AI Changes their mind on trades

[Frozen Stiffer]

I'm currently 71 games into my 2nd season of managing (game-by-game) the Marlins; I began in 2006. I'm running PSB07 v1.51 at the moment. For the most part, the game has run quite well and has been very stable, except for one little issue that comes up. This isn't a SERIOUS issue, but it's frustrating at least.

[:@]

Mike Jacobs (1B) was injured badly, so I needed to find a replacement starting 1st baseman. Among the free agents, I managed to get Tony Clark, who was not resigned by Arizona. Everything continued well, with Tony filling in quite nicely.

Just now, I've received notice that Mike Jacobs is ready to come off the DL. Not all that thrilled to be paying Clark $3.8 mil to warm a bench, I looked to trade him and see if I can get any relief pitching in return. I shop him to all teams and find that Boston is willing to move Rudy Seanez. His stats are fair and I'm interested. I select him, but then when it returns to the initial trade screen, Boston is saying "Decent offer, but we'd want just a little more".

[&:]

What I don't understand is, if you weren't willing to make a 1:1 trade, why did he appear in the list of potential trade hopefuls? I never remember this happening in PSB 05. Since the occurrence with Clark, I've seen this happen again. The team lists the player as if they'd make a "straight up" trade for who I'm offering, but then when I choose them, the team changes their mind. Is there something I'm missing?

[:(]

[jono]

I've seen this happen even in PSB 2005 when I use the shop player to all teams option, so I just use it as a general guide line to see what I might get for a player.  If I really want to trade a player I just go team by team and offer the player I want to get rid of until I get an offer I like. 

[KG Erwin]

We all have different ideas on this. I will shop a player to all teams, focus on a guy I might want, and then start negotiating with that team.

Occasionally, the trade might end up involving completely different players, with both sides being happy, or we might call off the whole thing. My current league has seen many of those deals, or non-deals.

I personally don't have any problem with the human -AI trade logic. As long as you keep it one for one or two for two, you aren't necessarily taking advantage of the AI GM, especially with finances turned off. As things have progressed, I've acquired a few veterans in exchange for some promising prospects as I AM in a race for the pennant.

[Frozen Stiffer]

I agree with what you're saying KG- I have bargained, negotiated and sacrificed in the trade process to try and get what I want, while giving up as little as I have to. However, what I was describing above is a bit different from what we're discussing here. If the AI doesn't want to do a 1:1 trade, I am fine- this doesn't bother me one bit.

What does bother me is something entirely different. As I understand it, when you shop a player to all teams, you're effective asking them "What player, straight up, will you trade for this guy?". In my example, if the other team doesn't want to trade Rudy Seanez for Tony Clark, then simply don't put Seanez on that list; the list is for straight-up trades only. If you feel that it will take more than Clark to get Seanez, then you bring that up when/if we go into focused trade talks (i.e. when you deal directly with that team). Where I think the AI is being wrong is when they list Seanez as if they'd trade him straight-up for Clark and when I select Seanez the AI turns around and says they're going to need more. It's almost like a Bait-n-Switch. That's just plain cruel.

[:-]

[KG Erwin]

Yeah, exactly, bait and switch, and I think that's cool. The AI GM is actually trying to outmaneuver you. Clever, huh? I've seen that happen. However, as I've said, it CAN work both ways. Once in awhile, the AI isn't as dumb as we think (or would LIKE to think) it is. That's just one of the many reasons I love this game. [:D]

Face it, man, it's particularly galling to get stiffed by the AI, isn't it? [X(]

[Frozen Stiffer]

You think that's AI working it's magic and not a flaw somewhere?

With all due respect to Shaun, and there is a LOT due to him, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I disagree- I do not think that the AI is that clever.

[KG Erwin]

Maybe it ISN'T that clever, my friend, but then again, maybe WE are not as clever as we'd like to think. I don't see the trade logic as a bug. It isn't perfect, but who says the AI should be an honest businessman? IF this is an unintentional result, then I don't see any reason to change it. This gives the AI an almost- human trait, does it not?

[KG Erwin]

Let me put it another way --during the course of my season, I've received a number of offers from the AI GMs-- most of the time, it's trying to sucker you into a deal. The nature of the offer simply shows you how desperate the other teams might be. Once in awhile, though, by using that bait and switch trick, you can finagle a good deal out of it.

That's the way it works in real life, right?

What specifically do you think is broken in the trade logic?

[akcranker]

I don't think I've ever seen this situation in any of my associations but I don't know I took a long break from playing PS..

But I do agree with KG.. even if this is a "flaw" I kinda like it because you won't always get what you expect from the AI.. you goto the trade table with them and they slide over a slightly different offer than what you thought you were going to agree to.. well now you have to work something different out with them.. or move on..  makes trading alittle tougher.