6/5/2012 10:42 PM
"Just so you all know, the percentage of users that actually have 0 for the ADV budget is very small."

I would imagine it's going to be more prevalent in some worlds rather than others.

For example, 24 owners in Cooperstown and 23 in Moonlight Graham are running 0 ADV
 in the current seasons.  But only 7 in Mantle.
6/6/2012 7:16 AM
0 ADV is definitely an "experience" thing.  
And I imagine that the 10m budget start with 4m increments also contributes to a lower number of 0 ADV than expected.
6/6/2012 8:25 AM
As to the other points...

1.  I don't hate coach hiring.   It's only as hard and "not fun" as you make it.   However, the smart owner just doesn't pay 2.3m for a 83 HC when he knows, with a little patience, that he can get a 81 HC for 900k.     Releasing all available coaches "into the wild" will only leave the least savvy owners bidding HC up to 2.3m.

3.  They may exist but most experienced owners will tell you that they aren't varied enough to force any of us to use more than 0 in ADV. 
6/6/2012 10:54 AM
I think that the whole game may benefit from more variance with how advanced scouting works. This is an area that really hasn't been touched since the game was released and could probably use a thorough review.


6/6/2012 1:05 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/6/2012 8:25:00 AM (view original):
As to the other points...

1.  I don't hate coach hiring.   It's only as hard and "not fun" as you make it.   However, the smart owner just doesn't pay 2.3m for a 83 HC when he knows, with a little patience, that he can get a 81 HC for 900k.     Releasing all available coaches "into the wild" will only leave the least savvy owners bidding HC up to 2.3m.

3.  They may exist but most experienced owners will tell you that they aren't varied enough to force any of us to use more than 0 in ADV. 
You can get a 90 rated hitting coach for 2.3M
6/6/2012 1:15 PM
Posted by patrickm885 on 6/6/2012 10:54:00 AM (view original):
I think that the whole game may benefit from more variance with how advanced scouting works. This is an area that really hasn't been touched since the game was released and could probably use a thorough review.


Advanced affects accuracy of current ratings for All players of all ages. It's instantly valuable.

If i look in any of my worlds, i can instantly (for free) see the exact current level of any player. That's completely the opposite way it works to RL; where i have to spend time and resources to evaluate other teams players, to ascertain their weakness/strengths. Surely I get my own teams current ratings for free, as my coaches work with them day in day out, but i shouldn't get everyone else's for free, unless i send my scouts out to see those guys train/play, that involves me spending my budget, if i dont pay for scouts and i don't care about anyone elses players, then fine, my choice, but that hampers me when i need FA help, and i only have their actual production stats to use, because i was too cheap to pay for scouts.
6/6/2012 2:25 PM
>> Advanced affects accuracy of current ratings for All players of all ages. It's instantly valuable. <<

Not true.  Everybody seems the same, accurate current rating.

ADV budget determines the accuracy of the projected ratings you see.

Except for major injuries & DITR, development follows a predicable pattern. If you can see 2 seasons worth of ratings, you can come within a few points of knowing exactly how a player's ratings will end up. Especially on your own team, where you can control playing time and, to a degree, MinL coaching.

It seems that development can be screwed up.  It also seems that once you cover the basics (playing time & acceptable coaching), players are all going to develop on almost exactly the same pattern.

Which is why you see a lot of long-term successful owners with 0 or very low ADV.  It's not that ADV doesn't do anything. More like there seem to be better ways to invest the money.
 

6/6/2012 2:38 PM
Posted by tufft on 6/6/2012 2:25:00 PM (view original):
>> Advanced affects accuracy of current ratings for All players of all ages. It's instantly valuable. <<

Not true.  Everybody seems the same, accurate current rating.

ADV budget determines the accuracy of the projected ratings you see.

Except for major injuries & DITR, development follows a predicable pattern. If you can see 2 seasons worth of ratings, you can come within a few points of knowing exactly how a player's ratings will end up. Especially on your own team, where you can control playing time and, to a degree, MinL coaching.

It seems that development can be screwed up.  It also seems that once you cover the basics (playing time & acceptable coaching), players are all going to develop on almost exactly the same pattern.

Which is why you see a lot of long-term successful owners with 0 or very low ADV.  It's not that ADV doesn't do anything. More like there seem to be better ways to invest the money.
 

I don't believe crump was saying that as a statement of fact.  He was stating it as a suggestion of how to make ADV relevant, as the remainder of his post fleshes out.
6/6/2012 3:12 PM
I think the development patterns could even be tied to coaching ratings. The better, more patient the coach, the more they can get out of a player. This could be admittedly hard to program, but would make the most sense. 
1/25/2013 11:22 AM
Bump for relevancy
1/25/2013 12:54 PM
"and make FI the most sought after job.  That will prevent jerks like me from hiring all the decent FI as BC so no one else gets one."

This seems like such a simple thing to fix.  Make it so that if someone offers a FI coach a BC job they reject it.  How hard can that be to program?

1/25/2013 4:55 PM
#2 and #3 are the biggest thing in my mind that would keep the game challenging. Make development fuzzy and make development unpredictable and it opens up a lot of areas of the game. Making the  decline of veterans fuzzy and unpredictable would also add some challenge to the game.

Expanding the Diamonds in the Rough might help too... make it both diamonds and turds. A once a season roll that could either boost or hinder a player's development curve. Maybe players between 18 and 25 have a shot at boosting or hindering their development. And then once they get past 35 or so they have a shot at falling off a cliff, declining normally or some could get lucky and play into their 40s.
1/25/2013 5:09 PM
The moment development becomes more "fuzzy" and diamonds in the rough become much more common is the moment I start to 0 out all of my scouting and spend more $ in free agency.
1/25/2013 5:50 PM
Yeah, all that makes any player under 28 or so a crapshoot.    Screw developing players.  Someone else can do that and I'll have 140m in payroll.
1/26/2013 2:51 PM
It needs to be halfway between crapshoot and predictable somehow... there should be a way to scout a player and determine how variable his upside is. The unpredictable development could vary from prospect to prospect. You should have guys with high projected ratings and a very good chance at making them (the Arods and the Bryce Harpers, etc). Maybe those guys have a 80% chance of making it and a 10% chance of being a bust and a 10% chance of being even better.  You also should have guys with high projected ratings that have a lesser chance of making it (Justin Smoak, etc.) Maybe they have a 50% chance of hitting their higher ratings and  a 45% chance of busting and a 5% chance of being better. You also should have guys with low projected ratings but with a high chance to surpass them (Piazza).
Then you could spend scouting money  somehow (advanced or draft) to get a sense of how likely they are to bust, develop, or DITR.



of 3

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.