|
Post by Commish_Ron on Sept 20, 2022 13:59:56 GMT -5
Should we consider reducing the scouting accuracy?
I have historically been in favor of 100% scouting accuracy. It used to bother me so much in a league with lower accuracy watching 1/2 star trash getting drafted in the first round and knowing that their scout just reported something different than mine. That made it less of a game of skill and more a game of luck in my mind. Now that scouting accuracy is a reportable number I feel less passionate about it.
I do think in general less luck makes for better online league competition. Like I mentioned in the TCR thread, " 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 14:28:32 GMT -5
If we reduced scouting accuracy below 100% would my scout see a player differently than the scout with another team?
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Sept 20, 2022 15:01:38 GMT -5
Since we do not use individual team scouts, we rely on the OSA composite ratings. So it seems that even with scouting accuracy set at less than 100% we still would all see the same ratings for each player.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Sept 20, 2022 15:02:35 GMT -5
If we reduced scouting accuracy below 100% would my scout see a player differently than the scout with another team? Yes absolutely. If the accuracy is below 100% that's where those scouting talents at different levels come into play. You can increase your scouting accuracy for an individual player by rescouting the same player multiple times. We would not be considering doing a major shift here, but maybe drop down to 90 or 95 to introduce a little fog of war.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Sept 20, 2022 15:04:41 GMT -5
Since we do not use individual team scouts, we rely on the OSA composite ratings. So it seems that even with scouting accuracy set at less than 100% we still would all see the same ratings for each player. We can all hire individual scouts and you can still toggle between OSA and scout. I haven't really done much of that but I assume there is currently very little discrepancy between the 2. I do keep a scout on payroll though in the hopes that it improves my international discoveries.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Sept 20, 2022 15:17:29 GMT -5
Since we do not use individual team scouts, we rely on the OSA composite ratings. So it seems that even with scouting accuracy set at less than 100% we still would all see the same ratings for each player. We can all hire individual scouts and you can still toggle between OSA and scout. I haven't really done much of that but I assume there is currently very little discrepancy between the 2. I do keep a scout on payroll though in the hopes that it improves my international discoveries. True. I overlooked the scout that we use only for international scouting (100% of budget allocated to international). Occasionally I toggle between OSA and scout ratings. I have found differences so rare that they are virtually non-existent. But the surprise discovery of an international stud (think Enrique Vazquez at 16 years old) makes funding the scouting effort worth it. Would accuracy set at less than 100% add the dimension of allocating the scouting budget to the other categories (major, minor, amateur)? If so, that would be challenging and cool.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Sept 20, 2022 15:30:49 GMT -5
Would accuracy set at less than 100% add the dimension of allocating the scouting budget to the other categories (major, minor, amateur)? If so, that would be challenging and cool. It would. To an extent anyway. The more we lowered that number the more that aspect would come into play.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Sept 20, 2022 16:11:34 GMT -5
I don’t really see a benefit in making this change but am open to listening to reasons why this would be needed.
|
|
|
Post by Brian_Twins on Sept 20, 2022 17:22:49 GMT -5
Without much to go off, having less "luck" in an established league like this one seems to make the most sense.
|
|
|
Post by Arizona_PBL on Sept 20, 2022 17:25:17 GMT -5
I also see no benefit for the change
|
|
|
Post by Jared_Carolina on Sept 20, 2022 19:15:40 GMT -5
I think the talent randomness change would be better than this. I am against.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Sept 20, 2022 19:40:58 GMT -5
So effectively "turn on" Scouts for more than discovering new talent. That, AND an increase to TCR would make for more fog, less sure thing.
Trading with Scouts is different than trading with 100% accuracy, so that might spice things up. Dollars put into Scouting would mean more overall and further differentiate from those that choose not to spend their dollars. Signing scouts with better attributes than "international" would have more meaning. The setting of your sliders to allocate your scouting budget would also mean more and further differentiate how each GM sees players through the league, minors, etc.
Scouts on? Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by detroitcarl on Sept 21, 2022 11:23:35 GMT -5
Having less than 100% means a scout is almost mandatory just to get another scouting viewpoint. Today a scout reports the same as OSA, just having a scout means you can request a report whenever you want vs waiting for OSA to update.
TCR is another variable. We can play with it, but it is very different. That results in a players ability actually changing vs our view of him. Which to me is a completely different thing.
|
|
|
Post by AstrosGM_Shane on Sept 21, 2022 15:07:30 GMT -5
I'm against this as well. I like the TCR more than this. Also gives an advantage to those that have signed the best scouts already. Some teams haven't even really worried about it.
|
|
|
Post by markblakemore on Sept 24, 2022 15:34:59 GMT -5
Personally I like this for all the reasons that David brings out. It's similar but different to the TCR change and I do understand the consideration that those that can afford the best scouts get an advantage. But surely that is realistic also.
So yes but I wouldn't advocate we change the setting materially for now.
|
|