Interesting.
And there is a lot here to unpack.
Who wants to discuss finances again?
Setting screenie #2 shows that this league is actually set up to produce a revenue range where the lowest is 30% of the highest. That parallels nicely with the team budgets. And explains quite a bit.
Setting screenie #3 league evolution.
I'll say "normally", but it's totally subjective, you would turn this off to keep the game from veering randomly.
I know "evolution" is supposed to be itemized as it happens in the history (for anyone to see).
Here in PBL, there hasn't been any, if you believe even subtle changes are itemized, since 2022.
I would suggest unchecking this to avoid any future issues.
This is not a "top of mind" setting if we were to encounter a fluctuating hitting or pitching issue.
If an argument arises about how hitting and pitching sucks and that we should do A, B and C to correct that, quite possibly it's this evolution at work???
And if you then make changes you feel will correct things, this same setting my then swing the pendulum the other way, amplifying the situation in a direction that may cause more harm than good.
A valuable poll, in my opinion, would be to ask whether this should be unchecked?
Setting screenie #4 minimum buyouts.
Not sure why this is 10% (likely a left-over setting) when the house rules, at least for team options, say 25%?
I think this would be a logical adjustment to avoid a GM making a contract buyout offer mistake.
Setting screenie #5.
When your superstar calibre players setting to $16M (which is a very old, default setting in OOTP, which is fine) BUT your actual "superstar" players exceed that by more than 100%, then there is too much money in the league (and another have/have not argument).
The TOP 25 salaries (easily found on the financial page) far exceed the setting for "superstar calibre" players in PBL.
And of that TOP 25, the upper HALF of that list exceed that "superstar" number by 100% or more, the TOP 5 essentially $40M.
Setting screenie #6 - scouting.
Just me thinking out loud - no complaint - but I have long been curious why my player's scouting pages reports lag by about a season?
My player reports (one picked randomly, but most are like this) show a latest "scout" date of 10/01/2055 and a latest OSA date of 11/26/2055, which (given the date in the game is
11/8/2056, means that every player's report and all the graphs associated with them are a YEAR old? Odd.
Maybe that also explains why. in some cases. the POT/OVR stars don't align with the stats on the scouting page?
No obvious reason in the settings? In fact "frequent" and "100%" would suggest otherwise?
I wonder out loud, whether the scouting system, especially in v21, has changed sufficiently to run counter to how we have traditionally accepted setting up the scouting sliders in PBL (all on "international")??
If anyone does NOT have their scouting setup that way, I would be curious to know if you see more recent scouting reports?
I may toy with setting up my scout to have 25% budget across the board just as a test next season?
Quite curious actually why our (or maybe it's just my) scouting is not "current" in PBL??
Setting screenie #10 - player aging/dev.
These settings ensure that both bats and arms, once fully developed, would retain that for some time as they age - good to know.
Unfortunately it also ensures that those elite bats and arms, especially once free agents, will be making huge dollars, which puts the very best out of reach for some budgets.
But certainly far, far, far less risk in PBL paying an older elite player when you know they will retain their skill set.
Again, good to know.
Players will develop essentially normally and retain their ratings for some time.
Very valuable information, when compared to a default setting game!
No sense commenting on the first year player draft sertings. It is what it is.
Thank you for posting these settings Ron.
It does provide more clarity and can easily be referenced in future discussions.
Great addition next to the League Governance in this section!