Next year make diamonds only 90+
-
I know this wont be popular, but they need to be a bit more rare than they are. They are too mainstream now. Golds become pretty much useless after a month. Even if this hikes up their prices it will be worth it because being a diamond will truly be worth it. Golds need to be 80-89
-
An 89 is an 89 no matter what color is on the card. Change my mind.
-
@untchable704_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
An 89 is an 89 no matter what color is on the card. Change my mind.
FACTS
-
I think people get too wrapped up in overalls and diamonds.
-
I think it's fine as is, but maybe the colour of the lights on the reveal screen could be the colour of the diamond (or the diamond background of the card). This at least differentiates the 5K Lance Lynns from the 500K Mike Trouts in a visual way.
-
@cbpm72_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
I think it's fine as is, but maybe the colour of the lights on the reveal screen could be the colour of the diamond (or the diamond background of the card). This at least differentiates the 5K Lance Lynns from the 500K Mike Trouts in a visual way.
They are different colors. Purple means sad face. Blue means 50/50 happy or sad face and greenish blue means happy face.
-
@untchable704_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
@cbpm72_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
I think it's fine as is, but maybe the colour of the lights on the reveal screen could be the colour of the diamond (or the diamond background of the card). This at least differentiates the 5K Lance Lynns from the 500K Mike Trouts in a visual way.
They are different colors.
oh, I need to take a closer look at my diamonds. I thought they all had a blue background right now? I must be going senile if they don't.
-
@cbpm72_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
@untchable704_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
@cbpm72_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
I think it's fine as is, but maybe the colour of the lights on the reveal screen could be the colour of the diamond (or the diamond background of the card). This at least differentiates the 5K Lance Lynns from the 500K Mike Trouts in a visual way.
They are different colors.
oh, I need to take a closer look at my diamonds. I thought they all had a blue background right now? I must be going senile if they don't.
Oh I thought you meant the colors on the walk outs. That’s what’s different. Nothing different on the cards.I get what you’re saying now. My bad.
-
This would make cards obtained from balling packs a lot more viable.
-
I did not have "Stop giving us so many good cards!" on my bingo card.
-
Diamonds used to be 90+ only. They lowered that in 2019? or 18 one of the two. I doubt they will go back to the way it was.
-
@untchable704_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
An 89 is an 89 no matter what color is on the card. Change my mind.
Agree 100%. People get too wrapped up in overalls and whether or not the card is good enough rather than just playing the game IMO
-
@khain24_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
Diamonds used to be 90+ only. They lowered that in 2019? or 18 one of the two. I doubt they will go back to the way it was.
Yes I remember
-
100% agree. Make 96+ the new 90, MAKE TROUT A 99 AGAIN!
Old rating system was better and frankly made way more sense.
-
@savefarris_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
I did not have "Stop giving us so many good cards!" on my bingo card.
Swing and a miss
-
Originally when they did this and went to the 125 rating scale it was to separate legendary players from good/great players. Which, I thought was a good idea and made sense… except they have completely went away from that and now everybody gets a juiced up 100+ stat card. IMO 99 OVR’s should be few and far between literally only the best players of all time should get a 99 card. This game doesn’t need everyone get a 96+ overall. 85-95 should be perfectly viable and I think it would make the game a lot more fun.. of course we know they won’t do that bc then they wouldn’t have all this content to pump out and cards dropping every week.
-
@savefarris_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
I did not have "Stop giving us so many good cards!" on my bingo card.
I had cards are too good on mine.does that count?
-
@namtrah22_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
Originally when they did this and went to the 125 rating scale it was to separate legendary players from good/great players. Which, I thought was a good idea and made sense… except they have completely went away from that and now everybody gets a juiced up 100+ stat card. IMO 99 OVR’s should be few and far between literally only the best players of all time should get a 99 card. This game doesn’t need everyone get a 96+ overall. 85-95 should be perfectly viable and I think it would make the game a lot more fun.. of course we know they won’t do that bc then they wouldn’t have all this content to pump out and cards dropping every week.
When they actually followed through with that Every single lineup of all immortals and only immortals in 18 from July until 19 came out. I would much rather have it this way then how it was then. It seems like an unpopular opinion based on this thread but content has been great since 18. People can say how good 16 and 17's content was, but there were only 2 content drops a month back then. If having everyone but the all time greats ratings be dumbed down fixes gameplay then I'm all for it, but I don't think that will be the case. At the end of the day ratings are just a number on the corner of the card. Diamonds don't need to be special other than for the personal satisfaction of optioning them. There will always be a competitive meta team regardless of what the overalls say. Switching back to the old way of player ratings actively worsens events and theme teams IMO
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
@namtrah22_psn said in Next year make diamonds only 90+:
Originally when they did this and went to the 125 rating scale it was to separate legendary players from good/great players. Which, I thought was a good idea and made sense… except they have completely went away from that and now everybody gets a juiced up 100+ stat card. IMO 99 OVR’s should be few and far between literally only the best players of all time should get a 99 card. This game doesn’t need everyone get a 96+ overall. 85-95 should be perfectly viable and I think it would make the game a lot more fun.. of course we know they won’t do that bc then they wouldn’t have all this content to pump out and cards dropping every week.
When they actually followed through with that Every single lineup of all immortals and only immortals in 18 from July until 19 came out. I would much rather have it this way then how it was then. It seems like an unpopular opinion based on this thread but content has been great since 18. People can say how good 16 and 17's content was, but there were only 2 content drops a month back then. If having everyone but the all time greats ratings be dumbed down fixes gameplay then I'm all for it, but I don't think that will be the case. At the end of the day ratings are just a number on the corner of the card. Diamonds don't need to be special other than for the personal satisfaction of optioning them. There will always be a competitive meta team regardless of what the overalls say. Switching back to the old way of player ratings actively worsens events and theme teams IMO
Yea truly I’m indifferent about it. The content has been awesome the last few years. I see the argument both ways.
-
The categories of the cards are irrelevant. The problem is they release too many good cards too early. Tops Now, monthly awards and such should be lower overalls until mid July.
