Feedback Requested: Tweaked Settings for Aging Curves - Page 10

Seviien · 09-02-2006, 03:45 PM

As best I can tell, the relationship between the modifiers and their effects is nonlinear. For example, changing the development modifier from 1.000 to 2.000 does not double the rate of development.

Seviien · 09-02-2006, 04:27 PM

I have updated the charts and summary stats.

neojonas · 09-12-2006, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seviien

3 Tier Minor System with the following MLEs:
```````````````AAA````AA``````A
Average```````0.850```0.775```0.700
Extra Base Hits`0.800```0.700```0.600
Homeruns`````0.800```0.650```0.500
Walks````````0.900```0.763```0.625
Strikeouts`````0.900```0.763```0.625

Batter Aging = 0.900
Batter Development = 0.700

Pitcher Aging = 4.000
Pitcher Development = 3.000

For the regular 5 Tier Minor League system would you recommend keeping the MLE's the default ones that came with 1.03? And do you think Better Aging/Development should be increased if you have more minor leagues? Just curious what people's thoughts are on that.

TNCubsFan · 09-12-2006, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neojonas

For the regular 5 Tier Minor League system would you recommend keeping the MLE's the default ones that came with 1.03? And do you think Better Aging/Development should be increased if you have more minor leagues? Just curious what people's thoughts are on that.

So far my experiences are that they are better but not quite satisfactory for me. The current testing using the full MLB and Minors is producing very pitching dominated leagues 50 years down the road. Think 1968 and you are close.

Edit to add

My testing has started from Seviiens recomendations and working with slowing pitcher development.

Syd Thrift · 09-12-2006, 01:32 AM

It's... interesting. I'm playing the new season of my dynasty with the patch and these settings and so far the biggest thing I've noticed is that all the oldsters in the league are falling apart. Which is fine; there are, I think, 3 guys in their mid-40s (42-44), and I was kind of wondering how they lasted so long in the first place. I'm not aware of anybody in their late 30s though. Realistically in the early 20th century there weren't a lot of players under 25 because you generally had to prove yourself in the minors for several years before a big league team noticed you. That doesn't bother me so much, however. My league is getting to the point, though, where a couple of the superstar pitchers are beginning to enter their 30s and so far everything looks okay. The most dominating guy in league history has a .500 record right now but that's mainly because the team behind him just went from solid to awful. I don't *think* he's really fallen off that much.

TNCubsFan · 09-18-2006, 01:27 AM

BUMP

Halo Fan · 09-21-2006, 10:38 AM

I got my historical league set up but haven't done much with it in the past couple of months. I was getting ready to fire it up again and then just came upon this thread. What's the current status of this problem? Are there modifiers that will allow for realistic aging (including pitchers not dropping off a cliff prematurely)? If not, when will this be addressed? Is the plan to release a new patch or to just tell everyone they need to wait a year?

Apologies if any of these questions have been definitively resolved somewhere, and I just missed it.

1998 Yankees · 09-21-2006, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halo Fan

Apologies if any of these questions have been definitively resolved somewhere, and I just missed it.

It seems to be generally agreed, from postings after 1.03 on this thread and others, that the tweaking of player aging and development was successful, so that a modifier of 1.000 in each represents modern-day baseball reality. No one has (or probably could be) definitive as to where to set these modifiers to reflect various historical eras or "what if" scenarios (like the person who wanted a league for 16 to 60 year-olds). This can only be attained by repeatedly testing your league with various settings until you get the results that you want.

neojonas · 09-21-2006, 12:17 PM

1.000 for all 4 modifiers? I was under the impression that for modern day baseball using a roster like Rolen's you still want Pitcher Aging = 4.000 and Pitcher Development = 3.000. Is this not true anymore?

TNCubsFan · 09-21-2006, 12:23 PM

I am using a modern MLB set up with full minors. 20 round draft. Adjust every year for historical accuracy.

I am using for Pitchers 3.000 for both development and aging.

Hitters for me are aging .900 and development .700

DISCLAIMER!!!!!

These modifiers are just that. I have not yet asked Seiiven to do his voodo on my results. However I have been very happy with the results from the three test leagues I have run using these settings.

1998 Yankees · 09-21-2006, 12:29 PM

You're right, I will qualify my statement by mentioning that I am purely a fictional leaguer. By historical simulations, I include the use of rosters of real players like Cubby and Arod23/Garlon. These may require tweaking of modifiers, perhaps substantially. Otherwise, people have stated elsewhere that they are satisfied with 1.000 modifiers.

Seviien · 09-21-2006, 01:06 PM

Values of 1.000 in version 1.03 do represent a huge improvement over earlier versions. I would, however, stop short of saying that the general consensus is that the defaults are okay. Using fictional players, settings of 1.000 yielded the red line that appears in the graph at the top of the thread. My settings resulted in the blue line, which is closer to MLB actuals.

fhomess · 09-27-2006, 08:53 PM

In the tests that folks have run (specifically those in the first post), have the player creation modifiers been kept at 1.000?

Seviien · 09-28-2006, 12:04 AM

I'm not sure exactly how I worded the first post, but the line representing OOTP defaults has everything at 1.000. The line showing my (more accurate results) incorporates ALL of the settings I specify in the first post.

PSUColonel · 12-18-2006, 02:48 PM

It appears these settings were suggested before v.3.0 Are these still suggested? (this is the problem, everytime a new patch is released, it's not clear if these sugestions are still valid)

bp_ · 12-18-2006, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

It appears these settings were suggested before v.3.0 Are these still suggested? (this is the problem, everytime a new patch is released, it's not clear if these sugestions are still valid)

If you read the first post you can see a note that it is updated for 1.0.3 = the current build of the game.

Quote:

Sep 2, 2006: Settings adjusted for patch 1.03; updated charts and summary stats to follow.
Sep 2, 2006: Charts and summary stats updated

09-02-2006, 04:27 PM	#182 (permalink)
Seviien All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 917 Thanked 10x in 9 posts	I have updated the charts and summary stats. Last edited by Seviien; 09-02-2006 at 07:13 PM.

09-18-2006, 01:27 AM	#186 (permalink)
TNCubsFan Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 215 Thanked 2x in 2 posts	BUMP __________________ "If a tie is like kissing your sister, losing is like kissing your grandmother with her teeth out" George Brett HOF

09-21-2006, 12:23 PM	#190 (permalink)
TNCubsFan Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 215 Thanked 2x in 2 posts	I am using a modern MLB set up with full minors. 20 round draft. Adjust every year for historical accuracy. I am using for Pitchers 3.000 for both development and aging. Hitters for me are aging .900 and development .700 DISCLAIMER!!!!! These modifiers are just that. I have not yet asked Seiiven to do his voodo on my results. However I have been very happy with the results from the three test leagues I have run using these settings. __________________ "If a tie is like kissing your sister, losing is like kissing your grandmother with her teeth out" George Brett HOF

09-27-2006, 08:53 PM	#193 (permalink)
fhomess Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,724 Thanked 255x in 119 posts	In the tests that folks have run (specifically those in the first post), have the player creation modifiers been kept at 1.000? __________________ StatsLab11 - PHP/MySQL based utilities for Online Leagues Other Mods: 19th Century: Schedules, FaceGen BBCards: 1887 Allen & Ginter, 1934 Goudey, 1988 Score, 1996 fhomess, 2005 fhomess FaceGen: 1960-Pres MLB, 32 Colleges, Backgrounds PEBA - Connecticut Nutmeggers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-02-2006, 03:45 PM	#181 (permalink)
Seviien All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 917 Thanked 10x in 9 posts	As best I can tell, the relationship between the modifiers and their effects is nonlinear. For example, changing the development modifier from 1.000 to 2.000 does not double the rate of development.

09-21-2006, 10:38 AM	#187 (permalink)
Halo Fan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: California Posts: 71	I got my historical league set up but haven't done much with it in the past couple of months. I was getting ready to fire it up again and then just came upon this thread. What's the current status of this problem? Are there modifiers that will allow for realistic aging (including pitchers not dropping off a cliff prematurely)? If not, when will this be addressed? Is the plan to release a new patch or to just tell everyone they need to wait a year? Apologies if any of these questions have been definitively resolved somewhere, and I just missed it.

09-21-2006, 12:17 PM	#189 (permalink)
neojonas All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,075 Thanked 83x in 34 posts	1.000 for all 4 modifiers? I was under the impression that for modern day baseball using a roster like Rolen's you still want Pitcher Aging = 4.000 and Pitcher Development = 3.000. Is this not true anymore?

09-21-2006, 12:29 PM	#191 (permalink)
1998 Yankees Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Yankee Stadium, back in 1998. Posts: 8,020 Thanked 525x in 353 posts	You're right, I will qualify my statement by mentioning that I am purely a fictional leaguer. By historical simulations, I include the use of rosters of real players like Cubby and Arod23/Garlon. These may require tweaking of modifiers, perhaps substantially. Otherwise, people have stated elsewhere that they are satisfied with 1.000 modifiers.

09-21-2006, 01:06 PM	#192 (permalink)
Seviien All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 917 Thanked 10x in 9 posts	Values of 1.000 in version 1.03 do represent a huge improvement over earlier versions. I would, however, stop short of saying that the general consensus is that the defaults are okay. Using fictional players, settings of 1.000 yielded the red line that appears in the graph at the top of the thread. My settings resulted in the blue line, which is closer to MLB actuals.

09-28-2006, 12:04 AM	#194 (permalink)
Seviien All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 917 Thanked 10x in 9 posts	I'm not sure exactly how I worded the first post, but the line representing OOTP defaults has everything at 1.000. The line showing my (more accurate results) incorporates ALL of the settings I specify in the first post.

12-18-2006, 02:48 PM	#195 (permalink)
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 2,731 Blog Entries: 3 Thanked 180x in 110 posts	It appears these settings were suggested before v.3.0 Are these still suggested? (this is the problem, everytime a new patch is released, it's not clear if these sugestions are still valid)