Talent Change Randomness question.

[dickysty]

I'm trying to strike a balance between historical numbers and some nice talent changes that seem reasonable.

Have you guys found what works well as far as a setting for Randomness?

Currently I'm using 25 but I'm not sure if that's going to be enough to make a difference. I also have recalc off.

Any suggestions would be great

[Kelric]

I keep recalc off and use 75.

[SittingDuck]

Originally Posted by dickysty

Currently I'm using 25 but I'm not sure if that's going to be enough to make a difference. I also have recalc off.

Wow. Basically if you have 25 on a scale of 1-200, you have a 1-in-8 chance of a player not being historical, I believe.

I have mine set at 67, so the player will be historical (for the most part) about 2/3 of the time.

[dickysty]

Originally Posted by SittingDuck

Wow. Basically if you have 25 on a scale of 1-200, you have a 1-in-8 chance of a player not being historical, I believe.

I have mine set at 67, so the player will be historical (for the most part) about 2/3 of the time.

Maybe I'm misremembering how the recal works. I would have thought that going from 100 to 25 would give me about a 75% chance of ratings staying the same.

I guess I'm not understanding how it works.

[SittingDuck]

There is an additional option called Talent Change Randomness, that allows you to adjust the frequency, not the severity, of talent changes. A setting of 200 is twice as many as the default 100; a setting of 50 is half as many as the default, and a setting of 1 will mean very, very few talent changes. 200 is the maximum value.

-OOTP8 Manual, pg 141

hth

[DrSatan]

The lower you set the talent change randomness the more likely the player will live up to his potential. This means your top prospects are less likely to bust, but it also means you won't get any diamonds in the rough, like late round draft picks who's potential (talent) raises. I recommend using a low setting in historical leagues, because of the frequency of pitchers busting after the first couple seasons.

[BruceM]

The lower you set the talent change randomness, the less likely there will be changes, good or bad. So it's not necessarily true that a player is likely to live up to his potential.

Setting it at default 100 equates to more chance of change.

Setting to 25 equates to less chance of changes.

There is no setting that says they'll be bad or good changes.

So both options have their risks.

[DrSatan]

Originally Posted by BruceM

The lower you set the talent change randomness, the less likely there will be changes, good or bad. So it's not necessarily true that a player is likely to live up to his potential.

Setting it at default 100 equates to more chance of change.

Setting to 25 equates to less chance of changes.

There is no setting that says they'll be bad or good changes.

So both options have their risks.

Talent change randomness affects "TALENT", not "RATINGS". So, if you have a prospect with 5 star potential and set randomness to 1, it will keep him from becoming a prospect with 1 star potential. Like I said before, it will also keep potential from increasing, so you won't have a 15th rd draft pick who's potential goes from 1 star to 4 stars. The setting doesn't affect ratings progression. Ratings are decided by player development speed and how the player is managed. It is much more likely that a talent change will be negative rather then positive, so the higher the setting is the more talent changes you will have, the more talent changes you have, the more busts you will have. This is why most people lower this setting. It is much more "risky" to raise this setting then it is to lower it. Player ratings develop towards their potential (talent), so it's much more beneficial to keep the potential (talent) from changing.

[BruceM]

Originally Posted by DrSatan

Talent change randomness affects "TALENT", not "RATINGS". So, if you have a prospect with 5 star potential and set randomness to 1, it will keep him from becoming a prospect with 1 star potential. Like I said before, it will also keep potential from increasing, so you won't have a 15th rd draft pick who's potential goes from 1 star to 4 stars. The setting doesn't affect ratings progression. Ratings are decided by player development speed and how the player is managed. It is much more likely that a talent change will be negative rather then positive, so the higher the setting is the more talent changes you will have, the more talent changes you have, the more busts you will have. This is why most people lower this setting. It is much more "risky" to raise this setting then it is to lower it. Player ratings develop towards their potential (talent), so it's much more beneficial to keep the potential (talent) from changing.

For every player that develops towards his talent, there are a couple hundred who don't.

I've played with this setting a lot in historical leagues and lowering it to 50 or 25 does not come close to guaranteeing a player will live up to his potential.

Like I said, there are risks with both options.

[DrSatan]

Originally Posted by BruceM

For every player that develops towards his talent, there are a couple hundred who don't.

I've played with this setting a lot in historical leagues and lowering it to 50 or 25 does not come close to guaranteeing a player will live up to his potential.

Like I said, there are risks with both options.

Talent change randomness doesn't have anything to do with a player reaching his potential, all it does is mess with what the players potential is. If you manage your players right, and bump up the dev speed a little, you shouldn't have any problems with players reaching their potential. I'm in the 36th year of a historical sim and every single player I've had on my team has reached his potential. I have talent change randomness set to one, so my first round draft picks won't bust. By bust, I mean their potential goes from 4-5 stars to nothing for no reason. If you know how to promote through the minors, then the players should progress to their potential. So, like I said, the only risk is leaving talent change at a high number. There is no risk in lowering the number, unless you consider less busts a risk.

[BruceM]

Originally Posted by DrSatan

Talent change randomness doesn't have anything to do with a player reaching his potential, all it does is mess with what the players potential is. If you manage your players right, and bump up the dev speed a little, you shouldn't have any problems with players reaching their potential. I'm in the 36th year of a historical sim and every single player I've had on my team has reached his potential. I have talent change randomness set to one, so my first round draft picks won't bust. By bust, I mean their potential goes from 4-5 stars to nothing for no reason. If you know how to promote through the minors, then the players should progress to their potential. So, like I said, the only risk is leaving talent change at a high number. There is no risk in lowering the number, unless you consider less busts a risk.

You've had every single player reach his potential. I guess if that's what you want in a league, then good for you. I've never had that happen, there are always busts, a lot more than there are success stories, much like real life.

Setting talent change randomness to 1 means it won't go down, it also means you won't get boosts either. So yes, there is risk both ways.

[DrSatan]

Originally Posted by BruceM

You've had every single player reach his potential. I guess if that's what you want in a league, then good for you. I've never had that happen, there are always busts, a lot more than there are success stories, much like real life.

Setting talent change randomness to 1 means it won't go down, it also means you won't get boosts either. So yes, there is risk both ways.

ed zachary, there won't be any boosts, but there's not that many boosts anyway. Sooooo like I said, there is no risk in lowering the number for talent change randomness. I would much rather have my prospects perform as advertised vs have them bust. When it comes to pitchers this is a major problem. There are too many instances when a pitching prospect reaches the majors, does a great job for one or two years, and then craps out.

[SittingDuck]

everyone has their own preference. ootp enables a lot of that, which is great.