This is the patch that will turn people away
-
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
-
@vipersneak_mlbts said in This is the patch that will turn people away:
".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.
That's probably true...and, if that actually consistently holds true in the game (which I'm skeptical) I can't disagree. But, if it floats around randomly..that shoots a huge hole in your logic.
-
A admin locked this topic on
