SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG
-
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
-
"low tier ws players" can't be that bad if they made it that far
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
-
Attributes need to affect gameplay more instead of the other way around. Attributes need to matter so cards are differentiated.
Pitchers with bad control should have meter input speed varied pitch to pitch. the worse control the more the speed varies, maybe even changing mid input. if you are able to master it you get rewarded by your pitches going where you want.
PCI should be shrunk greatly. they have the right idea with contact guys still get a larger PCI, power guys get smaller but bigger sweet spots, just needs to be dialed in better. Anything in the vision portion of the PCI should be a foul tip, should not have balls put in play that aren't touching the contract portion of the PCI.
Any other ideas on how specific attributes should affect gameplay?
-
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
It makes perfect sense.
A perfect perfect with Juan Pierre would be the same result as a perfect perfect with Mickey Mantle if it were only input based.
There would be no /9 ratings for pitchers of course. Pitchers would only be their movement and velocities... nothing else.
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once with my pitcher.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
It makes perfect sense.
A perfect perfect with Juan Pierre would be the same result as a perfect perfect with Mickey Mantle if it were only input based.
There would be no /9 ratings for pitchers of course. Pitchers would only be their movement and velocities... nothing else.
You're being purposefully dense. Peace.
-
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
It makes perfect sense.
A perfect perfect with Juan Pierre would be the same result as a perfect perfect with Mickey Mantle if it were only input based.
There would be no /9 ratings for pitchers of course. Pitchers would only be their movement and velocities... nothing else.
You're being purposefully dense. Peace.
Great response. Dense response in fact
-
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
-
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
Exactly. When people make the “all cards will be the same” argument, are they forgetting about things like vision, speed, arm strength, power, velocity etc. Surely just those would make cards differ.
-
@C_ypress_H_ill said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Hoofartid said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
This doesn't make any sense. Attributes would simply dictate how hard/easy it is to achieve a positive outcome and, consequently, would make them matter even more than they do now.
...is this really the argument against having a truly input-based game?
Exactly. When people make the “all cards will be the same” argument, are they forgetting about things like vision, speed, arm strength, power, velocity etc. Surely just those would make cards differ.
Not when perfect perfects are the same result no matter the rating... If they aren't, guess what's being used to determine it?
Fielder ratings wouldn't matter.. it's RNG that determines errors based in your fielder rating. Higher ratings, less odds of bad animations/errors.. your fielders would only be as good as their speed and arm strength/accuracy.
Pitchers would be melted down to accuracy and velocity, with repertoire. Stamina too.
A perfect perfect wouldn't matter who hit it without odds based on RNG...
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
Are you sure we're all talking about the same thing? You specifically called out a scenario where both Juan Pierre and Mike Trout hit a perfect/perfect, and you said that they would get the same result if it were only input based.
I don't think anyone is arguing for only input. I think the argument is for input + attributes as opposed to the current system which is input + attributes + RNG.
RNG is not the reason why those two players would get different results. They get different results due to attribute, specially power. A perfect/perfect for Mike Trout may result in a home run, but shouldn't a perfect/perfect from Juan Pierre be a hit to the gap or a hit into no man's land since that is the type of hitter he represents?
In my opinion, there is still plenty of room for variety and different types of cards and levels of cards without the game deciding that this time your perfect/perfect on a 90 mph fastball right down the middle to Mike Trout is a routine fly out because the digital dice rolled a 2.
-
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
Are you sure we're all talking about the same thing? You specifically called out a scenario where both Juan Pierre and Mike Trout hit a perfect/perfect, and you said that they would get the same result if it were only input based.
I don't think anyone is arguing for only input. I think the argument is for input + attributes as opposed to the current system which is input + attributes + RNG.
RNG is not the reason why those two players would get different results. They get different results due to attribute, specially power. A perfect/perfect for Mike Trout may result in a home run, but shouldn't a perfect/perfect from Juan Pierre be a hit to the gap or a hit into no man's land since that is the type of hitter he represents?
In my opinion, there is still plenty of room for variety and different types of cards and levels of cards without the game deciding that this time your perfect/perfect on a 90 mph fastball right down the middle to Mike Trout is a routine fly out because the digital dice rolled a 2.
A random number generator is being used for basically everything in sports games man. It's just less or more odds based on ratings..
Example. A fielder with 95 fielding still has a chance of bobbling the ball.. just much less of a chance than an 80. But it's still RNG that determines the result of him bobbling it.
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
Are you sure we're all talking about the same thing? You specifically called out a scenario where both Juan Pierre and Mike Trout hit a perfect/perfect, and you said that they would get the same result if it were only input based.
I don't think anyone is arguing for only input. I think the argument is for input + attributes as opposed to the current system which is input + attributes + RNG.
RNG is not the reason why those two players would get different results. They get different results due to attribute, specially power. A perfect/perfect for Mike Trout may result in a home run, but shouldn't a perfect/perfect from Juan Pierre be a hit to the gap or a hit into no man's land since that is the type of hitter he represents?
In my opinion, there is still plenty of room for variety and different types of cards and levels of cards without the game deciding that this time your perfect/perfect on a 90 mph fastball right down the middle to Mike Trout is a routine fly out because the digital dice rolled a 2.
A random number generator is being used for basically everything in sports games man. It's just less or more odds based on ratings..
Example. A fielder with 95 fielding still has a chance of bobbling the ball.. just much less of a chance than an 80. But it's still RNG that determines the result of him bobbling it.
I think your best point is on the fielding, but mostly because there isn't a better system in place at the moment. Fielding has to be somewhat randomized because it is too easy to just run over to the ball to catch it. Speed, range, and first step quickness only go so far.
I'm not saying this is actually a good idea, but If there was something more involved like a series of button prompts that were required to actually catch a fly ball (not quick time), then the difficulty could be somewhat modified based on the fielding ability of the fielder.
Imagine there is a deep fly ball to center. You have to hit a random face button in order to catch the ball after you camp under it. The better your fielder is, the sooner the button prompt shows so you have time to react. A fielder out of position or with common or bronze fielding may have a fraction of a second to react or maybe multiple button prompts while a gold or diamond fielder would have longer or a single prompt.
The problem with a system like this is obviously the speed at which plays can occur. How could you do something like that on a line drive to the 3rd basemen? It's not like you can stop the flow of the play to have some kind of mini game on every play.
It is clear that SDS wants fielding to matter. At least they've been saying that for the last few years. I just hope they eventually find some kind of way to make it more satisfying as opposed to "Oops... Ozzie Smith booted a ball in the 9th to allow the go ahead run because it was your turn. Sorry you lost even though you outplayed your opponent for the last 30 minutes."
-
If you had zero RNG, like I said, a perfect/perfect would be the same result with Pierre or Trout. To have any power attribute gives you a random number generator to determine the result technically. Just better odds on higher power... Otherwise as you said @PennStateFencer Pierre would hit it in the gap.. he would never ever hit a homerun. There's zero chance because different results/outcomes can't be generated based on ratings without a generator giving a different outcome.
-
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
Are you sure we're all talking about the same thing? You specifically called out a scenario where both Juan Pierre and Mike Trout hit a perfect/perfect, and you said that they would get the same result if it were only input based.
I don't think anyone is arguing for only input. I think the argument is for input + attributes as opposed to the current system which is input + attributes + RNG.
RNG is not the reason why those two players would get different results. They get different results due to attribute, specially power. A perfect/perfect for Mike Trout may result in a home run, but shouldn't a perfect/perfect from Juan Pierre be a hit to the gap or a hit into no man's land since that is the type of hitter he represents?
In my opinion, there is still plenty of room for variety and different types of cards and levels of cards without the game deciding that this time your perfect/perfect on a 90 mph fastball right down the middle to Mike Trout is a routine fly out because the digital dice rolled a 2.
A random number generator is being used for basically everything in sports games man. It's just less or more odds based on ratings..
Example. A fielder with 95 fielding still has a chance of bobbling the ball.. just much less of a chance than an 80. But it's still RNG that determines the result of him bobbling it.
I think your best point is on the fielding, but mostly because there isn't a better system in place at the moment. Fielding has to be somewhat randomized because it is too easy to just run over to the ball to catch it. Speed, range, and first step quickness only go so far.
I'm not saying this is actually a good idea, but If there was something more involved like a series of button prompts that were required to actually catch a fly ball (not quick time), then the difficulty could be somewhat modified based on the fielding ability of the fielder.
Imagine there is a deep fly ball to center. You have to hit a random face button in order to catch the ball after you camp under it. The better your fielder is, the sooner the button prompt shows so you have time to react. A fielder out of position or with common or bronze fielding may have a fraction of a second to react or maybe multiple button prompts while a gold or diamond fielder would have longer or a single prompt.
The problem with a system like this is obviously the speed at which plays can occur. How could you do something like that on a line drive to the 3rd basemen? It's not like you can stop the flow of the play to have some kind of mini game on every play.
It is clear that SDS wants fielding to matter. At least they've been saying that for the last few years. I just hope they eventually find some kind of way to make it more satisfying as opposed to "Opps... Ozzie Smith booted a ball in the 9th to allow the go ahead run because it was your turn. Sorry you lost even though you outplayed your opponent for the last 30 minutes."
You make great points, and I respect you on these forums. My point was to the initial thread. That RNG had to exist. Can it be scaled better? Oh 100% yes! I think it's not done well. It should have a complete overhaul.
But RNG is essential to any sport game. It's the odds of these outcomes happening that can be properly scaled. Animations are also an issue. -
Power ratings should put a cap on exit velocity that way players with different power levels would have different results with same input. say trouts cap on perfect perfect is 115 mph, where Pierre could be 95 max or something along those lines. Pierre could still hit home runs, just less often.
-
@agent512 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
Power ratings should put a cap on exit velocity that way players with different power levels would have different results with same input. say trouts cap on perfect perfect is 115 mph, where Pierre could be 95 max or something along those lines. Pierre could still hit home runs, just less often.
This is a great suggestion!
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@PennStateFencer said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@Nanthrax_1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
@GOtexas1 said in SDS needs to make a game mode without RNG:
This game's honestly unreal. If a top 10 player is losing three games in a row to low tier WS players, that's a problem. Not counting all other shitty RNG related outcomes in this game. Give us our money back...
You realize without "RNG" or outcomes based on ratings instead of just input, all players or cards would just be generic and all have the same rating..
You can't have it both ways...
I'm not really sure I agree with that. Attributes can still have an impact on PCI size, exit velocity of balls in play, pitch velocity, pitch movement, pitch control, fielder range, fielder arm strength, etc. You can still have differences in player cards that would matter without arbitrary BS occurring which heavily influences the outcome of the game. Having differences based on attributes isn't RNG. RNG is two identical cards with identical input in the same situation being given different results at random.
Even if RNG wasn't eliminated completely, I think most people agree it's out of control. While a good player will still win the majority of their games, sometimes it is just impossible to win. I've played games where I struck out my opponent 15+ times, on All-Star no less, because their timing and PCI placement was THAT bad. Yet the CPU will decide to let them on base with an error, then immediately advance the runner on a passed ball that was no where near the dirt, and then bloop in a run while I line out for 9 innings and strike out once or twice.
At this point I've accepted that it happens and try not to get mad about it, but for a game where winning consecutive games (12-0 in BR, trying to get to WS) actually matters, it sure is frustrating when you clearly out perform your opponent and get nothing to show for it.
I actually agree, it's a bit much in this game, but you can't have it without. It has to be there.
Otherwise outcomes for good input would result in the same thing regardless of rating for a card. That was my point.
Yes you can change the PCI size, movement/velo, etc. still.. But you need some sort of differentiation between cards and RNG will naturally be there based on the rating of a hitter vs. a pitcher. Same goes for fielders ratings..
My point is there's no way to make this game of cards having different strengths and weaknesses without it.
Can it be properly scaled better? Absolutely
Are you sure we're all talking about the same thing? You specifically called out a scenario where both Juan Pierre and Mike Trout hit a perfect/perfect, and you said that they would get the same result if it were only input based.
I don't think anyone is arguing for only input. I think the argument is for input + attributes as opposed to the current system which is input + attributes + RNG.
RNG is not the reason why those two players would get different results. They get different results due to attribute, specially power. A perfect/perfect for Mike Trout may result in a home run, but shouldn't a perfect/perfect from Juan Pierre be a hit to the gap or a hit into no man's land since that is the type of hitter he represents?
In my opinion, there is still plenty of room for variety and different types of cards and levels of cards without the game deciding that this time your perfect/perfect on a 90 mph fastball right down the middle to Mike Trout is a routine fly out because the digital dice rolled a 2.
A random number generator is being used for basically everything in sports games man. It's just less or more odds based on ratings..
Example. A fielder with 95 fielding still has a chance of bobbling the ball.. just much less of a chance than an 80. But it's still RNG that determines the result of him bobbling it.
I think your best point is on the fielding, but mostly because there isn't a better system in place at the moment. Fielding has to be somewhat randomized because it is too easy to just run over to the ball to catch it. Speed, range, and first step quickness only go so far.
I'm not saying this is actually a good idea, but If there was something more involved like a series of button prompts that were required to actually catch a fly ball (not quick time), then the difficulty could be somewhat modified based on the fielding ability of the fielder.
Imagine there is a deep fly ball to center. You have to hit a random face button in order to catch the ball after you camp under it. The better your fielder is, the sooner the button prompt shows so you have time to react. A fielder out of position or with common or bronze fielding may have a fraction of a second to react or maybe multiple button prompts while a gold or diamond fielder would have longer or a single prompt.
The problem with a system like this is obviously the speed at which plays can occur. How could you do something like that on a line drive to the 3rd basemen? It's not like you can stop the flow of the play to have some kind of mini game on every play.
It is clear that SDS wants fielding to matter. At least they've been saying that for the last few years. I just hope they eventually find some kind of way to make it more satisfying as opposed to "Opps... Ozzie Smith booted a ball in the 9th to allow the go ahead run because it was your turn. Sorry you lost even though you outplayed your opponent for the last 30 minutes."
You make great points, and I respect you on these forums. My point was to the initial thread. That RNG had to exist. Can it be scaled better? Oh 100% yes! I think it's not done well. It should have a complete overhaul.
But RNG is essential to any sport game. It's the odds of these outcomes happening that can be properly scaled. Animations are also an issue.You're probably right. I'll concede that there does need to be some form of RNG, but in its current form the randomness has too much of an impact on the outcome. The problem is how do you find the balance? SDS has clearly had difficultly with that for years, and since this is the internet they will never make everyone happy.
-
Pitch type and location should matter here too, affecting exit velocity. A fastball middle middle should hit the exit velocity cap more often with a smaller variance, compared with fastball up an in where it's harder to get your hands through and generate as much power, same thing for low and away. hung breaking balls should hit the exit velo cap as well, where down and away there should be a penalty bring the exit velo down. bit.
Would still need some rng as every PP should not have the same exit velo. The variance should depend on power, pitch type, and location. Pitches out of the zone should have a greater penalty against exit velo.
