@@pfholden no problem. Your videos got me into the game and I have purchased every year ever since. OOTP should pay you commission. Side note: I wish you could use the development lab to improve a player’s personality. Maybe send him to sensitivity training or something like that.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this! I've been kind of doing the same thing, just knocking around in the lab each offseason to try to figure out what works and what does not. Really looking forward to figuring this out and seeing how the OOTP team improves it in the years to come!
Let me know if you find anything cool! I've been under the weather so unable to keep up with watching much OOTP stuff on YT but looking forward to catching up!
@@pfholden Hope you feel better... right thing the only thing I know is that the success rate seems pretty low. But, like you, I kind of think that's fine!
In Will’s post online he said “you can always put guys into programs to improve their pitches, or defense, or speed, etc., since those don't have a potential cap.” So I think you can always improve pitches
@@Goon_Sixyeah, as I’ve played through the game they definitely do so I’m thinking that’s either a typo or something they’ve changed since he made that post. Speed and defense definitely don’t have a cap
Was waiting for a video from you on this! I did a round of testing like you did here - but I cranked it up to allow 20 players so I could put a bunch of folks through for the same thing at the same time. And I know that random is random and weird things can happen but in the batch of players I chose, the ones with LOW work ethic or intelligence (or even both) seemed to have just as good luck (and often better) than the players that had high ratings in those categories. I know this was likely an anomaly, but perhaps it suggests that work ethic and intelligence don't move the dial all that much... time will tell! Looking forward to hearing any new information that comes up on this topic - love this new feature.
Training Fielding doesn't matter which position you train since it boosts all the Infield or Outfield ratings. So by training the easiest of the three Outfield positions will boost your overall defense at all of them. And same for infield. I set rating scale to 1-100 (with 100% accuracy) to see the changes (without having to go into the player editor. A regular Success gives you about +5 to each of Outfield Range, Error, and Arm. Netting you about a +10 overall score to all three outfield positions. Am Outstanding result is about +10 to each rating for overall score of +20 Catcher is more subtle. +2 or 3 for Success and +7 or 8 for Outstanding. Getting a Poor fail result was a -3 for all Infield ratings resulting in -10 for all positions, ouch! Stealing is pretty subtle also +2 for Aggressiveness and Ability, which you can't even see on a 20-80 scale. +7 or 8 for Outstanding.
I wonder if the player development budget is factored int the development lab? At the start of the off season, I often strip mine down to the baseline to meet necessary salary obligations and then build it back up.I wouldn't want to do that if the budget is a factor here.
Not sure if you've touched on this in the videos (though I know you referenced Will's forum posts) but the key to me which takes a LOT of tedium away from the passive development sliders is that its net-negative. So there's little incentive (imo) to tweak every player; really only serves a strong purpose for either stars or players you want very specific things from. The two most common use cases for me so far: 1) Aging defense savant like KK; if I have a younger guy I want getting the bulk of CF playing time I will crank KK's defense sliders because I'd rather his bat fall off a cliff but he still be an elite defensive sub for as long as possible than for him to just regress across the board and be fairly useless as a backup CF taking up a roster spot; and 2) Players where I need a Hail Mary; if I have a pitcher who is say 23-24 and has good to decent Stuff and Movement but his Control is still raw at say 20/45, I might crank his Control dev since if he doesn't gain Control he has zero value anyways so might as well risk him losing his Stuff/Movement in order to try and salvage something if I can get the Control to be playable.
@@pfholden I generally micro my top top prospects, lock the rest of my "Manual Promotions shortlist" (the ones that project to have ML value so I lock to level/position) prospects to the middle so the AI doesn't screw with them, and let the AI do the rest. Figure with guys I'm not bothering to manually promote may as well let the AI roll some dice and try and get some of that sweet TCR boosts for me.
Loving both development features so far! They add a whole new aspect to developing your team! I am too am curious why we cannot remove after the 5 day assessment...maybe it will get changed on a patch???
Its going to be fun to work out different strategies. I think you have time for 1 long and 1 short program per slot each off season. Or skip a long program and run five short programs in the slot instead. That's a heck of a lot of slots to boost defense! Spam it for the whole team and suddenly you are OAA gods! I also wonder how feasible it will be to add a new pitch (or improve a terrible third pitch) to make some of those two pitch pitchers into viable starters? It makes highschool prospects better, since you have more years to labs giving them more opportunity to have breakthroughs. And when you do have a superstar signed for an expensive long term contract, I'll be looking to run conditioning, defense, running . . . whatever I can to help ensure they stay healthy and be the most productive possible.
Yeah, Will really made it sound like there would be some Intake Assessment report you could use to decide if you wanted to continue the lab for that player. But I couldn't find anything (no email, nothing on the players own development or scouting pages). I think the 5 days are just to give you a chance to change your mind and switch to someone else. You can let the AI make choices, review them, and then cancel the ones you don't like? (except the AI choices seemed really dumb). The players Progress status changes daily. If you just click through day by day and watch it, they change constantly. Its not particularly meaningful. I've had players be struggling the whole time and then succeed at the end and others that were looking good suddenly fail. Although they do seem to move one step at a time (so it would take several positive bumps to get up from struggling). It would be really nice to get an initial assessment . . and anyone starting out struggling (and at immediate risk of regression) you could just cancel (voiding their chance to try that program that year)
From what I can tell the regular 'Successful' outcomes are pretty small. I've had a couple boost an rating by 3 points (had to go into the editor to actually see the change). The Breakthroughs are really where its at. I've had +20 defense (from 55 to 75) in Right field (along with some improvement to outfield range and arm!) all from one breakthrough. The Strength and Conditioning breakthrough is great also. Had an injury prone character go from 158 overall injury rating down to 117 and no longer be classified as prone. But its hard to get big breakthroughs.
I wonder what goes into adjusting the chances of a successful outcome. Will said coaches were important and obviously Work Ethic (and I suspect Adaptability and Intelligence) come into play. Players also have a Relationship status with each coach (shown on their development page). I'm guessing having a good relationship with the coach in question helps. Sigh . . . time to use the editor, set max coaching and relationship (and worse) and see what difference it makes. I'm usually too lazy for those types of tests! 😉
if it's anything like football manager then young players with good personality classes will develop the best. and we notice in this video mayo is captain class and he improved.
Learn new position seems kind of useless (and buggy). I had one player who already knew all the infield positions except first base and was a poor fielder. So I figured learn new would give him first base. He got lucky and had an outstanding 'breakout' . . . learning Centerfield! At least that is what the status email said. However when I checked him, it did not add CF to his ratings. You can also assign someone to a different position (one they don't have) and then do the Improve Defense at that position rather than the Learn New Position lab. No idea how effective that would be but it lets you control what you are learning.
Uhh spoiler alert but that last part might not be an option for very long. There's currently an exploit involved with that (players aren't supposed to be able to repeat programs in the offseason, but currently you can swap their position and train defense again which leads to some ludicrous defensive gains if you hit at for example all of 2B/SS/3B in one winter), so there will be some changes to fix that which might impact ability to train defense that way (by swapping position and using Train Defense instead of the intended Learn New Position).
@@Math.Bandit Honestly just being able to train once a year seems too strong. Successful is +10 Overall defense rating, Outstanding result +20. Just hitting a couple of these on a player over his career is going to keep him at a top tier defensive rating. If these boosts are on top of the regular rating assignments (from player creation and natural development) then it seems they should have slightly reduced the initial stats. Forcing you to do some training to keep the established level of skill. Overstacking outstanding defense is already an 'exploit' of sorts with OOTP. This is just going to make is worse.
On the one hand, I love the idea of getting in the lab 🧪… on the other, it’s just one more thing to micromanage in the minor leagues for every prospect, which is gonna slow me down even more.
With the lab, it's only 6 players at a time allowed in there if you play with the default settings. And only during the off-season. The more passive development, you can manage for every player, but as the Math Bandit says, there's no way I'm doing that for every player!
