Do you think next years game?
-
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
-
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
-
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
EDIT: just checked your stuff the season you went WS, ya went 79 and 74. like I said you can get it if you have a lot of time to play and can go .500 or slightly above it.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
-
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
-
I checked just for fun and man I'm disappointed, only a 1.200 ops when I've had better ranked seasons than that
-
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
Let me reword the sentence for it to be more clear.
You have played 1,628 games and have only been able to hit WS once. I have hit WS 10 times and have played 167 games.But remember we are here to discuss the issues with the game not stats, even though you just totally disregarded my points about the game and went right back about talking individual stats.
-
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
Let me reword the sentence for it to be more clear.
You have played 1,628 games and have only been able to hit WS once. I have hit WS 10 times and have played 167 games.But remember we are here to discuss the issues with the game not stats, even though you just totally disregarded my points about the game and went right back about talking individual stats.
And yet, you were the one that initially brought it up.
You also said that there is no denying the fact that lineouts are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, etc., etc., as if that doesn't legitimize this game being garbage, then it doesn't matter because it's all opinionated.
-
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
Let me reword the sentence for it to be more clear.
You have played 1,628 games and have only been able to hit WS once. I have hit WS 10 times and have played 167 games.But remember we are here to discuss the issues with the game not stats, even though you just totally disregarded my points about the game and went right back about talking individual stats.
And yet, you were the one that initially brought it up.
You also said that there is no denying the fact that lineouts are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, etc., etc., as if that doesn't legitimize this game being garbage, then it doesn't matter because it's all opinionated.
You are missing the entire point. You can call 19 garbage if you want, but the statement that it is worse than 18 is wrong. You can acknowledge 18 is terrible and still think 19 is garbage. They aren't mutually exclusive. Noone's singing the praises of online play for 19 here, only that 18 was worse.
-
@eatyum said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
Let me reword the sentence for it to be more clear.
You have played 1,628 games and have only been able to hit WS once. I have hit WS 10 times and have played 167 games.But remember we are here to discuss the issues with the game not stats, even though you just totally disregarded my points about the game and went right back about talking individual stats.
And yet, you were the one that initially brought it up.
You also said that there is no denying the fact that lineouts are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, etc., etc., as if that doesn't legitimize this game being garbage, then it doesn't matter because it's all opinionated.
You are missing the entire point. You can call 19 garbage if you want, but the statement that it is worse than 18 is wrong. You can acknowledge 18 is terrible and still think 19 is garbage. They aren't mutually exclusive. Noone's singing the praises of online play for 19 here, only that 18 was worse.
Like I said, it's all opinionated.
No argument here. I'm done.
-
Hmmm I’m curious what my br stats are... particularly my ERA
-
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@eatyum said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@onnagood1 said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
@SefarR said in Do you think next years game?:
@cvogsfashow said in Do you think next years game?:
So if you have been here for a while you should of realized that most say 19 is better than 18. Yes, we all know it isn't perfect but a bigger problem is people thinking they are better than they actually are. People will always look for something to blame instead of themselves...like the game in this case. For example, if someone had 1,622 games played and are 818 - 804, with a .229 average, .351 slugging, and a .625 OPS. They are a below average player at this game especially when most of their games are on Allstar difficulty. Would that same person get offended for me calling them below average...yup, will they come up with some excuse as to why the stats are the way they are...YUP.
A bit besides the point, but I'd be interested to hear how you define average? Would a .500 record (i.e. winning exactly as much as losing) not be the definition of average?
I also find it amusing that you think people overestimating their abilities is a bigger issue than the overabundance of RNG in 19. This is exactly why we have tools like the hit quality indicator and the post-game PCI analysis. With those we can objectively estimate how we did in any given game. The fact is, in 19 you will frequently lose games where you have objectively outperformed your opponent and it has nothing to do with a biased awareness of one's own skill level.
To me it has a lot to do with batting average and the difficulty they play most of their games on. If you are a .500 player and are batting .250 and play most of your games are on Allstar and HOF, to me, you are a below average player at THIS GAME.
People over estimating there skills is a huge issue in this game and on this forum. Yes, we are all aware that 19 has RNGesus issues. But I would say more than 50% of the time people make a thread complaining they lost due to RNG and not being rewarded, while striking out their opponent a 1000 times. Then you go check the game history and its not true. For example, @BigBadBosc44 said that he hasn't been rewarded 8 of his last 10 games meanwhile in the past week he has played one online game versus an opponent. People also don't realize that game history can be checked very easy and every time I see a post like this a go look at their game history and it tells a completely different story majority of the time.
OK, well my BR batting avg is .425 and my era is 2.04, yours is worse at batting avg. .408 with era 4.32, BR is set to all-star level....so what's your point?
LMAO hilarious.
Lets dive a little further shall we....BR you have 8 games played... 8 GAMES PLAYED and are batting .425 with a 2.04 era and have a best record of 5-2. I have played 185 games of BR with a .408 average and 4.32 era with a best run of 12-0 (which I have done 6 times this year). If you had at least 50 games played and a .425 average I would think differently. Ya have 8 games and think it means something. Get out of here. You are a below average player on any difficulty.
OK, well the same argument could be made for Ranked Seasons. You only have 167 games played vs. 1,628. I already admitted that by your standards that I am a below average player based on my stats. I also made it to WS. Check my game history for 07/19/19 (lol, which I realize was some time ago, but nevertheless, you can't take away the fact that I made it to WS). So by your standards you can be a below average player and still make it to WS.
So again, whether I was a scrub or a consistent WS player, it has no relevancy to the issues with this game. Are you really that clueless? Or are you just throwing numbers out there in attempt to discredit me and distract one's views from the real problem? I'm beginning to realize it may be both.
It took 1,628 games for you to hit WS once...congrats. I have hit it 10 times in 167. I play a few games after hitting WS, but don't grind for 1000, 1100, or 1200 rewards, don't need the stubs or packs just want the WS reward. And if you have a lot of time to play, anyone can eventually get up to WS even by going .500 or slightly above it. Getting to WS doesn't make you a good player.
I have already said there are issues with this game and no one is denying that fact. Line outs are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, swing and misses on very early or too late. But what I am about to say is also a large problem in the community. I am going to simplify it for you. A lot of people are not as good as they think which makes a lot of people blame the game instead of blaming themselves. LITERALLY THE PERSON WHO CREATED THIS THREAD CAN BE USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THIS. Literally said 8 of his last ten games have been the result he described above in the OP. The man had played 1 or 2 online games in the past 3 weeks when this was posted.
Lastly, no one is saying this game is perfect and doesn't have flaws, it does have flaws but it is significantly better than 18 and is a stepping stone to getting the game where the COMMUNITY wants it.
OK Mr. Big Shot whatever you say, LMAO
And it didn't take me 1,628 games for me to hit WS.
1,628 is games played to date which today is 02/13/20, I attained WS back in 07/19. So subtract all the games played between 07/19/19 to 02/13/20 is the real number it took....see you really are CLUELESS.
Let me reword the sentence for it to be more clear.
You have played 1,628 games and have only been able to hit WS once. I have hit WS 10 times and have played 167 games.But remember we are here to discuss the issues with the game not stats, even though you just totally disregarded my points about the game and went right back about talking individual stats.
And yet, you were the one that initially brought it up.
You also said that there is no denying the fact that lineouts are an issue, catcher blocking, check swings, etc., etc., as if that doesn't legitimize this game being garbage, then it doesn't matter because it's all opinionated.
You are missing the entire point. You can call 19 garbage if you want, but the statement that it is worse than 18 is wrong. You can acknowledge 18 is terrible and still think 19 is garbage. They aren't mutually exclusive. Noone's singing the praises of online play for 19 here, only that 18 was worse.
Like I said, it's all opinionated.
No argument here. I'm done.
Finally.
-
This post is deleted!
-
I wish 20 will be better has an overall experience so far it has been a 3-2 pitching experience is so stressful using pulse and how always late on this censored diamond players using fast balls is so pathetic. But whatever I do wish 20 gets me a better online experience
-
A admin locked this topic on
