Too many 99s
-
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
I would be only ok with current day players receiving 99 overall cards if they are breaking records. Like in the case of Randy for the Rays. He deserves a 99.
-
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
I would be only ok with current day players receiving 99 overall cards if they are breaking records. Like in the case of Randy for the Rays. He deserves a 99.
Do not speak that name in the presence of a Cardinals fan....
-
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
To most people no matter how good a 93-97 card is, it is unplayable. The 99 is just a number. People are going to use the meta cards no matter what. IMO there is no harm in giving finest cards 99s for the sale of lineup diversity. If only the top notch guys get 99s what do you get? MLB 18
-
@SchnauzerFace said in Too many 99s:
I love all the options and lineup diversity, so I have no complaints about a lot of juiced cards. But I do think the "99 Creep" has become a bit silly. If you check the adjusted overalls on the-show-zone, you'll see that most of the "99" cards we use are actually much higher than that. For example. Gehrig has a "true" overall average of 107.96, Griffey is 107.43, Foxx is 107.39, Mantle is 106.91, etc. It reminds me of the famous Spinal Tap quote, but in reverse. In this case, why don't we just make those 99s, and make everything a little less.
Unfortunately, I think SDS has made this bed and we're all gonna have to lie in it. If they tried to go backward next year, Twitter would blow up with people complaining there aren't enough "end game" cards. Come to think of it... weren't most people whining earlier this year because they didn't start giving us 99 bosses until the 5th inning? You can never please everyone, so I guess we should just accept that 99 Jacob Stallings is going to be a thing and learn to live with it.
Next year all player max overall ratings go to 125 overall, so they are 26 louder.
-
It’s all relative. The ‘99’ aspect of it is irrelevant. They aren’t all equally good, so it doesn’t really matter imo.
-
Absolutely agree, while line up diversity and a wealth of useable options at each position is definitely a good thing, the whole thing has gone too far now. I’ve been referring to the implementation of the 125 scale and SDS logic of that time that it was a way to make the all time greats like Babe Ruth and Ted Williams stand apart from the rest of the 99s in the game. That only the best of the best were worthy of such a rating for this reason. So, I’m guessing next year they’ll have to expand to a 150 or 200 scale, given how diluted it’s now become.
Line up diversity can still be attained in DD, as it was in years gone by, without offering a selection of vanilla feeling juiced cards with 110+ in every category that are only differentiated by the card art. You get some hitters with decent contact, speed and defense, say the Gwynn or Ichiro types. You sacrifice power as a result. You get the powerful players in RF, cards like Reggie Jackson, or Stan Musial. Here, you’re sacrificing the speed and defense for more pop. Then you might get the balanced options in between, all rounders who are good, but not elite. There can be many useable options that fall into this category that promote line up diversity.
Then there are the end game players at that position. The elite, hard to obtain, much sought after cards that are the best of the best to play the game. The cards we implemented the 125 scale for. 5 tool players who can hit, run, defend and stand apart from the rest. These should be premium cards that aren’t necessarily easy to get. Throwing 110+ ratings on everything from a single game flashback to a legitimate legend tends to water down the feeling of accomplishment from finally obtaining a card like Willie Mays or Griffey, when there are a multitude of equally, or sometimes, ridiculously, better options just raining down from the skies.
You can’t really justify giving these cards better ratings than Mantle, Mays and Junior. I’m not a fan of the repeated cards either - Gavin Lux has three diamond cards already, including a 99 with 114/108 vs RHP, 91/98 vs LHP. Joe Morgan has a solitary 99 diamond with 123/107 RHP and 84/67 vs LHP. Is it just me, or is this not absolute insanity?
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
To most people no matter how good a 93-97 card is, it is unplayable. The 99 is just a number. People are going to use the meta cards no matter what. IMO there is no harm in giving finest cards 99s for the sale of lineup diversity. If only the top notch guys get 99s what do you get? MLB 18
That's debatable. Way more people play with Posada than Travis D'Arnaud. I see more PotM Didi than Ripken. 94 Wagner is better than 99 Miller. 94 Chipper? That is quite the generalized statement you made. The are certainly players that will use the highest rated players, but also many others that use cards they feel more comfortable with.
-
Go back to the 99 attribute cap and 90 overall diamonds.
-
@formallyforearms said in Too many 99s:
@the_dragon1912 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
To most people no matter how good a 93-97 card is, it is unplayable. The 99 is just a number. People are going to use the meta cards no matter what. IMO there is no harm in giving finest cards 99s for the sale of lineup diversity. If only the top notch guys get 99s what do you get? MLB 18
That's debatable. Way more people play with Posada than Travis D'Arnaud. I see more PotM Didi than Ripken. 94 Wagner is better than 99 Miller. 94 Chipper? That is quite the generalized statement you made. The are certainly players that will use the highest rated players, but also many others that use cards they feel more comfortable with.
I agree with you there, and I’m in the same boat, but the overwhelming majority of people on here that are complaining about the finest ratings are the exact same group as the “this card won’t crack my lineup” crowd. I’m not saying you, as you are certainly in the minority, but the ones that make the most noise to get things charged right now can’t be pleased by anything and the gameplay consistently gets worse due to SDS listening to the same loud group of 20 guys that won’t be pleased no matter what SDS does
-
I dont see the problem. I like that everyone doesn't HAVE to put Babe in the lineup because he has the ultimate card. It's fun that current players you like have useable cards. I honestly dont get the idea that good cards should be limited- Do you not get tired of facing Kluber, Orel, and Paxton every game? Or Tatis, Trout, Mantle, and Babe? Because that's what you are arguing for
-
And we thought that 17 had too many 99's. I don't mind topps now and potm cards artificially buffed up to like 95-98 overall, but a 99 should really be only reserved for the cream of the crop legends and flashbacks who are truly deserving
-
@dommycals007 said in Too many 99s:
Way too many 99s in the game. Atleast 50 in market alone. I miss the good ol days where end game cards were a 95 chipper or a 94 Bagwell from collections and not a 99 future card who’s seen less than 150 mlb games. Guys have a couple of good games and get 125 power from both sides bc of topps now.. Anybody else want them to go back to the good ol show days like ‘16 where there was BO, IV, HW, rookie etc. with versions of players. don’t mind the different types of cards but jeez enough of the 99s.
Let's not pretend all 99's are alike tho. Some of these "99's" like Bogarts etc are more like 97's.
The number on the card is symbolic sometimes...
-
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
I would be only ok with current day players receiving 99 overall cards if they are breaking records. Like in the case of Randy for the Rays. He deserves a 99.
No, he doesn't. A hot streak is just that, a hot streak. It's only when they're done, that we can actually compare them to a legend and see how they match up. Trout still has a few more years, but I still feel as if he's done enough to be in that comparison, and certainly Pujols has. The rest of the modern day hitters can take a back seat to the legends.
-
Regardless of his postseason feats, and they were spectacular. There is no way randy should have a card with better attributes than trout mantle mays Griffey. It’s just stupid , this 125 125 maxed out [censored] is nonsense, especially if your going to give it to cards like randy or potm Mondesi but not Mays chipper mantle etc
-
@ComebackLogic said in Too many 99s:
Absolutely agree, while line up diversity and a wealth of useable options at each position is definitely a good thing, the whole thing has gone too far now. I’ve been referring to the implementation of the 125 scale and SDS logic of that time that it was a way to make the all time greats like Babe Ruth and Ted Williams stand apart from the rest of the 99s in the game. That only the best of the best were worthy of such a rating for this reason. So, I’m guessing next year they’ll have to expand to a 150 or 200 scale, given how diluted it’s now become.
Line up diversity can still be attained in DD, as it was in years gone by, without offering a selection of vanilla feeling juiced cards with 110+ in every category that are only differentiated by the card art. You get some hitters with decent contact, speed and defense, say the Gwynn or Ichiro types. You sacrifice power as a result. You get the powerful players in RF, cards like Reggie Jackson, or Stan Musial. Here, you’re sacrificing the speed and defense for more pop. Then you might get the balanced options in between, all rounders who are good, but not elite. There can be many useable options that fall into this category that promote line up diversity.
Then there are the end game players at that position. The elite, hard to obtain, much sought after cards that are the best of the best to play the game. The cards we implemented the 125 scale for. 5 tool players who can hit, run, defend and stand apart from the rest. These should be premium cards that aren’t necessarily easy to get. Throwing 110+ ratings on everything from a single game flashback to a legitimate legend tends to water down the feeling of accomplishment from finally obtaining a card like Willie Mays or Griffey, when there are a multitude of equally, or sometimes, ridiculously, better options just raining down from the skies.
You can’t really justify giving these cards better ratings than Mantle, Mays and Junior. I’m not a fan of the repeated cards either - Gavin Lux has three diamond cards already, including a 99 with 114/108 vs RHP, 91/98 vs LHP. Joe Morgan has a solitary 99 diamond with 123/107 RHP and 84/67 vs LHP. Is it just me, or is this not absolute insanity?
Nope not you......it is complete insanity. The Baseball HOF is the hardest to get into of any major sports HOF. There are way too many cards of players that have better stats than Real HOF Players. How much sense does that make?
-
All time greats and trout deserve 99. Active players killing it with diff versions like finest PS and POTM. deserve mid level diamonds. All other future garbage players that we realistically have no clue how they’ll be and topps now guys like Travis darnaud who is a mediocre player at best (just an example of topps now) don’t deserve such juiced stats, they deserve high golds for the assumption of being good for couple of games. These non established players even some finest guys get 99s bc everybody deserves a medal now a days instead of the best
-
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
@Thierry007007 said in Too many 99s:
@DoIHearBossMusic said in Too many 99s:
I'm ok with actual legends getting 99s, but agree about guys with a few good days getting cards better than Babe, Musial, Mays, etc.
I know it's fictional but it really waters down the elite cards
I think current day players should have a 95, 96 overall cap. Legends and past players should be the only ones with 99 overall cards. Always respect the elders.
I agree, There should only be a handful of 99s like Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Babe, Gibson, etc. Not like the 93-97 cards aren't playable
I would be only ok with current day players receiving 99 overall cards if they are breaking records. Like in the case of Randy for the Rays. He deserves a 99.
Do not speak that name in the presence of a Cardinals fan....
He did not even play a full 60 games season, Now we will see what he does next year.
-
@sbevans142 said in Too many 99s:
I dont see the problem. I like that everyone doesn't HAVE to put Babe in the lineup because he has the ultimate card. It's fun that current players you like have useable cards. I honestly dont get the idea that good cards should be limited- Do you not get tired of facing Kluber, Orel, and Paxton every game? Or Tatis, Trout, Mantle, and Babe? Because that's what you are arguing for
If you want to play with a lesser player, then by all means play him. They shouldn't however have their stats blown up to something that they aren't or never will be, just because you don't want to take the hit of playing a non-elite.
-
@dcmo3 said in Too many 99s:
@sbevans142 said in Too many 99s:
I dont see the problem. I like that everyone doesn't HAVE to put Babe in the lineup because he has the ultimate card. It's fun that current players you like have useable cards. I honestly dont get the idea that good cards should be limited- Do you not get tired of facing Kluber, Orel, and Paxton every game? Or Tatis, Trout, Mantle, and Babe? Because that's what you are arguing for
If you want to play with a lesser player, then by all means play him. They shouldn't however have their stats blown up to something that they aren't or never will be, just because you don't want to take the hit of playing a non-elite.
Exactly. But if they drop the ratings, and make guys like Ruth Mays mantle etc really hard to get or by paying real money for them, then so be it. But players like 99 kulber and Newhouser and last years Kershsw would be used less if they didn’t have 99s. Less 99s, less dumb players. I’m tired of playing these guys who throw 102 but have no more than 100’innings played like what a joke lol
-
@TEXAS10PT said in Too many 99s:
@ComebackLogic said in Too many 99s:
Absolutely agree, while line up diversity and a wealth of useable options at each position is definitely a good thing, the whole thing has gone too far now. I’ve been referring to the implementation of the 125 scale and SDS logic of that time that it was a way to make the all time greats like Babe Ruth and Ted Williams stand apart from the rest of the 99s in the game. That only the best of the best were worthy of such a rating for this reason. So, I’m guessing next year they’ll have to expand to a 150 or 200 scale, given how diluted it’s now become.
Line up diversity can still be attained in DD, as it was in years gone by, without offering a selection of vanilla feeling juiced cards with 110+ in every category that are only differentiated by the card art. You get some hitters with decent contact, speed and defense, say the Gwynn or Ichiro types. You sacrifice power as a result. You get the powerful players in RF, cards like Reggie Jackson, or Stan Musial. Here, you’re sacrificing the speed and defense for more pop. Then you might get the balanced options in between, all rounders who are good, but not elite. There can be many useable options that fall into this category that promote line up diversity.
Then there are the end game players at that position. The elite, hard to obtain, much sought after cards that are the best of the best to play the game. The cards we implemented the 125 scale for. 5 tool players who can hit, run, defend and stand apart from the rest. These should be premium cards that aren’t necessarily easy to get. Throwing 110+ ratings on everything from a single game flashback to a legitimate legend tends to water down the feeling of accomplishment from finally obtaining a card like Willie Mays or Griffey, when there are a multitude of equally, or sometimes, ridiculously, better options just raining down from the skies.
You can’t really justify giving these cards better ratings than Mantle, Mays and Junior. I’m not a fan of the repeated cards either - Gavin Lux has three diamond cards already, including a 99 with 114/108 vs RHP, 91/98 vs LHP. Joe Morgan has a solitary 99 diamond with 123/107 RHP and 84/67 vs LHP. Is it just me, or is this not absolute insanity?
Nope not you......it is complete insanity. The Baseball HOF is the hardest to get into of any major sports HOF. There are way too many cards of players that have better stats than Real HOF Players. How much sense does that make?
It makes a lot more sense than having the same lineup consisting of the same players year after year for every edition of this game until we all get old enough to where we no longer play video games. Because that is exactly how it would be if other players weren’t juiced. You don’t get these complaints from the 2k, Fifa, Madden communities, and you know why? Because the MLB the show community by far has the oldest active community members of any video game I’ve ever seen. And nothing against anybody that plays video games in their 30s and 40s, I’ll likely feel the same way as some of you when I get to that age, but the fact of the matter is that the target audience for video games is ages 14-mid 20s for a reason.
