Posted by 06gsp on 1/20/2021 1:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by adlorenz on 1/20/2021 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by 06gsp on 1/20/2021 11:58:00 AM (view original):
There are many issues with open leagues, but I don't think salary cap is one of them. There are a lot of things in need of fixing in sim league baseball that attention could be better spent on. I'd be curious to hear the rationale for why this change specifically.

We are working on some of those as well, but the question was asked because the majority of Open Leagues seem to see the same types of rosters and the salary cap seems to have been in this state for awhile (if ever changed). The adjustment is essentially to mix it up a little and is a simple as changing a number in the code. So it seems like a low effort, somewhat game changing adjustment.

If I am off base with the idea that is completely fine, it is why I asked you all as the players for your opinion.

-Adam

thanks, I hadn't considered how small a change it would be

but I think changing the cap just to mix it up a little would, literally, only mix things up a little, you'd quickly see the same types of rosters used at whatever different cap you select.

I could see the benefit of adjusting the salary cap between 80-90m as a temporary change, knowing that something more permanent is in the works. I guess for me, a lot would depend of the timeframe we'd be talking about.

Do you envision dynamic pricing being adjusted within this year? Or do you feel it could take longer? I know there may not be a definitive date given the complexity of it

Posted by jfranco77 on 1/20/2021 10:21:00 AM (view original):
I think 90 or 100 would allow them to get more of the players they "know" -but even at 100 they're going to perform WAY below expectations. Tough to strike a balance between getting the guys you want and not being horribly disappointed in how they perform.

100% this, new users want to use players they know, and use great players, but they also want realistic results as the normalization, ballpark, and competition level impacts are all learning points. I feel $80m is a good balance for that. Most realistic is around $65-75m range, so $80m allows them to stay relatively realistic, get relatively expected performances from players they grew up watching and their favorites, while still allowing for the ability to grab a star or two, or even a historic season. Then, those relatively small deviations of performance allow them to learn about the effects of normalization, ballparks, fatigue, competition, etc in a way that isn't devastating or a turn-off to playing again.

I wouldn't change this value, especially if dynamic pricing is coming into play with a base reset as this will expand that pool of players even more for new owners to experience.

- there is value in modest change, in that people would need to adapt their oft-used strategies
- but $80M ALREADY gives very unrealistic results, where most teams are 100+win caliber compared to normal MLB clubs. $75M would be better IMHO.

Posted by tomhanrahan on 1/20/2021 2:08:00 PM (view original):
- there is value in modest change, in that people would need to adapt their oft-used strategies
- but $80M ALREADY gives very unrealistic results, where most teams are 100+win caliber compared to normal MLB clubs. $75M would be better IMHO.

Yeah, if a change, I would endorse going down to the $70-75m range over going up. Going up only separates from realism even more.

So let me ask this. Would a better change be to revert salaries back to pre-dynamic pricing days (the first time) rather than adjust the cap?

I think you guys are probably reading a little too much into my asking this question. The question was asked because while we work on bigger efforts (i.e. rewrites, dynamic pricing, major features) we are trying to freshen up or change the games a little bit because well... nothing really has been done to them in a long time. My initial thought around increasing the cap centered around more casual players drafting more of an all-star team than a real roster. But this is why I ask you all questions about this. I have only have 2 seasons of experience in SLB so when I come up with an idea or a thought its best to leave the validation to you all. I didn't take into account how much more dominant the pitching would be and the frustration that would cause for the casual players.

Our version of dynamic pricing is probably going to come with a general pricing adjustment as well to account for dominant eras in the engine. That is why this isn't going super fast. The formula for pricing, is over 4 pages long and we want to make sure we do it right. There is also a plan to completely rewrite/update the game and reintroduce SimLeague Live after the completion of the Gridiron Dynasty rewrite (which has already started) as well.

Posted by adlorenz on 1/20/2021 2:48:00 PM (view original):
So let me ask this. Would a better change be to revert salaries back to pre-dynamic pricing days (the first time) rather than adjust the cap?

I think you guys are probably reading a little too much into my asking this question. The question was asked because while we work on bigger efforts (i.e. rewrites, dynamic pricing, major features) we are trying to freshen up or change the games a little bit because well... nothing really has been done to them in a long time. My initial thought around increasing the cap centered around more casual players drafting more of an all-star team than a real roster. But this is why I ask you all questions about this. I have only have 2 seasons of experience in SLB so when I come up with an idea or a thought its best to leave the validation to you all. I didn't take into account how much more dominant the pitching would be and the frustration that would cause for the casual players.

Our version of dynamic pricing is probably going to come with a general pricing adjustment as well to account for dominant eras in the engine. That is why this isn't going super fast. The formula for pricing, is over 4 pages long and we want to make sure we do it right. There is also a plan to completely rewrite/update the game and reintroduce SimLeague Live after the completion of the Gridiron Dynasty rewrite (which has already started) as well.

Many good things in here that I can't wait to see (general pricing adjustment, return of Live, etc)!

That said, yes, I think a salary reset would be a better change than adjusting the cap. It'll also reduce the advantage of 2017-2020 players salary-wise. I'm sure we'll see some sort of instant return to Joss and HoJo, but I'm hoping that with increased knowledge of the sim from things like the Testing WhatIfSports League we'll see that the perceived value isn't as great as it appears at first glance for pitchers like Joss, and so while he appears to be a bargain, his pricing isn't terribly far out of line (HR impact maybe excepted when used in conjunction with extreme HR reducing ballparks), and thus his use won't be quite as prevalent as before.

Whatever is decided, it's very encouraging to see communication from administration. I like the concept of bringing about small changes from time to time to keep the community interested and aware that there are people working on making it better. This brings more hope that the promises of bigger changes in the future might actually come to pass. Unfortunately but understandably, the veteran community here has learned to take promises with a healthy dose of skepticism.

At this point, just returning to pre-dynamic pricing salaries would provide a little bit of a shakeup while a better system is being worked on. I still like the idea of having a version of open leagues only accessible to owners with fewer than 5 championships - a beginner league, if you will.

Posted by just4me on 1/20/2021 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tomhanrahan on 1/20/2021 2:08:00 PM (view original):
- there is value in modest change, in that people would need to adapt their oft-used strategies
- but $80M ALREADY gives very unrealistic results, where most teams are 100+win caliber compared to normal MLB clubs. $75M would be better IMHO.

Yeah, if a change, I would endorse going down to the $70-75m range over going up. Going up only separates from realism even more.

This

Posted by adlorenz on 1/20/2021 2:48:00 PM (view original):
So let me ask this. Would a better change be to revert salaries back to pre-dynamic pricing days (the first time) rather than adjust the cap?

I think you guys are probably reading a little too much into my asking this question. The question was asked because while we work on bigger efforts (i.e. rewrites, dynamic pricing, major features) we are trying to freshen up or change the games a little bit because well... nothing really has been done to them in a long time. My initial thought around increasing the cap centered around more casual players drafting more of an all-star team than a real roster. But this is why I ask you all questions about this. I have only have 2 seasons of experience in SLB so when I come up with an idea or a thought its best to leave the validation to you all. I didn't take into account how much more dominant the pitching would be and the frustration that would cause for the casual players.

Our version of dynamic pricing is probably going to come with a general pricing adjustment as well to account for dominant eras in the engine. That is why this isn't going super fast. The formula for pricing, is over 4 pages long and we want to make sure we do it right. There is also a plan to completely rewrite/update the game and reintroduce SimLeague Live after the completion of the Gridiron Dynasty rewrite (which has already started) as well.

For myself, I do think reverting back to pre-dynamic pricing would be a better move.

It would be great to have live play back, not just for the owners who play in live leagues but for those of us who like to test things out. Looking forward to that.

I personally like higher caps..
But the reason I don't play OLs is bc of AAA players. I think the best 'improvement' possible to OLs would be to eliminate AAA players- OR have a universal set of AAA players (every team gets the exact same AAA players in every single OL). My honest opinion is that the whole AAA concept is absolutely horrible and just plain silly.

Make the cap $85M & eliminate AAA

Sorry, but that IS my answer to the question of how to improve OLs.

I would strongly be in favor of reverting back to pre-dynamic pricing at least until something better comes along. If you want to split the difference, maybe give a maximum of 10% increase per player, that way some of the major cookies will go up, but guys like 95 Maddux won't be ridiculous.
Dynamic prices is fine, but it was done so poorly last time that it appeared to have created more problems than it fixed.

Also what could it hurt? It'll change things up at least in the short term, and I think we can all be in agreement that before the new mechanism, whatever that may be, is implemented, we desperately need a pricing reset to undo some of the silliness that came with the last structure.

Why would there be a need for an entire rewrite? It seems to me that the actual game engine works well. The only thing about it that I'd say needs changing is how/when strikeouts are determined & fielding% being linked to the pitcher on the mound.

Also, reverting back to the original salaries would be a huge change, especially for us who never experienced the original salaries. I 1st played SLB right after the prices changed.

I also agree with Adam's assumption that new players want to build an all-star roster with names like Mantle & Mays & Ruth....

New players also want to see their Mantle and Mays bat over .300 with 40+HR, while their Maddux and Gibson all have 2 ERAs. Obviously you can't have it both ways, but the further we get from realistic stats, the less likely new players are to enjoy the game.