This is the patch that will turn people away
-
Overall I think I'm happy with the patch. Meatballs are back which is frustrating but nowhere near the level of last year and none on perfect releases. I'm not getting nearly as many perfect releases which if I'm being honest with myself is more accurate to how I've done. Before the patch there were definitely times I was like "how in the world did I get a perfect release there?"
-
To have a system where you can calculate early or late and aim for that once again makes it too easy. That’s just my .02
I’m throwing a slider away to RH, I make sure I’m either perfect or late, ball is never thrown over plate. I mean I guess you possibly get more walks but the pitch results don’t really change. Every pitch is back to the corner or slightly off.
I just don’t care about the comp scene at all because I know the game isn’t comp and won’t be IMo
-
@cbpm72_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@cbpm72_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
What I like is for my 99 pitcher to be warmed up at the beginning of the game, confident in his pitches, and to have good ratings. At this point, I want my perfect pitches to be perfect most of the time. But then as the game goes on. As my pitcher tires or loses a bit of confidence, i want even my perfect input to get a little out of wack and for the output to become less pleasing to me. I want there to be a need to bring in a reliever to improve my input and the output of the other player. This makes the game dynamic and cannot be done my having my input have the exact same output ALL the time.
It's not a given that pitchers will get 'worse' as a game goes on. Sometimes players get stronger as the game goes along (we see this in real life). One of the most important factors for gaming should be the human player's ability to focus and concentrate, so under those conditions (and with a good card the stat boosts will always help) it's possible to keep pitching well without the computer necessarily interfering to make you make a mistake.
Conspiracy theories about how the game cheated you are just dumb.
Is this the 'general you' or did I spout a conspiracy theory somewhere?
The plural 'you' bud. I do not think you did at all. TBH I do not even remember why I wrote that lol
-
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@cbpm72_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@raesone_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@raesone_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@aaronjw76_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
I'd love to see some video examples of all these meatballs happening with pin point because majority of people here tend to exaggerate their feedback by about 200%
And if PPP is harder to execute perfect pitches then that's a good thing. The most accurate pitching mechanic SHOULD be the hardest to perfect.
I agree but the problem is not that the execution got harder. That's fine and it's a welcome change. The problem is the result when you do end up missing the perfect. How far will it be off from the mark? Does it depend on how much you miss and with what angle? Or does the game simply punish you for missing by throwing a very hittable pitch belt high?
As you can see it's not as simple as you and others before you are putting it. In my sample size so far, it is more random than it was before. And I don't like the randomness, that was THE issue last year.
Let's say if I miss by 5° on a late release, it will always end up in the same spot if I miss by those numbers. That's something I can work with, because I can calculate the margins and risk of throwing a certain pitch in a certain spot. I felt like that was present before but it isn't now. And that not knowing when the game will force one down the middle, THAT is my issue.
Thank gawd the game isn't like how you want it. How sterile that would be. You seriously want to be able to predict baseball outcomes to that degree? You want the ball to ALWAYS end up in the same spot if you miss similarly with perfect pitching input? You want to be able to "calculate" how off a pitch is going to be? I think you, and people who want the game like you do, is why they fixed it.
Yes, I do want that. And I'm not alone in that regard, pretty much every competitive player out there wants it this way and less RNG. That's why most of us hated last year's game. The only people who DON'T want this, are the average Joe's who need a RNG meatball down the middle every once in a while to get on the board.
I'm probably worse than an average joe, but I agree, I honestly want the output to match the input a lot more. I don't mind losing to better players at all, but it drives me up the wall to have even match-ups (or worse) clearly decided on things that are wholly computer-determined. Even if it would help me, I don't want the RNG meatballs in the game.
Odd. I want to even be the pitcher who throws RNG meatballs. Why? Because that happens in baseball. Pitchers do that all the time.
It sure does happen in a real game. All sorts of unusual thing. But, that's because a ball gets away from a pitcher, or a base-runner slips trying to steal. Teams come back from 5 run deficits in the 9th inning.
I believe the point most ppl are trying to make about this game is..when you are right-on/exact/timed-perfectly with your pitch or bat meter...the game should never animate it as an RNG meatball or a swung-through-too-late.
There are times in many games I actually do, accidentally, throw a hanger..I seldom ever get punished for it. If those were the times I gave up that single homerun that lost me a 1-0 game I wouldn't be as incredulous about the silly game predispositions.
The ones that turn into home runs are almost always pitches that went exactly where I metered up for. Unfortunately, the AI will animate those pitches as meatballs. That is the problem. This is the RNG/DDA/AI-interference/whatvs in the game that drive people to make hateful posts.
So, you are singing off a different song-sheet in regards to "that's what really happens in baseball".
-
The patch the broke the gane. Mound visit causes a freeze off. Contact swing isn’t fixed, it’s a joke.
-
".the game should never animate it as an RNG meatball or a swung-through-too-late."
Why not? I understand the argument. I disagree that RNG is a problem as long as that RNG is calculated with player card ratings weighing the calculation. If I swing the bat and hit it perfect/perfect, I should not get the same output from a common player as from a 99. You want your input to eliminate player ratings and the effect of those ratings on RNG. We simply disagree on how we want the game to play.
-
Pitches shouldn’t go where you want them when you miss, but there should at least be some logic as to why a pitch would end up where it does. Like what was mentioned earlier, if you release early it should hang more, if you release late it should end up lower than you intended. East/west should be pretty random though.
-
Taking things to a silly extreme, think about a player card with a power rating of 0, but with decent contact. If i am able to hit the ball perfect/perfect with him should the output be the same as if I was using a power 99? No, of course not. But to make that difference in power occur in the game, an RNG calculation has to be made, with the 0 power guy having almost no chance of the RNG to give him a home run.
-
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
-
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
If a pitcher has 0 control, achieving perfect input should be 99% harder than with a pitcher that has 99 control. But if you do get perfect input, the ball should go where you intended, whether they have 0 or 99 control.
-
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
If a pitcher has 0 control, achieving perfect input should be 99% harder than with a pitcher that has 99 control. But if you do get perfect input, the ball should go where you intended, whether they have 0 or 99 control.
I understand that is how you would like it to be. I disagree. I do not think they can make the meter 99x harder to hit the line as you suggest. There are players who can hit the line almost every time regardless of which player they are using. To me, that makes the game unrealistic when cards that suck can play that well. I understand the argument that if you are that good with your input then the card shouldn't matter, I just disagree.
-
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
If a pitcher has 0 control, achieving perfect input should be 99% harder than with a pitcher that has 99 control. But if you do get perfect input, the ball should go where you intended, whether they have 0 or 99 control.
I understand that is how you would like it to be. I disagree. I do not think they can make the meter 99x harder to hit the line as you suggest. There are players who can hit the line almost every time regardless of which player they are using. To me, that makes the game unrealistic when cards that suck can play that well. I understand the argument that if you are that good with your input then the card shouldn't matter, I just disagree.
The limitation is with the engine then, because they can't make input more or less difficult based off stats. So instead they use RNG to compensate for that limitation.
Ideally, you would have a baseline of input difficulty. This would go up or down based off control.
99 control = easiest input difficulty.
0 control = hardest input difficulty.The baseline difficulty would also move based off current pitcher energy and confidence.
This way a user with exceptional skills could paint with a pitcher with low control, while a user with low skills would struggle with a high control pitcher, therefore making "stick skills matter".
-
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
If a pitcher has 0 control, achieving perfect input should be 99% harder than with a pitcher that has 99 control. But if you do get perfect input, the ball should go where you intended, whether they have 0 or 99 control.
I understand that is how you would like it to be. I disagree. I do not think they can make the meter 99x harder to hit the line as you suggest. There are players who can hit the line almost every time regardless of which player they are using. To me, that makes the game unrealistic when cards that suck can play that well. I understand the argument that if you are that good with your input then the card shouldn't matter, I just disagree.
The limitation is with the engine then, because they can't make input more or less difficult based off stats. So instead they use RNG to compensate for that limitation.
Ideally, you would have a baseline of input difficulty. This would go up or down based off control.
99 control = easiest input difficulty.
0 control = hardest input difficulty.The baseline difficulty would also move based off current pitcher energy and confidence.
This way a user with exceptional skills could paint with a pitcher with low control, while a user with low skills would struggle with a high control pitcher, therefore making "stick skills matter".
I think it is mostly that way now. Stick skills definitely matter. Players that are very good at the game usually win. I agree with the way you are thinking about it. In the end, however it is done, I want the cards and my input to both matter. AND I want realistic baseball.
-
The mechanic shouldn’t be more difficult with low control pitchers, that’s the role of the PAR size. Some pitchers have trouble locating even if their mechanics are on point.
-
@genopolanco_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
Pitches shouldn’t go where you want them when you miss, but there should at least be some logic as to why a pitch would end up where it does. Like what was mentioned earlier, if you release early it should hang more, if you release late it should end up lower than you intended. East/west should be pretty random though.
Yep, if you take the slider as an example, if the pitcher misses, it kind of equates to not putting enough spin on the ball and it not breaking enough
-
@yankblan_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
The mechanic shouldn’t be more difficult with low control pitchers, that’s the role of the PAR size. Some pitchers have trouble locating even if their mechanics are on point.
Good point.
-
@yankblan_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
The mechanic shouldn’t be more difficult with low control pitchers, that’s the role of the PAR size. Some pitchers have trouble locating even if their mechanics are on point.
Both should be affected by control, the PAR size will show potential location on perfect input, but the mechanic difficulty will determine input precision. Input precision should be harder with low control pitchers as well as potential PAR location size.
-
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@abbyspapa_psn said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
It is the same with pitching. If your pitcher has a 0 control rating, do you think he should have perfect control if you can hit a line on a swinging meter every time? I do not think so. I think if his ratings are low, even hitting the meter perfectly should not always give him the same output as a 99 pitcher. There needs to be a calculation, with the better pitcher having a much higher chance of his output being perfect than the card that has 0 for control. The guy with 0 control should still have a chance if you hit the line, but not as much of a chance as a 99 pitcher. But that is just how I see it.
If a pitcher has 0 control, achieving perfect input should be 99% harder than with a pitcher that has 99 control. But if you do get perfect input, the ball should go where you intended, whether they have 0 or 99 control.
I understand that is how you would like it to be. I disagree. I do not think they can make the meter 99x harder to hit the line as you suggest. There are players who can hit the line almost every time regardless of which player they are using. To me, that makes the game unrealistic when cards that suck can play that well. I understand the argument that if you are that good with your input then the card shouldn't matter, I just disagree.
The limitation is with the engine then, because they can't make input more or less difficult based off stats. So instead they use RNG to compensate for that limitation.
Ideally, you would have a baseline of input difficulty. This would go up or down based off control.
99 control = easiest input difficulty.
0 control = hardest input difficulty.The baseline difficulty would also move based off current pitcher energy and confidence.
This way a user with exceptional skills could paint with a pitcher with low control, while a user with low skills would struggle with a high control pitcher, therefore making "stick skills matter".
I think it is mostly that way now. Stick skills definitely matter. Players that are very good at the game usually win. I agree with the way you are thinking about it. In the end, however it is done, I want the cards and my input to both matter. AND I want realistic baseball.
I agree, but the scale is not wide enough between average and elite.
If I'm using PPP and trying to throw his 4th pitch with a guy with 45 control, 20% energy and confidence, I should have to paint a Jackson Pollack painting to achieve perfect input.
-
It'd be nice if SDS could have a game one year where the game play is good from the get go and they don't touch it all year. How does that not happen already after years and years of this game.
Also, this Moonshot event is not like last years. I am not that good at hitting or pitching but I could score quite a bit in this Moonshot event last year. my opponents are also not scoring near as much as last year either.
-
To me it seems like pitch speeds change from inning to inning after this new patch. One inning I’m way ahead next I can’t catch up to anything
