Performance-Based Player Progression (Official Thread)

[jaysfan17]

I just simmed the last half of April after playing the first half and I must say the "new" Performance-Based Player Progression feature doesn't seem to work for me. This was the biggest feature I was most looking forward too. I thought I was finally going to have veteran players (35-40) on my team without having to trade them away before or halfway through the season.


Example: RA Dickey was 3-0 with a 1.98 ERA and he as already regressed 2-3 points per pitching attribute. Mark Buerhle's record is slightly weaker, but he's probably performing at a typical Mark Buerhle level. He's decreased at the same rate as well.


Before I bought the game, my assumption was that over the year, Mark and RA would probably gain a point or two or stay neutral IF they had the same season as last year. Right now, IMO, they are performing exceptionally better then last year.


I have the game for both the Vita and PS4 and I've noticed that not all features in the PS4 are in the Vita, but I expected that. Is this new feature only in the PS4 and PS3?


Does anyone else notice any problems? Could there be a patch?


Oh, I remember Ramone telling us that we could challenge umpire calls in the game too. Is that only on PS4 and PS3?

[Maverick09]

Quote: Originally Posted by jaysfan17

I just simmed the last half of April after playing the first half and I must say the "new" Performance-Based Player Progression feature doesn't seem to work for me. This was the biggest feature I was most looking forward too. I thought I was finally going to have veteran players (35-40) on my team without having to trade them away before or halfway through the season. Example: RA Dickey was 3-0 with a 1.98 ERA and he as already regressed 2-3 points per pitching attribute. Mark Buerhle's record is slightly weaker, but he's probably performing at a typical Mark Buerhle level. He's decreased at the same rate as well. Before I bought the game, my assumption was that over the year, Mark and RA would probably gain a point or two or stay neutral IF they had the same season as last year. Right now, IMO, they are performing exceptionally better then last year.

Very good points you're bringing up here. I personally haven't done the test, but this would suck if it were the case. What's the point of having older, experienced players if they're going to regress immediately? May as well trade them for younger guys. I hope their regression stops at some point; have you tried to sim the rest of the season to see the result?

[jaysfan17]

Quote: Originally Posted by Maverick09

Very good points you're bringing up here. I personally haven't done the test, but this would suck if it were the case. What's the point of having older, experienced players if they're going to regress immediately? May as well trade them for younger guys. I hope their regression stops at some point; have you tried to sim the rest of the season to see the result?

Not yet. I kind of just want to play instead of sim for now. I read a different thread and a guy simmed a full season and RA Dickey regressed to 71 by the All-Star break (I think).


Thanks for your input as well; I appreciated it.

[Maverick09]

Just simmed one season, here are some examples.

Mark Buehrle (36 YO): 14W - 10L, 2.49 ERA: Went from 83 OVR to 69 OVR (-14 OVR)

R.A Dickey (40 YO): 11W - 8L, 3.99 ERA: Went from 84 OVR to 68 OVR (-16 OVR)

David Ortiz (39 YO): 31 HR, 75 RBI, 261 AVG: Went from 88 OVR to 74 OVR (-14 OVR)

There are other examples of guys regressing to this degree (Tim Hudson of the Giants, etc.). Dickey and Ortiz retired, Buehrle stayed around.

[rman]

So much for the fluff fact sheet they posted. More broken features...makes you wonder how much BS filler is in there.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

In 2008 Mussina must have improved his fastball, endurance and power at 39 since he went 20-9.

The performance progression mitigates some of these losses as you age. NOTHING stops a player from losing skill as they age.

[boxers]

Quote: Originally Posted by tabarnes19

In 2008 Mussina must have improved his fastball, endurance and power at 39 since he went 20-9. The performance progression mitigates some of these losses as you age. NOTHING stops a player from losing skill as they age.

Agreed. I haven't tested this myself but based on the above examples, it sounds like the base regression level needs to be tuned a little bit. If the formula is:

Net regression/progression= base regression/progression + performance based progression/regression

For example, the base regression for a 38 year old is -10 OVR, with a 2.50 ERA season, he should be able to have a maximum performance based progression of +5 OVR. Net regression=-5 OVR.
If that same player has a terrible season, he receives a maximum -5 OVR performance based regression. Net regression -15OVR.

It just seems harsh for the game to punish a 36 year old who puts up a 2.49ERA in the AL East, as Mark-E-Mark seemed to do in the OP's sim.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Quote: Originally Posted by boxers

Agreed. I haven't tested this myself but based on the above examples, it sounds like the base regression level needs to be tuned a little bit. If the formula is: Net regression/progression= base regression/progression + performance based progression/regression For example, the base regression for a 38 year old is -10 OVR, with a 2.50 ERA season, he should be able to have a maximum performance based progression of +5 OVR. Net regression=-5 OVR. If that same player has a terrible season, he receives a maximum -5 OVR performance based regression. Net regression -15OVR. It just seems harsh for the game to punish a 36 year old who puts up a 2.49ERA in the AL East, as Mark-E-Mark seemed to do in the OP's sim.

I disagree. Statistics do not prove that skills have improved or not diminished. I really would like to see performance progression toned down a tad.

If you Sim in the future a little the league becomes dominated by pitchers rated 88+ with sub 3 eras.

I've seen players drop less than other Sims and maintain better in others.