Proposed 2114 Changes

[Huckleberry]

Okay, here is the list of changes I think we have a bunch of agreement on so may be implemented before next season, along with my thoughts and comments on each:

• Injuries - I don't want to lower the frequency of injuries but I would like to shift them so there are fewer long term injuries with players OUT and more short term and day-to-day injuries. I believe this will require a modified injury.txt file but I know nothing about that. Need someone to research or point me to already completed research (or a file) on this one.
• Talent change randomness - Ours has always been set at 100. The allowed range is from 1 to 200. My suggestion would be a moderate change at first from 100 to 75 to see what happens for a few seasons. Does anyone have experience tweaking this setting?
• Storylines - Seems like most people want them off. I don't have a problem with that.

[Gomer]

I endorse all of these changes.
I'll also do a little homework regarding the injury files.

The injury file we used in FOBL didn't affect frequency. But it did cut down on devastating (ie dev-killing) injuries.

[Txhorns]

I propose that we add the DH to the league.






j/k just want to see Huck's reaction

[Huckleberry]

Kemboi's contract just converted to an automatic annual rollover in perpetuity deal.

[claphamsa]

I propose that we add the DH to the league.






j/k just want to see Huck's reaction

the DH is an abomination...but OOTP deal with pinch hitting for pitchers almost as bad as Dust Baker...so it makes sense in OOTP.

[Gomer]

the DH is an abomination...but OOTP deal with pinch hitting for pitchers almost as bad as Dust Baker...so it makes sense in OOTP.

agree 100%

i'd say stick one of the leagues (NOT BOTH) with DH, at least some of these big bat/no glove prospects could get some reps

[JohnC]

I am good on all 3 of Huck's points.

[Claybor]

1. Good if we can figure out a way to do it.

2. Sounds good.

3. I don't mind the storylines, but don't care if they go away.

[squaredrive]

agree on all 3.

[Huckleberry]

Sound fairly unanimous. Or at least enough. I will make these changes when the WBA Championship Series concludes. So development and injuries (and storylines) will continue through the playoffs then be changed.

[Coop]

I've got a question about lowering the talent randomness factor.  If we lower it (and I'm definitely in favor of doing so, maybe even further than from 100 to 75), who exactly does it affect?  Does it affect only those new players coming into the league, or does it affect existing players as well?

The reason I ask this is because it's been my experience that, when a young player starts having his "Potential" ratings go down, they KEEP going down.  I've never yet seen, for example, a guy with 4-star potential go down to 1-star, then bounce back to 4-star.  In my experience (which I admit is somewhat limited), if a 4-star kid goes down to 1-star, he STAYS at 1-star forever.  It appears that OOTP is randomly tagging certain young players as a bust, and no matter how long you wait or how much you pray, those kids have that hidden setting on their files which says "bust," and that's pretty much the end of their story.  So if we change the randomness factor, is that going to allow some of these busts to bounce back, or is the change only going to affect the new kids coming into the league (by ensuring that fewer of them get tagged as busts)?

[Claybor]

I think your observations are pretty accurate.

I don't think many will 'bounce back' as you say. I think all players will be affected and just not change as often. Just my opinion of course.

[Gomer]

I think turning down the randomness will save some players from their maddening downward talent spirals, but I don't know how much it will help players achieve their potentials.

I haven't studied it, but it looks like a lot of players do develop (slowly) over time, but few fully develop by age 25. And we know, with a few rare exceptions, that dev pretty much sputters out at age 25 in ootp.

If we sped up dev speed, I think more players would come close to their potentials before hitting the age 25 wall.

[Huckleberry]

It won't help the guys who have already tanked.

Dev speed is something else we can look at. Current development settings:

[Gomer]

is there any harm in cranking up dev speed?

it would be nice to have some more fully developed 23 and 24 year olds.

and maybe we wouldn't have to waste 8 years on a prospect who's gonna crash anyway. let him crash after 4 years, and let us move on.

[Coop]

I’m in favor of increasing development speed.  Some of our guys are taking forever to develop.  My best catching prospect is a 21-year-old who is supposed to have 3.0 star potential but he’s about to finish his third year of pro ball and he’s still at 0.5 stars.  Reminds me of a famous Casey Stengel line:  “I’ve got a catcher named Goossen; he’s 20 years old and in ten years he’s got a chance to be 30.”

[Huckleberry]

As mentioned in Slack chat all the changes have been made except development speed. What are everyone's thoughts on the values we should change to on that?

APMP's suggestion of 7 in the chat is probably not going to happen. Ha.

[Gomer]

I'd turn it up as high as it goes. I think the snail's pace we're at now is partially responsible for these guys not reaching their potential.


Why wait til they're 26 to see if they're duds?
Let them sink or swim sooner so we can decide to move on without them or not.

[Huckleberry]

Changed both dev factors to 1.200 and pitcher aging speed to 0.700 per Slack chat discussion. Hopefully this helps, but we can keep our eye on it.