Two Questions
-
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
Fake juiced cards are better than HOF cards based on real seasons/careers, because even though they are fake, they are still alive? That's the point you are trying to make?
Well, that's an opinion I guess.Where did anyone say "Fake juiced cards are better than HOF cards based on real seasons/careers, because even though they are fake, they are still alive?"
Is that you're bad attempt in creating a "straw man"?
I mean, how else would you describe it?
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@ballneverlie_xbl said in Two Questions:
Well comparing HOF and soon to be HOFers to players that havent done jack is a big difference.
Its a video game so whatever floats your boat. More content the better
There is a difference in what they have accomplished in real life, but those cards still have a better chance of becoming reality than those lineups that the people who are complaining they are unrealistic!
I don't even understand the argument that you're trying to make. Why do they have a better chance of becoming reality than the lineups with HOFers or potential HOFers? What ever that means anyway.
Go back to the original post!
Been there...
Still doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, you are helpless!
Well that's a creative way to have a discussion.
Why don't you enlighten me and explain it to me like I'm 5?
How is a lineup of future stars more realistic than a lineup of HOFers? I honestly do not understand the argument you're making, in particular because you haven't actually made one.
And I don't have any issues with future star cards...
With many of these legends in these lineups are dead, so there is definitely a zero chance of having these lineups become realistic, however there is still (however slight) a chance that these players in the FS cards become worthy at some point of those stats. Slight chance is greater than zero chance.
There's nothing that says anything card is better than any other card.
You know what I am saying.
Having future stars cards in the game are "better" than dead players cards because it's more realistic. That is your argument, not mine.That is not my argument! Again, creating a straw man!
Alright man. You do you. Keep fighting the good fight, or whatever it is you think you are doing here.
-
If people hate on FS players they better not be running out a CAP…
-
@washednd_psn said in Two Questions:
If people hate on FS players they better not be running out a CAP…
Hahaha, yes!
-
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
Fake juiced cards are better than HOF cards based on real seasons/careers, because even though they are fake, they are still alive? That's the point you are trying to make?
Well, that's an opinion I guess.Where did anyone say "Fake juiced cards are better than HOF cards based on real seasons/careers, because even though they are fake, they are still alive?"
Is that you're bad attempt in creating a "straw man"?
I mean, how else would you describe it?
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@ballneverlie_xbl said in Two Questions:
Well comparing HOF and soon to be HOFers to players that havent done jack is a big difference.
Its a video game so whatever floats your boat. More content the better
There is a difference in what they have accomplished in real life, but those cards still have a better chance of becoming reality than those lineups that the people who are complaining they are unrealistic!
I don't even understand the argument that you're trying to make. Why do they have a better chance of becoming reality than the lineups with HOFers or potential HOFers? What ever that means anyway.
Go back to the original post!
Been there...
Still doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, you are helpless!
Well that's a creative way to have a discussion.
Why don't you enlighten me and explain it to me like I'm 5?
How is a lineup of future stars more realistic than a lineup of HOFers? I honestly do not understand the argument you're making, in particular because you haven't actually made one.
And I don't have any issues with future star cards...
With many of these legends in these lineups are dead, so there is definitely a zero chance of having these lineups become realistic, however there is still (however slight) a chance that these players in the FS cards become worthy at some point of those stats. Slight chance is greater than zero chance.
There's nothing that says anything card is better than any other card.
You know what I am saying.
Having future stars cards in the game are "better" than dead players cards because it's more realistic. That is your argument, not mine.That is not my argument! Again, creating a straw man! In fact, I do not even have an "argument".
Lol what is the point of this thread then?
to say this game is unrealistic? That's a given. DD is a fantasy card building game. -
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
-
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@sauciestburrito_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@ballneverlie_xbl said in Two Questions:
Well comparing HOF and soon to be HOFers to players that havent done jack is a big difference.
Its a video game so whatever floats your boat. More content the better
There is a difference in what they have accomplished in real life, but those cards still have a better chance of becoming reality than those lineups that the people who are complaining they are unrealistic!
I don't even understand the argument that you're trying to make. Why do they have a better chance of becoming reality than the lineups with HOFers or potential HOFers? What ever that means anyway.
Go back to the original post!
Been there...
Still doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, you are helpless!
Well that's a creative way to have a discussion.
Why don't you enlighten me and explain it to me like I'm 5?
How is a lineup of future stars more realistic than a lineup of HOFers? I honestly do not understand the argument you're making, in particular because you haven't actually made one.
And I don't have any issues with future star cards...
With many of these legends in these lineups are dead, so there is definitely a zero chance of having these lineups become realistic, however there is still (however slight) a chance that these players in the FS cards become worthy at some point of those stats. Slight chance is greater than zero chance.
Bruh not a single person cares how realistic a lineup is in this game. You clearly don't understand the argument here
That is my point, they get all upset about how unreal the FS cards are, but not how unreal their lineups are! Which pretty much defeats their own argument of why they don't want to see FS cards!
You're being incredibly literal. Yes, it would be impossible for Mickey Mantle or Hank Aaron to play on a team today seeing as they are dead. But the ability of their cards is very real. Mickey Mantle and Hank Aaron actually accomplished those things. The Future Stars are alive....yes. but thus far, Edward Cabrera has not accomplished anything and thus his attributes are made up.
I get what you are trying to say, but I think you are missing what people complain about. Personally I think people are too hard on FS cards. When TA4 was announced, everyone wanted Adley Rutchman over Cal Ripken Jr. But now they don't want Spencer Torkelson. Not sure why....but I 100% understand that having a player who has yet to accomplish anything at the MLB level play superior to hall of famers is a little ridiculous.
-
@kovz88_psn said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_PSN
He's really not, you're just having a hard time understanding it.
All the HOFers in the game were not alive at the same point, therefore they could never be in the same lineup together.
Future Stars are all currently in the minors (some in majors) and therefore have a chance of being on the field together therefore making it more realistic.
There is you're 5 year old explanationWell that’s pretty dumb (it’s video game based on fantasy sports) but to be fair most of those HOFers were able up play in the same lineup together, whether on the same team or in AS games.
-
I feel like a lot of this discussion wouldn't have happened if Tork had been the Tigers TA4 and not an inning boss.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
-
@ericulous1_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@sauciestburrito_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@ballneverlie_xbl said in Two Questions:
Well comparing HOF and soon to be HOFers to players that havent done jack is a big difference.
Its a video game so whatever floats your boat. More content the better
There is a difference in what they have accomplished in real life, but those cards still have a better chance of becoming reality than those lineups that the people who are complaining they are unrealistic!
I don't even understand the argument that you're trying to make. Why do they have a better chance of becoming reality than the lineups with HOFers or potential HOFers? What ever that means anyway.
Go back to the original post!
Been there...
Still doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, you are helpless!
Well that's a creative way to have a discussion.
Why don't you enlighten me and explain it to me like I'm 5?
How is a lineup of future stars more realistic than a lineup of HOFers? I honestly do not understand the argument you're making, in particular because you haven't actually made one.
And I don't have any issues with future star cards...
With many of these legends in these lineups are dead, so there is definitely a zero chance of having these lineups become realistic, however there is still (however slight) a chance that these players in the FS cards become worthy at some point of those stats. Slight chance is greater than zero chance.
Bruh not a single person cares how realistic a lineup is in this game. You clearly don't understand the argument here
That is my point, they get all upset about how unreal the FS cards are, but not how unreal their lineups are! Which pretty much defeats their own argument of why they don't want to see FS cards!
You're being incredibly literal. Yes, it would be impossible for Mickey Mantle or Hank Aaron to play on a team today seeing as they are dead. But the ability of their cards is very real. Mickey Mantle and Hank Aaron actually accomplished those things. The Future Stars are alive....yes. but thus far, Edward Cabrera has not accomplished anything and thus his attributes are made up.
I get what you are trying to say, but I think you are missing what people complain about. Personally I think people are too hard on FS cards. When TA4 was announced, everyone wanted Adley Rutchman over Cal Ripken Jr. But now they don't want Spencer Torkelson. Not sure why....but I 100% understand that having a player who has yet to accomplish anything at the MLB level play superior to hall of famers is a little ridiculous.
Yes, I was being incredibly literal! Back in my original post, I mentioned Lloyd Christmas as a hint that this post also shouldn't be taken so serious!
-
Ahh, it's a troll post. That makes sense. Well done
-
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@sauciestburrito_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@sauciestburrito_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@dewrock_psn said in Two Questions:
@dap1234567890 said in Two Questions:
@ballneverlie_xbl said in Two Questions:
Well comparing HOF and soon to be HOFers to players that havent done jack is a big difference.
Its a video game so whatever floats your boat. More content the better
There is a difference in what they have accomplished in real life, but those cards still have a better chance of becoming reality than those lineups that the people who are complaining they are unrealistic!
I don't even understand the argument that you're trying to make. Why do they have a better chance of becoming reality than the lineups with HOFers or potential HOFers? What ever that means anyway.
Go back to the original post!
Been there...
Still doesn't make sense.
If you can't figure it out, you are helpless!
Well that's a creative way to have a discussion.
Why don't you enlighten me and explain it to me like I'm 5?
How is a lineup of future stars more realistic than a lineup of HOFers? I honestly do not understand the argument you're making, in particular because you haven't actually made one.
And I don't have any issues with future star cards...
With many of these legends in these lineups are dead, so there is definitely a zero chance of having these lineups become realistic, however there is still (however slight) a chance that these players in the FS cards become worthy at some point of those stats. Slight chance is greater than zero chance.
Bruh not a single person cares how realistic a lineup is in this game. You clearly don't understand the argument here
That is my point, they get all upset about how unreal the FS cards are, but not how unreal their lineups are! Which pretty much defeats their own argument of why they don't want to see FS cards!
You're still missing the point. FS get hate because they are given juiced up cards they haven't earned that are better than literal hall of famers. Legends cards are based off of actual stats, while FS are based off of projections. That's the argument. Has nothing to do with realism of lineups
No, I'm on point! You are just ignoring the point!
You clearly have no clue
-
@dolenz_psn said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
Again. Lars Nootbaar has 125 C 100 Power vs R for hitting a walkoff single. I don't see near the outrage for Topps now cards as I do for future stars. Hypothetically if Tork got called up tomorrow, hit a walk-off Homerun, had the same attributes with lower durability to keep the overall down as they do with the TN cards, that would be okay? Its just a really weird line to draw
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@dolenz_psn said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
Again. Lars Nootbaar has 125 C 100 Power vs R for hitting a walkoff single. I don't see near the outrage for Topps now cards as I do for future stars. Hypothetically if Tork got called up tomorrow, hit a walk-off Homerun, had the same attributes with lower durability to keep the overall down as they do with the TN cards, that would be okay? Its just a really weird line to draw
Lots of people complain about Topps Now cards. It all boils down to the same reason as FS cards, they are boosted above HOFers and players that actually earned high attributes. That is the entire reason for the outrage and disdain. Then, the rebuttal is about diversity, Immortals, and it circles back all over again.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@dolenz_psn said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
Again. Lars Nootbaar has 125 C 100 Power vs R for hitting a walkoff single. I don't see near the outrage for Topps now cards as I do for future stars. Hypothetically if Tork got called up tomorrow, hit a walk-off Homerun, had the same attributes with lower durability to keep the overall down as they do with the TN cards, that would be okay? Its just a really weird line to draw
Look, the Nootbar card is ridiculous too. Most Topps Now cards are at this stage. There is no way I should be opting to pinch hit Nootbaar over Edmonds with My Cardinals team but I do.
Their problem is that even those like me, who only play offline and never play the market, can have a team full of 98 and 99 players. I have not even complete a single stage of Team Affinities yet. If they release gold Topps Now cards then nobody would bother to even do the moments.
It is a conundrum.
-
Topps Now do have the same problems too, again I don’t mind them, but the Joey Wendle George Brett debate from a few weeks ago... I think my issue for Topps Now is more they ignore middle relievers who come in and get big strike outs or get out of jams and reward the .215 bench bat that lucks their way into a walk off... Otherwise, they’re fun cards, but very few usually make lineups... Jazz and Joey being exceptions.
-
This is an ultimate build squad mode. So that said, I want my team to be as overpowering, fake and unrealistic as possible...
-
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@dolenz_psn said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
Again. Lars Nootbaar has 125 C 100 Power vs R for hitting a walkoff single. I don't see near the outrage for Topps now cards as I do for future stars. Hypothetically if Tork got called up tomorrow, hit a walk-off Homerun, had the same attributes with lower durability to keep the overall down as they do with the TN cards, that would be okay? Its just a really weird line to draw
Lots of people complain about Topps Now cards. It all boils down to the same reason as FS cards, they are boosted above HOFers and players that actually earned high attributes. That is the entire reason for the outrage and disdain. Then, the rebuttal is about diversity, Immortals, and it circles back all over again.
I just don't understand the overwhelming excitement for Adley when he dropped and the overwhelming hate for Tork. Obviously a select few hate both but I'm taking them out of the equation for a second. I don't get the whole inning boss argument because even if Babe ruth and Trout were the other 2 bosses most would take hank just because he is new this year. Do you want a tough choice? just take Hank and be done with it. Is it because Adley plays catcher and Tork plays 3rd? I could have told anyone the second Chipper was announced as the live series reward that every 3rd baseman released in the entire game cycle would be worse than him. No one is forcing anyone to use Tork because he is better on paper than some legends. He's still not a part of the "meta" garbage so who cares
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@poksey_mlbts said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@dolenz_psn said in Two Questions:
@the_dragon1912 said in Two Questions:
@ikasnu_psn said in Two Questions:
My issue with Future Stars was there were too many of them in last year's game. I actually made a post about it, this was in response to TA2 and a few FS headliners coming out
They did a much better job this year of cycling them through, instead of lineups consisting of almost all FS cards, you only see a few. Which wasn't the case last year after TA2.
There are only 2 FS cards I don't like this year are Cabrera, for obvious reasons, and Pearson, because it seems like the only reason they used him again this year because he was an extreme reward last year. I love the future stars cards when they are top 10 prospects. Wander, Adley, Tork, Witt, and J-Rod are legitimately future stars of baseball. Robert Puason, Issac Paredes? There is certainly an argument that they shouldn't have diamond cards, but they were barely used at the time they came out so who cares
Well, the argument really popped up when we are getting a Future Stars Boss. One that most players have probably never heard of. One who leap frogs and is better than 3B legends like George Brett. One who leap frogs over current stars like Arenado.
I don't mind that the card exists but I do mind it being better than than the Hall of Famers. I do have a problem with it being a boss when there are so many cards that many of us are still waiting on.
Yes, every legend card has some fantasy stats built in to pad their overall. But they are usually not overly ridiculous. They don't give Ozzie Smith 100 plus power out of the blue. They don't give Gary Carter 99 speed.
Again. Lars Nootbaar has 125 C 100 Power vs R for hitting a walkoff single. I don't see near the outrage for Topps now cards as I do for future stars. Hypothetically if Tork got called up tomorrow, hit a walk-off Homerun, had the same attributes with lower durability to keep the overall down as they do with the TN cards, that would be okay? Its just a really weird line to draw
Lots of people complain about Topps Now cards. It all boils down to the same reason as FS cards, they are boosted above HOFers and players that actually earned high attributes. That is the entire reason for the outrage and disdain. Then, the rebuttal is about diversity, Immortals, and it circles back all over again.
I just don't understand the overwhelming excitement for Adley when he dropped and the overwhelming hate for Tork. Obviously a select few hate both but I'm taking them out of the equation for a second. I don't get the whole inning boss argument because even if Babe ruth and Trout were the other 2 bosses most would take hank just because he is new this year. Do you want a tough choice? just take Hank and be done with it. Is it because Adley plays catcher and Tork plays 3rd? I could have told anyone the second Chipper was announced as the live series reward that every 3rd baseman released in the entire game cycle would be worse than him. No one is forcing anyone to use Tork because he is better on paper than some legends. He's still not a part of the "meta" garbage so who cares
Obviously you arent talking about me, because I wont use Rutschman either. Why would I ever use him over Posada? Also, I would 100% take Ruth over Trout and Aaron.
-
@ministro787-_mlbts said in Two Questions:
This is an ultimate build squad mode. So that said, I want my team to be as overpowering, fake and unrealistic as possible...
So, you are looking to have fun and enjoy this game? I am unsure if that is allowed here!
