|
Post by Commish_Ron on Sept 20, 2022 13:51:50 GMT -5
TCR = Talent Change Randomness.
This is set to below average in PBL. (i.e. talent will remain more static that average, less randomness). Our setting is 67 on a scale of 1-200 with 100 being average.
Increasing would add some luck factor into the game and make things a little more difficult for the hard core spreadsheet users.
My initial take. From a high level I think less luck is good for an online league. To really compete lets all play with the cards facing up and see who can outmaneuver who. The hard core spreadsheet users do not have a competitive advantage, at least as far as they do not have access to any data we don't all have access to. They are just more savvy on how to use it.
I do also get that a little bit of gamble and lottery winning can add spice to the league for some people as well. So I am happy to listen to arguments and put it up for a vote if it gets support. Very similar arguments for the scouting accuracy discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Sept 20, 2022 14:31:11 GMT -5
Personally I like the setting where it's at. It feels realistic to me and the league is going strong. I don't see the need to change it.
|
|
|
Post by Brian_Twins on Sept 20, 2022 17:34:44 GMT -5
The more realistic, the better imo
|
|
|
Post by Arizona_PBL on Sept 20, 2022 18:06:09 GMT -5
leave where it is. I think its current setting is just about right
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Sept 20, 2022 19:04:15 GMT -5
Supposedly this affects the more skilled players more often.
It would be nice for those that can afford the most skilled players, or several skilled players, by paying them huge coin possibly get stuck with an albatross slightly more often, instead of paying a sure thing until they hit middle age.
And, it would also be nice for a few more shooting stars to appear for the rest of us? Until they are purchased by those that can.
Without going all the way to default, maybe there is a point in between? Or a gradual increase to point between?
|
|
|
Post by Jared_Carolina on Sept 20, 2022 19:07:29 GMT -5
I vote to change. I like the idea of a player developing of more than what they were drafted. Current setting encourages tanking to a small degree.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Sept 20, 2022 19:13:51 GMT -5
I agree with David. The future is uncertain. At least a little bit more uncertainty would be more interesting and challenging.
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Sept 20, 2022 19:14:19 GMT -5
Seems the most realistic the way it currently is. Albert Pujols and Mike Piazza are extremely rare. High, high majority of good hitters in the MLB get drafted in the first two rounds
|
|
|
Post by detroitcarl on Sept 21, 2022 11:27:16 GMT -5
Note, TCR affects both age ranges. Increasing TCR not only means more boom/busts at the development ages, but also increased fall offs in older players.
We did increase aging slightly last offseason. Increasing TCR will result in more risk to older players and the chance of bad contracts occurring.
|
|
|
Post by AstrosGM_Shane on Sept 21, 2022 15:09:14 GMT -5
I like the idea of increasing it. Not sure how much, but baseball in real life is random too with always a few players coming out of nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Sept 22, 2022 17:04:08 GMT -5
I think we often times focus on the positive aspects of a player increasing their skill but do not consider that in this case the opposite would also be possible.
It wouldn’t just hit “rich teams signing old players” either.
My vote is for this to remain unchanged.
|
|
|
Post by wallyroyalsgm on Sept 23, 2022 16:35:49 GMT -5
New here, but I think this is a good change. Just learned about the extended aging mechanic recently adopted, and it seems to me that gives an unneeded advantage to the big money teams, who can afford the salaries necessary to hire the older players with little chance of negative consequences if the talent remains steady. The smaller market teams can't easily do this. Seems like we should be making things a little more difficult for the wealthy, not easier.
|
|
|
Post by markblakemore on Sept 24, 2022 15:00:55 GMT -5
Some reasoned arguments in here. I probably lean towards increasing this a bit closer to 100 and getting a little more randomness in but I've no strong feelings on this one.
|
|