Fleecing the AI GMs in Trades...

[KG Erwin]

...can still be done, so some discipline is required. To get something, you gotta give up something. Now, as a personal house rule, trades are on a player for player basis, i.e., no 2 for 3 deals are allowed. So, when the AI responds that "we're getting close to a deal, but we'd want a bit more", you gotta ignore the bait.

That's just me, but to keep a sense of balance in your associations, I'd recommend adopting that rule. Now, that's not to say that can't occasionally finesse a deal, but that requires diplomacy, which is something for Shaun to consider in future.

There may be certain GMs that you can deal with, but, after rejecting their overtures, they might not feel so friendly towards you. Think of the famous examples of the NY Yankee-Boston Red Sox pipeline, and later the Yankee-KC Athletics connection. I've come to find out that the Dodgers & Pirates used to be the same way.

This "willingness to talk" aspect perhaps needs to be worked in. To put it in a less delicate way, every AI GM could have a "f**k you" factor built in.

What do you guys think about this?

[eddie01]

Great idea KG! I try to stick to that myself, because I'm running into GM's who have sawdust for brains,lol I haven't had any major foulups with this part of PS, but it can surprise you at what they are willing to trade sometimes.

[peregrine]

This is definitely a good idea. What do we actually know about how the AI values players? That would go a long way towards improving how it looks at trades. One thing I noticed recently when I was doing an experiment, I made several super players, all 100s, one for each team, in the draft, but since I used low money junk players to edit into the super guys, they were virtually ignored in the draft. So clearly the AI is using something else besides stats to guide their decisions, I think they take the yearly salary as a big factor in how good a player is.

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: peregrine

This is definitely a good idea. What do we actually know about how the AI values players? That would go a long way towards improving how it looks at trades. One thing I noticed recently when I was doing an experiment, I made several super players, all 100s, one for each team, in the draft, but since I used low money junk players to edit into the super guys, they were virtually ignored in the draft. So clearly the AI is using something else besides stats to guide their decisions, I think they take the yearly salary as a big factor in how good a player is.

Think again. I play without finances. I see the AI measuring stats, age and potential in weighting trade offers. That's my theory, but of course I could be wrong.

[peregrine]

I'm not saying that's wrong, it's very possible that the way the AI handles the draft and handles trades is completely different. I've noticed, as you have, that for lower quality players the AI will definitely try to pawn off old guys at the end of their careers or people who haven't come into their potential. 

[LetsPlay2]

I have Deals and finances turned off, and I only set a team to Human when I need to make an actual trade.
I have noticed that when I take a team over to  make a deal (according to when they acually happened) I may be rejected my the team I am trading to.
But if I take that team over then the SAME deal is made.