Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons
-
I really like the evolution part you mentioned. Evolution is something that definitely needs to be expanded upon next year and this could be a great way to do it. I remember getting 100+ hits or whatever in 16' or 17' with Wade Boggs so that I could get that sweet 98; it was gruelling, but awesome. I had high hopes for evolution before the game came out but it was pretty much a bust. I'm hoping that in 21' they can really improve on the idea.
Edit: Anne Hathaway is smokin'
-
Dudes. I thought I was the only Anne Hathaway creeper on this forum.
We are not alone.
-
I've mentioned a similar idea in years past. I suggested a tiered, passive rating mod that rewards more rating points per win and a lower rating penalty per loss for a team depending on the mod amount. Match making would still be strictly ranking based, but a passive mod would give incentive to have a mixed team that's not a god squad. More points per win if you're a pci master who can win with an inferior team, and we'll all see more team diversity.
Win win overall
-
@IIJACKINTHBOXII said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
I really like the evolution part you mentioned. Evolution is something that definitely needs to be expanded upon next year and this could be a great way to do it. I remember getting 100+ hits or whatever in 16' or 17' with Wade Boggs so that I could get that sweet 98; it was gruelling, but awesome. I had high hopes for evolution before the game came out but it was pretty much a bust. I'm hoping that in 21' they can really improve on the idea.
Edit: Anne Hathaway is smokin'
Yeah, those days when there was a reason to have a lesser card in your lineup. I'd like to see Evolution pushed to an almost annoying extreme. Besides, capping the lineup in such a way essentially lineup diversity, which is great. It's always a bummer to see that your lineup is almost identical to the person you're playing every game. The amount of cards has definitely helped that this year, as there are only a small handful of players I see almost every game (Ruth, for example).
-
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
I've mentioned a similar idea in years past. I suggested a tiered, passive rating mod that rewards more rating points per win and a lower rating penalty per loss for a team depending on the mod amount. Match making would still be strictly ranking based, but a passive mod would give incentive to have a mixed team that's not a god squad. More points per win if you're a pci master who can win with an inferior team, and we'll all see more team diversity.
Win win overall
I may be misinterpreting what you're saying, but this reads like you're saying that people should be "rewarded" for using lesser teams, even if they are up against a god squad? I don't know that I care for that idea, because the competitive balance is just so off unless you're really good with mediocre players. (I'm not, except for Jonathon Villar and Eric Thames for some reason).
I'd rather see something that encourages team and competitive balance. Instead of the Orioles vs the Yankees, you'd get something more akin to the Indians vs. the White Sox.
-
I want a ranked mode that doesn’t involve playing on all star. I’d also like to see more online modes without line up restrictions. It’s pretty terrible that we have one solitary online mode where we can play competitive 9 inning games without restriction.
It’s totally pointless collecting cards in DD without RS, unless you want to play vs CPU games. Personally, I hate all
3 inning game modes and won’t bother with events and BR. When I do play BR, I’ll get to 3-4 wins and just quit the run anyway, because I absolutely hate the format and can’t stand to play out a full run.Events have been very similar to BR, mostly 3 inning games with crappy settings and each event has dragged on far, far too long this year, with targets of 200 wins being commonplace. I grit my teeth and finish the conquest maps I have to finish as quickly as possible, again this is something to be endured, rather than enjoyed. Showdowns and moments are more of the same, try and finish ASAP because you hate the content, but you need the stars or whatever at the end of it.
The only mode I even slightly enjoy is RS, because this is the only mode that is an approximation of actual baseball, where you can play 9 innings against another human using whatever line up you wish to use from the cards you have collected. It’s a shame they tried to ruin that this year as well by making it play like 9 inning BR, home run after home run and everything rigged to generate action.
What we actually need is less of these side game modes like events and BR and some actual meat on the bones of a so called baseball simulation that doesn’t try to emulate actual baseball, instead preferring to shorten games, induce more action by creating constant errors, forced meatballs and home runs and something more like a simulation. You wouldn’t play a flight simulator, for example, only to find that they’d added missiles and machine guns to a passenger plane. “Yes, we know an American Airlines AirbusA320 doesn’t have machine guns and laser guided tomahawks in real life, but we decided to add them anyway. It’s just going to make it more fun while you’re flying the plane, it’s to induce a bit of action.” That what SDS are trying to do, metaphorically, to the game of baseball.
-
The problem with subdividing online play is always going to be matchmaking. We already have 3 distinct competitive modes (BR, RS, E). Adding RS+ is just going to decrease the user base for each even further.
IF SDS can figure out cross-platform play in the new era, then this might become a valid option. Until then: no chance.
-
@SchnauzerFace said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
Dudes. I thought I was the only Anne Hathaway creeper on this forum.
We are not alone.
ya'll aren't alone either!!!
-
that is what br is for imo
-
@WiryHooligan22 said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
I've mentioned a similar idea in years past. I suggested a tiered, passive rating mod that rewards more rating points per win and a lower rating penalty per loss for a team depending on the mod amount. Match making would still be strictly ranking based, but a passive mod would give incentive to have a mixed team that's not a god squad. More points per win if you're a pci master who can win with an inferior team, and we'll all see more team diversity.
Win win overall
I may be misinterpreting what you're saying, but this reads like you're saying that people should be "rewarded" for using lesser teams, even if they are up against a god squad? I don't know that I care for that idea, because the competitive balance is just so off unless you're really good with mediocre players. (I'm not, except for Jonathon Villar and Eric Thames for some reason).
I'd rather see something that encourages team and competitive balance. Instead of the Orioles vs the Yankees, you'd get something more akin to the Indians vs. the White Sox.
So rewarding ranked victories with extra points and lower penalties for losses using a non-god squad doesn't encourage team balance? I think a passive rating mod is the right solution for the existing ranked format without needing a separate ranked mode that would further dilute match making. In terms of competitive balance, we actually need to see less of it. The RNG kills the gameplay and devalues user input
-
@schroederk said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
that is what br is for imo
Except in BR, you’re playing 3 inning games with random players. I’m talking about standard games with teams built from your collection.
-
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
@WiryHooligan22 said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
I've mentioned a similar idea in years past. I suggested a tiered, passive rating mod that rewards more rating points per win and a lower rating penalty per loss for a team depending on the mod amount. Match making would still be strictly ranking based, but a passive mod would give incentive to have a mixed team that's not a god squad. More points per win if you're a pci master who can win with an inferior team, and we'll all see more team diversity.
Win win overall
I may be misinterpreting what you're saying, but this reads like you're saying that people should be "rewarded" for using lesser teams, even if they are up against a god squad? I don't know that I care for that idea, because the competitive balance is just so off unless you're really good with mediocre players. (I'm not, except for Jonathon Villar and Eric Thames for some reason).
I'd rather see something that encourages team and competitive balance. Instead of the Orioles vs the Yankees, you'd get something more akin to the Indians vs. the White Sox.
So rewarding ranked victories with extra points and lower penalties for losses using a non-god squad doesn't encourage team balance? I think a passive rating mod is the right solution for the existing ranked format without needing a separate ranked mode that would further dilute match making. In terms of competitive balance, we actually need to see less of it. The RNG kills the gameplay and devalues user input
Let me rephrase. If you willingly use a lesser team against a god squad, you should be rewarded more/penalized less. I agree with that. Where I differ is there are hundreds of cards that are essentially useless, even in events. I’m trying to think of a way to make lesser cards more valuable.
-
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
@WiryHooligan22 said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
@esmlb_rop said in Content Discussion: Ranked Seasons:
I've mentioned a similar idea in years past. I suggested a tiered, passive rating mod that rewards more rating points per win and a lower rating penalty per loss for a team depending on the mod amount. Match making would still be strictly ranking based, but a passive mod would give incentive to have a mixed team that's not a god squad. More points per win if you're a pci master who can win with an inferior team, and we'll all see more team diversity.
Win win overall
I may be misinterpreting what you're saying, but this reads like you're saying that people should be "rewarded" for using lesser teams, even if they are up against a god squad? I don't know that I care for that idea, because the competitive balance is just so off unless you're really good with mediocre players. (I'm not, except for Jonathon Villar and Eric Thames for some reason).
I'd rather see something that encourages team and competitive balance. Instead of the Orioles vs the Yankees, you'd get something more akin to the Indians vs. the White Sox.
So rewarding ranked victories with extra points and lower penalties for losses using a non-god squad doesn't encourage team balance? I think a passive rating mod is the right solution for the existing ranked format without needing a separate ranked mode that would further dilute match making. In terms of competitive balance, we actually need to see less of it. The RNG kills the gameplay and devalues user input
I could actually live with this in some shape or form. I think you’d need to have them use all silvers or all golds or whatever though to gain a bonus ranking % for a win. If someone’s good enough to come out there and win with silvers against my team of 99s, they should get a bonus. Even though a lot of silver and even bronze cards can be effective hitters this year, they suffer huge penalties defensively more often than not. There’s a clear difference between fielding weak defenders and elite defenders this year more than years past. This would prevent skilled hitters from loading up with low overall power hitters and diamond pitchers, then slugging their way to WS in short order.
-
A admin locked this topic on
