2037.8 Boise Ratings Crush

[Bumstead]

So, with the least injured team in the league...only 2 Starting Pitchers on the disabled list for more than half the season and our best relief pitcher on the disabled list for the last 2 months of season minimum....weird...anyway, let me list the ratings loss for Boise this season as it is ridiculous:

Bill Marsh- started season 9/6/5, current 10/5/4 = net -1
Bill Pidduck - started season 10/6/6, current 8/6/6 = -2
Luis Manuel Torres - 6/6/7, 5 innings later 4/6/5 = -4
Marcos Sanchez - 11/6/5, now 10/5/4 = -3
Max Mace - 6/7/8, now 5/7/7 = -3
Max Makin - 7/7/7 to 6/7/7= -1
Stan Brooks - 8/6/8 to 5/6/7 =-4
Antonio Sanchez- 8/8/4 to 6/9/3 = -2
Tomas Chavez - 7/7/7 to 6/7/6 = -2
Samuel Cant - 7/7/7 to 6/7/6 -2
Benavides - 9/7/6 to 7/8/4 -3
Longoria - 8/6/6 to 7/5/5 -3

Those are the pitchers. I did have 1 pitcher whose ratings did not take a hit. 1. Yes 1 fucking pitcher and they aren't old guys...ridiculous...


Yoshida - 6/6/5 to 5/5/5 -2
Claudio Perez- 6/8/5 to 5/7/5 -2
Jose Rivera - 6/7/7 to 5/6/6 -2
Carlos Munoz- 8/8/6 to 7/7/6 -2
Terada - 7/9/9 to 6/9/8 -2
Schneider- 6/7/9 to 6/7/9 -2
Tom Coulthard - 6/6/6 to 5/5/6 -2
Barney Everhart - 6/6/6 to 5/5/6 -2
Pedro Nava - 6/7/5 to 5/6/5 -2

This is comical. Left out 30 year olds and all the OF's that lost just 1 rating point....When does the fun start. Why is this reasonable. These guys range in age from 22-28...so, either prospect type status or in their prime....ratings all crash? Why? Boise had 2 players whose ratings went up by 1 point each. The other 26+ players took a ratings hit. Again, explain the fun. Explain how the GM (me) caused this to occur. I didn't. I put in pitch limits and set 5 man rotation. 105 pitch max for a couple of guys and less for the others. No abuse on my part. How does this make any sense? OOTP19 is silly, I'm not.

Least injured team...hilarious. Boise has been harpooned this season by version 19....

[Lane]

are you comparing ratings from before the switch to relative to ratings after the switch to relative? because yes, nearly all players on all teams had some or all *displayed* ratings drop. nothing internally changed.

[Bumstead]

these are actual ratings, not potential ratings.

[Lane]

yeah, that's my point. the displayed actual ratings dropped for pretty much everyone across the board.

[Bumstead]

Why?

[Lane]

because of the switch from displaying absolute ratings to displaying ratings relative to the league. the game is trying to make a rating of 5 "average" at the BBA level.

Ron analyzed the "new" ratings here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=27115

The important thing to note is that no one's hidden internal ratings (read: performance) will be affected by this. The displayed ratings just look different.

[Lane]

you could also look at it as we used to have "ratings bloat" which apparently is a thing in long running leagues. The relative ratings kind of smooths things out in a way.

[Bumstead]

I don't understand why that changed during the season still...whatever. These players suck regardless. It makes no sense to me to screw with the ratings....all it did was screw with how we have to look at players...

[Lane]

I don't understand why that changed during the season still...whatever. These players suck regardless. It makes no sense to me to screw with the ratings....all it did was screw with how we have to look at players...

I agree the timing was not ideal, and it is inconvenient to go through the adjustment of how we view players. But in the long run it will be better, especially for new GMs coming into the league. We'll all be used to it before too long.

[RonCo]

It's fair to complain about the timing, and even the process itself, but yeah, most of those are not actually ratings hits. Just differences in his they are presented.

[bcslouck]

It's fair to complain about the timing, and even the process itself, but yeah, most of those are not actually ratings hits. Just differences in his they are presented.

Which for some, is more important than the actual ratings showing.

[RonCo]

It's fair to complain about the timing, and even the process itself, but yeah, most of those are not actually ratings hits. Just differences in his they are presented.

Which for some, is more important than the actual ratings showing.

I understand and agree.

[Bumstead]

It's fair to complain about the timing, and even the process itself, but yeah, most of those are not actually ratings hits. Just differences in his they are presented.

You can say what you want and that's fine, but I expect we will continue to see the ratings crush regardless with this version of OOTP. This experience is a version experience, not just this league. So while I have a problem with the timing of the change and completely ignoring any thoughts that the GM's (who put a whole lot of time into this league building their organizations) may have had on the change, my issue is with the stupidity of this version of OOTP. I can't understand the consistent pitcher fall off at 28 years of age or sooner...I think the rating fall off is happening too soon. I think it's unrealistic. Regardless of whether it's realistic or not, it makes the game less fun. I like to build teams, but now I might as well just buy teams because going the process of building a team, just to watch OOTP crush the ratings for no reason, just destroys a lot of work and strategy (not to mention competitiveness in leagues like this). I play the game and compete in these leagues for fun. This version is no fun; I can't wait till it's gone. Maybe if I was willing to quit my job and move out of my house into a tent (with wifi of course; but probably no wife), then I would have the amount of time I need to study what the game is doing so that I could build a deep enough team, through some "gaming the game" strategy, in order to have a team that is good for an extended period of time. I work, I need to work, and I want to work, so, I'm not going to go that route.

We are already competing with GM's who are gaming the game currently. For a person not gaming the game (me) to have OOTP19 randomly destroying what I'm building is just stupid and it's getting to the point of the effort I make becoming pointless...I need a box to stand on when I type this stuff...damn it...

[bcslouck]

I need a box to stand on when I type this stuff...damn it...

[bcslouck]

I understand what you're saying Jeff. Would adjusting the league factors for aging, development at least curtail this some? If it's a 19 thing and keeping those factors the same isn't really keeping them the same in this version, would adjusting those factors help? I don't know enough about the inter-workings to know myself.

[RonCo]

I agree that our ratings are bloated and that development is hard to predict...does not feel exactly real. There are several possible reasons for it. All I can say for sure is that the core development algorithms for v19 are not substantially different from v18.

[RonCo]

To be clear again...I'm not personally a big fan of relative ratings. I do think I'm an outlier, though, and that most here will like them once they get settled into them, though. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

[bcslouck]

To be clear again...I'm not personally a big fan of relative ratings. I do think I'm an outlier, though, and that most here will like them once they get settled into them, though. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

I get how it can be useful, I guess. I just think when you've been doing something one way for awhile, why change it? It seemed random. Not only the idea to do it but the timing. And I'm sure I have someone tell me "it wasn't random." To me, it was. It is what it is.

[Spiccoli]

Personally... I'm trying to not get too bummed about my one of my favorite player's ratings completely crashing. Since I don't how real it is...

2B Xue-Qin Man

Last season he was a 9 Contact - 9 Gap, excellent #2 hitter.

Now he's 6 Contact - 7 Gap... right after I signed him to a 6 year extension at around $12+ Million per year.

He's still having a nice season, though it's still a little drop off. But 27 years old seems a bit young to start lumping. But I don't know how much of it is real... is it from the relative stats or is he really starting to drop off.

This might be a hard lesson to learn about signing late 20 guys to long term extensions. I'm still a bit new to OOTP. I was torn about keeping him and Wareham... but it's just a game and part of the process is learning these lessons.

Personally, I like the relative ratings... especially since I can change the "Relative to" when I'm looking at the UMEBA or the minors. But it's been a shock to see the carnage to some of my guys.

[Ted]

Personally... I'm trying to not get too bummed about my one of my favorite player's ratings completely crashing. Since I don't how real it is...

2B Xue-Qin Man

Last season he was a 9 Contact - 9 Gap, excellent #2 hitter.

Now he's 6 Contact - 7 Gap... right after I signed him to a 6 year extension at around $12+ Million per year.

He's still having a nice season, though it's still a little drop off. But 27 years old seems a bit young to start lumping. But I don't know how much of it is real... is it from the relative stats or is he really starting to drop off.

This might be a hard lesson to learn about signing late 20 guys to long term extensions. I'm still a bit new to OOTP. I was torn about keeping him and Wareham... but it's just a game and part of the process is learning these lessons.

Personally, I like the relative ratings... especially since I can change the "Relative to" when I'm looking at the UMEBA or the minors. But it's been a shock to see the carnage to some of my guys.

I think that's a legitimate lump. 9 con shouldn't have ended up 6.