually purchase player contract, right click on player, an option says "Purchase Players Contract," this takes you to a screen very similar to the Trade screen.

Once the purchase has been completed, the player automatically gets a minor league contract, until he is added to the 25 man roster.

How does this seem?

Seems pretty good to me.

Though I do wonder how this function would impact the finances of leagues doing the selling. Might need to be some AI/balancing work done in that regard...