-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
Been meaning to do this, vote on expansion (bdub and schauwn)
- Thread starter OU11
- Start date
I vote yes, fwiw.
Winter is coming.
Winter is coming.
Does this mean I win?
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Yankee confirmed coming in 20th place.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
It was only like 8 central time
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
In case you'll thought I forgot:
Going to sim four more years and then run expansion so we have a before and after to compare to. Seoul's team full of GOATS though. Kyoto ended up winning the title, 3-2, to Guagnzhou. The Chinese League is terrible, must be a OOTP trend with leagues on the right side of the standings list, that's now evidence of 3 leagues (UBL West, WBL South, Chinese League) that are vastly inferior.
Going to sim four more years and then run expansion so we have a before and after to compare to. Seoul's team full of GOATS though. Kyoto ended up winning the title, 3-2, to Guagnzhou. The Chinese League is terrible, must be a OOTP trend with leagues on the right side of the standings list, that's now evidence of 3 leagues (UBL West, WBL South, Chinese League) that are vastly inferior.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
This is the Master post, each test is a split off from this point. League 5-year history, and what the best players are in the league before I do whatever each specific test does. League financials pretty much match WBL and I gave both Expansion teams middle of the pack budget (don't know what OU is going to do as far as that goes)
Change the scouting settings, it auto scouts the leagur
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Option 1: Random Gen
So, this is my first glance post. Player gen set to 17-30. This is right before FA, in this instance they won't get a special week but will still have tons of money to spend.
The two new teams are Chonqing and Saitama, one for each league. I generated 25 players for each level of their org.
Chongqing:
Got two young, very good starting pitchers in Liu and Meida, 4 stars each. Also two young 5-star relievers. Entire team really young in fact, so perhaps 30 is too low as a lower bound (At least for the WBL team, more in that in a sec)
Taking a look at the OSA Positional Strength Report (remember OSA is 100% accurate so it's at least a little more reliable than normal), They are 9th or lower at most positions other than RF, where a 20 year old 4-star prospect spawned, he comes in at 5th. The Chinese League is tough, but I could definitely see them coming in 6th or 7th over the two bottom feeders as the roster sits.
Saitama:
Spawned a 17 year old 5-star SS. So that immediately tells me that I need to change player settings at each level I spawn players at (maybe keep it at 22-32 or something, because it will spawn good players regardless of age). Probably would have one of the better MIFs in the league. A couple of good pitchers as well, but one is 29.
Their positional strength report is stronger, with 1st at SS (They actually spawned two really good ones), and 4th at LF. Rest of the positions are below average. But they come out of the box really solid, I think. Pretty much tells me what I need to know vis a vi random gen, I'm actually going to scrap this and mess with age settings a little bit.
Minor Leagues:
Saitama jumped to 2nd in the minors charts, BUT it's only because of their majors players who are still technically prospects. As for the actual minors players, there is a couple of 1.5 stars but for the most part their systems are empty. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing because they should build through the draft and stuff anyhow, but that's how a 17-30 age setting on the three minors levels works. Chonqqing is pretty much the same story, some 1.5 star guys but not much else. Obviously in this scenario, they have more than enough young talent, but the majors gen is obviously messed up this go around.
General Outlook:
I think if I were to continue this, we'd see both teams succeed for the long term because of the player gen. So next time, I will try 22-32. That still allows some young players to random gen, but not 17 year olds who will be around for 15 years dominating as full 5-stars. There are enough FA available and a draft that they could've competed right away as this sits.
TLDR 17-30 age settings too ridiculous
So, this is my first glance post. Player gen set to 17-30. This is right before FA, in this instance they won't get a special week but will still have tons of money to spend.
The two new teams are Chonqing and Saitama, one for each league. I generated 25 players for each level of their org.
Chongqing:
Got two young, very good starting pitchers in Liu and Meida, 4 stars each. Also two young 5-star relievers. Entire team really young in fact, so perhaps 30 is too low as a lower bound (At least for the WBL team, more in that in a sec)
Taking a look at the OSA Positional Strength Report (remember OSA is 100% accurate so it's at least a little more reliable than normal), They are 9th or lower at most positions other than RF, where a 20 year old 4-star prospect spawned, he comes in at 5th. The Chinese League is tough, but I could definitely see them coming in 6th or 7th over the two bottom feeders as the roster sits.
Saitama:
Spawned a 17 year old 5-star SS. So that immediately tells me that I need to change player settings at each level I spawn players at (maybe keep it at 22-32 or something, because it will spawn good players regardless of age). Probably would have one of the better MIFs in the league. A couple of good pitchers as well, but one is 29.
Their positional strength report is stronger, with 1st at SS (They actually spawned two really good ones), and 4th at LF. Rest of the positions are below average. But they come out of the box really solid, I think. Pretty much tells me what I need to know vis a vi random gen, I'm actually going to scrap this and mess with age settings a little bit.
Minor Leagues:
Saitama jumped to 2nd in the minors charts, BUT it's only because of their majors players who are still technically prospects. As for the actual minors players, there is a couple of 1.5 stars but for the most part their systems are empty. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing because they should build through the draft and stuff anyhow, but that's how a 17-30 age setting on the three minors levels works. Chonqqing is pretty much the same story, some 1.5 star guys but not much else. Obviously in this scenario, they have more than enough young talent, but the majors gen is obviously messed up this go around.
General Outlook:
I think if I were to continue this, we'd see both teams succeed for the long term because of the player gen. So next time, I will try 22-32. That still allows some young players to random gen, but not 17 year olds who will be around for 15 years dominating as full 5-stars. There are enough FA available and a draft that they could've competed right away as this sits.
TLDR 17-30 age settings too ridiculous
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Yeah they do. I think if Random gen is on the table it'll have to be supplemented with draft or FA bonuses as well because these teams will collapse (assuming a relatively normal majors random gen) after a couple of years. I'm testing those next of course so we'll see which works best
Well generating was my idea to supplement everything else, not replace.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Option 1 Part B:
This time Player Gen set to 22-33 for Majors, and 17-21 for Minors.
Chonqing:
Got a 5-star 33yo SP, a couple of solid relievers, and some other good pieces here and there. It's kinda weird seeing a 33 year old on minimum though, that's the only thing we'd have to change, giving each player their rightful value of contract. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem there's an easy option to do this (you can set fictional contracts, but it hits all players), and the more work OU has to do the less appealing an option seems. The easiest way would be to give the older guys service time and then give them an arb contract, but again, that's potentially 50 players OU may have to do that for. Their team rankings at most positions is worse than tenth, other than 7th place in RF. Strangely have much higher levels in the full organizational ranking, despite no top prospects (See below). So we'll see when I actually sim.
As for their minors, 17-21 didn't change much, but it's a little better than last time. They actually have zero top prospects (because everyone on their team is older than 23 pretty much, so their system is temporarily last. So yeah, draft help probably needed.
Saitama:
Got a little better draw. Their 2B and 1B are 4th and 2nd on the league positional rankings, at 29 and 24 years of age. Three solid SP, and a bunch of good relievers too. Rest of their lineup is again under 10th at their positions, but if they can shore up some of that in FA, They should be able to compete in the East Asia League.
Pre FA Thoughts:
Saitama in a much better position than Chonqing Imo. This alone is kinda worrying, one team can randomly get two guys of huge value and the other guy just gets a 33 year old SP and not much else. Saitama also got two players in the League's Top 20 Batters/Hitters to Chonqing's one. We'll see how they progress but for now it looks lopsided to one of the two expansion teams, which seems a bit unfair.
Free Agency/IFA:
Since I'm solely testing random gen, I'm not giving them a week in advance and thus not controlling which players go where. Every other scenario will use that so not to worry there.
Chonqing was very active in FA, Grabbing 4 key players, a lock down closer, a 35 year old 4 star SP, One of Seoul(this league's Amsterdam minus actual titles)'s old players, and a 4.5 star international 2B. Saitama picked up Tseng, a 35 year old SP who just won the Shampionship with Guangzhou last year while throwing a 160 ERA+.
In terms of Positional Strength, Both teams improved fairly well. Chongqing grabbed the 2nd best 3B in the league in FA, and other players to bump up some of their categories into league average. They sorely lacked in other spots though, such as CF and C. A real human doing FA here would've prioritized different, of course. Saitama were quoted for the best 1B, 2B, SS, and Rotation in the league. While Seoul did lose a lot of players this offseason, this is still pretty surprising. We'll see how the actual season plays out.
Chonqqing did spend big in IFA, Blowing over 15 million in bonuses alone, but they grabbed two very good SP prospects in the process. Before the draft, 5 of their Top 7 guys have come from IFA. This was a normal IFA generation, and not the crazy IFA Draft I have planned for a different save, so that's a good sign that they can build their systems this way. Saitama chose to spend lightly in IFA, grabbing two scrubs and not much else.
The draft is on Opening Day, so I had a chance to see ST. Saitama were in fact the best team in the league, while Chongqing were dead last. ST only means so much, but interesting to note so far. Chongqing did have an injury to their marquee FA, but he's back for opening day.
Draft:
I have no idea how I messed it up but I did, the draft order is kerplunked. There is a giant supplemental round and everything. Since I simmed to draft day, I can't change it. Oh well. Not a problem for us mechanically since we draft offsite anyways. This actually crashed my game, I'll see if I can fix it. More to come.
This time Player Gen set to 22-33 for Majors, and 17-21 for Minors.
Chonqing:
Got a 5-star 33yo SP, a couple of solid relievers, and some other good pieces here and there. It's kinda weird seeing a 33 year old on minimum though, that's the only thing we'd have to change, giving each player their rightful value of contract. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem there's an easy option to do this (you can set fictional contracts, but it hits all players), and the more work OU has to do the less appealing an option seems. The easiest way would be to give the older guys service time and then give them an arb contract, but again, that's potentially 50 players OU may have to do that for. Their team rankings at most positions is worse than tenth, other than 7th place in RF. Strangely have much higher levels in the full organizational ranking, despite no top prospects (See below). So we'll see when I actually sim.
As for their minors, 17-21 didn't change much, but it's a little better than last time. They actually have zero top prospects (because everyone on their team is older than 23 pretty much, so their system is temporarily last. So yeah, draft help probably needed.
Saitama:
Got a little better draw. Their 2B and 1B are 4th and 2nd on the league positional rankings, at 29 and 24 years of age. Three solid SP, and a bunch of good relievers too. Rest of their lineup is again under 10th at their positions, but if they can shore up some of that in FA, They should be able to compete in the East Asia League.
Pre FA Thoughts:
Saitama in a much better position than Chonqing Imo. This alone is kinda worrying, one team can randomly get two guys of huge value and the other guy just gets a 33 year old SP and not much else. Saitama also got two players in the League's Top 20 Batters/Hitters to Chonqing's one. We'll see how they progress but for now it looks lopsided to one of the two expansion teams, which seems a bit unfair.
Free Agency/IFA:
Since I'm solely testing random gen, I'm not giving them a week in advance and thus not controlling which players go where. Every other scenario will use that so not to worry there.
Chonqing was very active in FA, Grabbing 4 key players, a lock down closer, a 35 year old 4 star SP, One of Seoul(this league's Amsterdam minus actual titles)'s old players, and a 4.5 star international 2B. Saitama picked up Tseng, a 35 year old SP who just won the Shampionship with Guangzhou last year while throwing a 160 ERA+.
In terms of Positional Strength, Both teams improved fairly well. Chongqing grabbed the 2nd best 3B in the league in FA, and other players to bump up some of their categories into league average. They sorely lacked in other spots though, such as CF and C. A real human doing FA here would've prioritized different, of course. Saitama were quoted for the best 1B, 2B, SS, and Rotation in the league. While Seoul did lose a lot of players this offseason, this is still pretty surprising. We'll see how the actual season plays out.
Chonqqing did spend big in IFA, Blowing over 15 million in bonuses alone, but they grabbed two very good SP prospects in the process. Before the draft, 5 of their Top 7 guys have come from IFA. This was a normal IFA generation, and not the crazy IFA Draft I have planned for a different save, so that's a good sign that they can build their systems this way. Saitama chose to spend lightly in IFA, grabbing two scrubs and not much else.
The draft is on Opening Day, so I had a chance to see ST. Saitama were in fact the best team in the league, while Chongqing were dead last. ST only means so much, but interesting to note so far. Chongqing did have an injury to their marquee FA, but he's back for opening day.
Draft:
I have no idea how I messed it up but I did, the draft order is kerplunked. There is a giant supplemental round and everything. Since I simmed to draft day, I can't change it. Oh well. Not a problem for us mechanically since we draft offsite anyways. This actually crashed my game, I'll see if I can fix it. More to come.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Yea I'm getting the same.
I agree, at this point if we can pinpoint how to make sure the original gen isn't ridiculous one way or the other with ages, it could be a good supplement. From what I saw IFA worked to help Chongqing's system and their main team was pretty decent as it was, so that might be the way to go (IFA player 'draft' of some kind)
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
That might work, when I've genned minors there's been a couple of guys who could maybe fit as AAAA guys and then you could have the FA to work with that. They'd definitely be bottom barrel in the majors but it gives them a launching pad for draft/IFA stuff to accumulate a good system. So far I don't think Majors gen is bad per se if you have the right ages, but having to figure out contracts for some of them would be way too much work for you. Minors gen with the page 1 prosposal may be enough, not sure yet.
The one good thing about Majors gen is it solves the problem of them having assets to trade. There's enough there where as a new owner you have the option to decide if you want to rebuild from scratch or if you want to go for it all, just like all of us did when the league first began, which is a nice touch. If I can actually get past the draft though I'll see if it's too overpowered once the ball starts rolling.
The one good thing about Majors gen is it solves the problem of them having assets to trade. There's enough there where as a new owner you have the option to decide if you want to rebuild from scratch or if you want to go for it all, just like all of us did when the league first began, which is a nice touch. If I can actually get past the draft though I'll see if it's too overpowered once the ball starts rolling.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
So, end of season 1, Chongqing win 100 games on the back of two generated guys. Looks like this isn't the way to go. Both farms in the bottom half of the league with just IFA and no draft, which makes a ton of sense. The IFA guys they do have are solid, but that may not be the end be all answer. Saitama came in 4th in their division.
Scrapping option 1 (Majors gen) because it's too unreliable. On to Option 2, which is First Proposal plus an IFA 'Draft' which I will conduct. The idea here is to spawn double the normal IFA spawn, and let each expansion team select, say, 3 guys that will be put on their team for a small cash sum (minor league deal with, say, 5m bonus each or something depending on what their demand is). In theory this accomplishes two things: A) It allows them to add talent to their farm system because even with minors gen they will lack it, and at a low cost that doesn't involve bidding wars to cut into their FA budget and B) It doesn't totally disrupt the rest of the teams' IFA spending because the amount of players is doubled. If there's still only like, 3 decent guys in IFA altogether, we could consider a restriction of some kind on stars/bonus demand to make sure this still gets covered or something.
Scrapping option 1 (Majors gen) because it's too unreliable. On to Option 2, which is First Proposal plus an IFA 'Draft' which I will conduct. The idea here is to spawn double the normal IFA spawn, and let each expansion team select, say, 3 guys that will be put on their team for a small cash sum (minor league deal with, say, 5m bonus each or something depending on what their demand is). In theory this accomplishes two things: A) It allows them to add talent to their farm system because even with minors gen they will lack it, and at a low cost that doesn't involve bidding wars to cut into their FA budget and B) It doesn't totally disrupt the rest of the teams' IFA spending because the amount of players is doubled. If there's still only like, 3 decent guys in IFA altogether, we could consider a restriction of some kind on stars/bonus demand to make sure this still gets covered or something.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
So my thinking is:
Each team can select:
1 player over 4.5 Star Potential*
1 player from 4 to 3.5 Star Potential
1 player from 3 to 2.5 Star Potential
1 player from 2 to 1.5 Star Potential
1 player from or below 1 star Potential
*Maybe leave out 5-star guys altogether from this? Would help to ease the pain on the regular IFA season
Two options for determining pick order, either a snake. or just let them go back first, with who ever picking 2nd in this draft getting 3rd in the actual draft (only issue with this option is that technically that discrepancy is already counted for with the supplemental picks). I'll do a snake order for this purpose. Each team may choose to forgo their pick if they wish, as they will have to spend the full demand of each player they draft (but not more, because a bidding war would cut way too much into their budget)
I spawned 'More' IFA, bringing 36 guys to the pool. I actually forgot what setting we are on as a league. A lot(72) would probably be too much though for the normal IFA season.
Using this, with Saitama randomly going 1st, here's what I got:
Pick 1: David Rosas, 5 star SS, $8m
Pick 2: Enrigue Rivera, 4.5 Star SP, $5.6m
Pick 3: Sergej Westerdujin, 4 Star 1B, $2.3m
Pick 4: Sancho Rodriguez, 4 Star SP, $3m
Pick 5: Luis Arrojo, 3 Star SP, $850k
Pick 6: Fernando Matos, 3 Star SP, $950k
Pick 7: Jose Martinez, 2 Star SP, $650k
Pick 8: Felix Gonzalez, 1.5 Star 1B, $180K
Pick 9: PJ Allen, 1 Star C, $100k
Pick 10: Juan Gonzales, 1 Star C, $80k
So in total:
Saitama Spend $12.58M
Chongqing Spend $9.3M
EDIT: Did math wrong, but it's similar to these numbers
Players left remaining in the pool: 3 4.5 Stars, 5 4 Stars, 2 3.5 Stars, etcetera
I would also recommend that the new teams then be limited to spending $4m for the rest of the IFA period, since they already got a head start.
Probably the chief issue is that these players can not go straight to the complex using this method. It's probably then worth considering just giving them an IFA head start as well and letting them sign the players for their demands, rather than placing them on the teams which I tried to do. So still possible, assuming fair play is maintained. For this test though, they're stuck like that because AI doesn't play fair.
----
There was actually an immediate trade from Chongqing, as they traded their 4th pick, Fernando Matos, to Seoul in exchange for a Utility guy who played good defense and hit below average. Probably an AI specific move, but it didn't cost Chongqing much and could work out well. Both teams added players in FA per usual. I tried to keep most old vet deals to 1-2 years and distributed players evenly and then let the rest of the pool go the way of the AI. Both teams got some good players but have holes in their lineup which is to be expected. Both have two players on the Top 20 Batters/Pitchers, all from FA.
With the extra IFA guys, Dynamic ratings has their farm systems at 4th and 5th in the league. The 3 teams ahead of them have been accumulating a lot for a while, so that's pretty reasonable. This is pre-draft, of course, but one of those 3 teams actually picks ahead of them any how (the other picks right after in 5th, and the third is Macau who are about to explode in terms of talent)
Will continue in another post, but so far so good.
Each team can select:
1 player over 4.5 Star Potential*
1 player from 4 to 3.5 Star Potential
1 player from 3 to 2.5 Star Potential
1 player from 2 to 1.5 Star Potential
1 player from or below 1 star Potential
*Maybe leave out 5-star guys altogether from this? Would help to ease the pain on the regular IFA season
Two options for determining pick order, either a snake. or just let them go back first, with who ever picking 2nd in this draft getting 3rd in the actual draft (only issue with this option is that technically that discrepancy is already counted for with the supplemental picks). I'll do a snake order for this purpose. Each team may choose to forgo their pick if they wish, as they will have to spend the full demand of each player they draft (but not more, because a bidding war would cut way too much into their budget)
I spawned 'More' IFA, bringing 36 guys to the pool. I actually forgot what setting we are on as a league. A lot(72) would probably be too much though for the normal IFA season.
Using this, with Saitama randomly going 1st, here's what I got:
Pick 1: David Rosas, 5 star SS, $8m
Pick 2: Enrigue Rivera, 4.5 Star SP, $5.6m
Pick 3: Sergej Westerdujin, 4 Star 1B, $2.3m
Pick 4: Sancho Rodriguez, 4 Star SP, $3m
Pick 5: Luis Arrojo, 3 Star SP, $850k
Pick 6: Fernando Matos, 3 Star SP, $950k
Pick 7: Jose Martinez, 2 Star SP, $650k
Pick 8: Felix Gonzalez, 1.5 Star 1B, $180K
Pick 9: PJ Allen, 1 Star C, $100k
Pick 10: Juan Gonzales, 1 Star C, $80k
So in total:
Saitama Spend $12.58M
Chongqing Spend $9.3M
EDIT: Did math wrong, but it's similar to these numbers
Players left remaining in the pool: 3 4.5 Stars, 5 4 Stars, 2 3.5 Stars, etcetera
I would also recommend that the new teams then be limited to spending $4m for the rest of the IFA period, since they already got a head start.
Probably the chief issue is that these players can not go straight to the complex using this method. It's probably then worth considering just giving them an IFA head start as well and letting them sign the players for their demands, rather than placing them on the teams which I tried to do. So still possible, assuming fair play is maintained. For this test though, they're stuck like that because AI doesn't play fair.
----
There was actually an immediate trade from Chongqing, as they traded their 4th pick, Fernando Matos, to Seoul in exchange for a Utility guy who played good defense and hit below average. Probably an AI specific move, but it didn't cost Chongqing much and could work out well. Both teams added players in FA per usual. I tried to keep most old vet deals to 1-2 years and distributed players evenly and then let the rest of the pool go the way of the AI. Both teams got some good players but have holes in their lineup which is to be expected. Both have two players on the Top 20 Batters/Pitchers, all from FA.
With the extra IFA guys, Dynamic ratings has their farm systems at 4th and 5th in the league. The 3 teams ahead of them have been accumulating a lot for a while, so that's pretty reasonable. This is pre-draft, of course, but one of those 3 teams actually picks ahead of them any how (the other picks right after in 5th, and the third is Macau who are about to explode in terms of talent)
Will continue in another post, but so far so good.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Yeah something is wrong with this backup, draft just simply isn't working.
Which sucks because now I can't articulate my idea better. I think some bonus in IFA is the golden ticket here (in addition to the proposal), but right now all you have is my word. Just minors gen+FA+draft is fine for their majors team but still leaves their farm a little lackluster imo.
I'm just going to take the draft pool and 'pick' (like we normally would), unfortunately won't be able to sim multiple years to see how it unfolds but I think if it puts their farm systems in that 3rd to 5th range that's probably the sweet spot with their majors teams being meh for a while (keep in mind the amount of FA in this sim is crazy high compared to ours)
Which sucks because now I can't articulate my idea better. I think some bonus in IFA is the golden ticket here (in addition to the proposal), but right now all you have is my word. Just minors gen+FA+draft is fine for their majors team but still leaves their farm a little lackluster imo.
I'm just going to take the draft pool and 'pick' (like we normally would), unfortunately won't be able to sim multiple years to see how it unfolds but I think if it puts their farm systems in that 3rd to 5th range that's probably the sweet spot with their majors teams being meh for a while (keep in mind the amount of FA in this sim is crazy high compared to ours)
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
So this is what I got by manually doing the draft (worst thing ever, my pary with Orlando)
Chongqing are top, though their top guy was the 3rd pick in the draft, so that has no baring on the IFA part. I underlined the guys from the IFA draft, though there's other guys in their systems. I definitely think that if they get a head start draft they need a cap on spending, without it they were clear and away the best two systems in the league. Chongjin had the 1st pick and Shanghai the 2nd pick in this draft, guess I suck at drafting for Shanghai because their guy only fell to 36th. I can't really remember but I think at least one of the post Round 1 Conditional picks is on this list too, so that's a nice touch.
I'm going to keep pushing the draft back to try and get around this crash, and just manually do it, but note that the 3rd+rounds won't be considered(too much work) so this is purely to see what the next two years are like as eventually it won't be an accurate representation.
I definitely recommend tinkering with our league file for those who have the ability to do so, and see what kind of IFA solution works best. We can work out details but this is definitely my recommendation.
Chongqing are top, though their top guy was the 3rd pick in the draft, so that has no baring on the IFA part. I underlined the guys from the IFA draft, though there's other guys in their systems. I definitely think that if they get a head start draft they need a cap on spending, without it they were clear and away the best two systems in the league. Chongjin had the 1st pick and Shanghai the 2nd pick in this draft, guess I suck at drafting for Shanghai because their guy only fell to 36th. I can't really remember but I think at least one of the post Round 1 Conditional picks is on this list too, so that's a nice touch.
I'm going to keep pushing the draft back to try and get around this crash, and just manually do it, but note that the 3rd+rounds won't be considered(too much work) so this is purely to see what the next two years are like as eventually it won't be an accurate representation.
I definitely recommend tinkering with our league file for those who have the ability to do so, and see what kind of IFA solution works best. We can work out details but this is definitely my recommendation.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
End of the Regular Season. Saitama got to 2nd, just ahead of Kyoto and Seoul, and 9 games back of Yokohama who won the division. They did, however, trade the #40 and #95 prospect to grab some major league improvements over the season. Most of their strength came from FAs though, which again, word of warning, won't be as intense in our league by far. Their farm system fell to #11, but they still have the #13 and #14 guys, so they're in pretty decent long term shape.
Chongqing finished 7th in their 9 team league. Their farm system is currently #4 (blame Dynamic ratings), and they did trade one prospect for a top tier starter (the dutch guy from the IFA draft), while trading other major leaguers for prospects once their season went down the tube.
So overall not that bad. Chongqing's future is very bright, while Saitama immediately jumps into the playoff hunt, but none feel over or underwhelming. Shanghai, meanwhile, this league's version of me, is still happily tanking away and not going to let any expansion teams stop them, which is good news for me.
Chongqing finished 7th in their 9 team league. Their farm system is currently #4 (blame Dynamic ratings), and they did trade one prospect for a top tier starter (the dutch guy from the IFA draft), while trading other major leaguers for prospects once their season went down the tube.
So overall not that bad. Chongqing's future is very bright, while Saitama immediately jumps into the playoff hunt, but none feel over or underwhelming. Shanghai, meanwhile, this league's version of me, is still happily tanking away and not going to let any expansion teams stop them, which is good news for me.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
One possible tweak I'm going to try is also giving the following year after an expanded IFA pool the same number as well. I think this would eliminate any cries of inbalance, but I'm not actually sure if the inbalance is in the fact that there's a expanded pool one year, or that one year good players are snatched up out of nowhere(the latter could be covered by my suggestion that 5 stars be exempt from the expansion IFA draft).
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Octuple post. The adderall is real.
The financial situation looks fine too. Both teams still have some budget space, actually, even after spending on the IFAs and big on FA. Saitama were eliminated in the LCS, and Yokohama ended up beating the team I 'run', Hong Kong, for their first title.
TLDR of the last 8 posts: IFA good
The financial situation looks fine too. Both teams still have some budget space, actually, even after spending on the IFAs and big on FA. Saitama were eliminated in the LCS, and Yokohama ended up beating the team I 'run', Hong Kong, for their first title.
TLDR of the last 8 posts: IFA good
64 amateur IFAs is way too much.
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
You can take all my guys