Third inning boss revealed
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Thank you Sr!
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Thank you Sir!
-
@Nanthrax_1 said in Third inning boss revealed:
@stewart1465 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Not sure why they are so slow to roll out good inning bosses. Was it 3rd inning last year where it was Henderson, Alomar and Verlander?
Ya it was.. keep in mind, these are prestige to 96.. so not as bad as it looks
And people asked for this. Last year there were all 99 line ups in the first 2 months. I’m enjoying the slower roll out, especially since these two are new and both have good swings. I’m trying to make an all switch hitting team and they’re definitely gonna be on it.
-
3 straight inning programs with underwhelming bosses. Wouldn’t be a problem except that 4 of the 5 XP bosses aren’t great either. I like Reggie. Don’t care about any of the others. I always get all the bosses, so I guess the joke is on me.
-
I actually really liked the last inning bosses. Hanram absolutely rakes and the card has always been a fan favorite in years past. The feller card is good if you can locate.
-
@The57Deluxe said in Third inning boss revealed:
3 straight inning programs with underwhelming bosses. Wouldn’t be a problem except that 4 of the 5 XP bosses aren’t great either. I like Reggie. Don’t care about any of the others. I always get all the bosses, so I guess the joke is on me.
It's still the early game. These cards shouldn't be expected to be late game meta players, like Billy Wagner. I like that these cards are sticking generally close to the overalls of the moment. We're seeing mid 90s cards start to appear, so these cards are mid 90s. And as said before, it's not like last year where every card was 98 or 99 at this point, and the game became a "choose your god" adventure
-
@Sayjinman said in Third inning boss revealed:
@bimblekay said in Third inning boss revealed:
My guess is the Bosses will be underwhelming this year as compared to last. The best cards will be found at the end of the TA paths, summer and fall. 99 Willie Mays will be the found at the end of the the Giants TA path for example...
I’m expecting the exact same thing! It’s the only reason I’m doing the Mariners, White Sox and Padres TA. Griffey Jr, Frank Thomas, Tony Gwynn 99s here I come!!
Yes! My thoughts exactly
-
I don't mind. Don't have the pressure to grind for 300 stars now. Can just keep taking my sweet time playing MTO. Hell I think I'm only at 210? stars for this program.
-
@MaxHarvest said in Third inning boss revealed:
Plenty of good card in the game I’m fine w the two L’s if they throw us a bone w the last boss, a good reliver please
How is a diamond 2B with high contact, high vision, some potential pop, 50 steal speed, and a switch hitter an L??? Might be the best 2B on the market, and in the game you would need Sandberg or Vidal to best him.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
-
modules:composer.user_said_in, @SteelyMacBeam, Third inning boss revealed
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
Its not a problem unless anyone makes it a problem. They are just ratings. This game is supposed to be fun. If it weren’t for boosted ratings on “undeserving” players there would be no point in playing DD whatsoever because everyones lineup would look exactly like this:
Piazza (his swing is garbage but always has the best hitting attributes)
1B: Gehrig/Foxx/Pujols
2B: Alomar
SS: Honus Wagner
3B: Chipper
LF/RF- Williams/Ruth
CF-Mays/Mantle/ GriffeyNo one would use any other cards in their lineup if the ratings truly represented how good a player was. Im sure you saw MLB 18. Every lineup was the same from July until the release of MLB 19. Lineup diversity IMO is far more important to keep a game fresh than having realistic ratings
-
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
-
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
-
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
-
@Soucy81 said in Third inning boss revealed:
I don't mind. Don't have the pressure to grind for 300 stars now. Can just keep taking my sweet time playing MTO. Hell I think I'm only at 210? stars for this program.
You should always try and get to 300 stars! Even if you don't like any of the choices, just sell them and you will have a lot of stubs! 30,000 stubs is around $25 if you were to buy them...
-
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
Sure, but look at the immortals and career arc players. Everyone of them were HOFers or will be.
The 99s were
Berra, Piazza, Brett, Eckersley, Trout, Kershaw, Jackie, Musial, Ted Williams, Ripken, Chipper, Ruth, Griffey, Pujols, Seaver, Gossage, Ryan, Wagner, Gibson, Sandberg, Feller.All are deserving of being rated amongst the best. You want to flip Schmidt and Chipper, that's fine with me. The difference was one rating was based on best of career, while the other was based on a particular year. The ratings were at least somewhat fair and not inflated for the sake of "lineup diversity". If all that matters is lineup diversity and attributes, then it wouldnt matter if they made Papa Smurf and Pikachu and gave them 95 rated cards too. There has to be a rhyme or reason for rating systems.
And yes, I wouldve complained about 17 or 19 for that reason as well.
-
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
Sure, but look at the immortals and career arc players. Everyone of them were HOFers or will be.
The 99s were
Berra, Piazza, Brett, Eckersley, Trout, Kershaw, Jackie, Musial, Ted Williams, Ripken, Chipper, Ruth, Griffey, Pujols, Seaver, Gossage, Ryan, Wagner, Gibson, Sandberg, Feller.All are deserving of being rated amongst the best. You want to flip Schmidt and Chipper, that's fine with me. The difference was one rating was based on best of career, while the other was based on a particular year. The ratings were at least somewhat fair and not inflated for the sake of "lineup diversity". If all that matters is lineup diversity and attributes, then it wouldnt matter if they made Papa Smurf and Pikachu and gave them 95 rated cards too. There has to be a rhyme or reason for rating systems.
And yes, I wouldve complained about 17 or 19 for that reason as well.
There's an ocean of difference between juicing cards of actual ballplayers and projections for the sake of a more interesting roster, and "adding Papa smurf". Heck, this the game had NPB players like Sadaharu Oh and Koji Yamamoto, I would be even happier. Also, as much as I love Chase Utley and Albert Belle, they won't make the Hall of Fame
-
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
Sure, but look at the immortals and career arc players. Everyone of them were HOFers or will be.
The 99s were
Berra, Piazza, Brett, Eckersley, Trout, Kershaw, Jackie, Musial, Ted Williams, Ripken, Chipper, Ruth, Griffey, Pujols, Seaver, Gossage, Ryan, Wagner, Gibson, Sandberg, Feller.All are deserving of being rated amongst the best. You want to flip Schmidt and Chipper, that's fine with me. The difference was one rating was based on best of career, while the other was based on a particular year. The ratings were at least somewhat fair and not inflated for the sake of "lineup diversity". If all that matters is lineup diversity and attributes, then it wouldnt matter if they made Papa Smurf and Pikachu and gave them 95 rated cards too. There has to be a rhyme or reason for rating systems.
And yes, I wouldve complained about 17 or 19 for that reason as well.
There's an ocean of difference between juicing cards of actual ballplayers and projections for the sake of a more interesting roster, and "adding Papa smurf". Heck, this the game had NPB players like Sadaharu Oh and Koji Yamamoto, I would be even happier. Also, as much as I love Chase Utley and Albert Belle, they won't make the Hall of Fame
Papa Smurf has played the same amount of MLB games as most of those fabricated future stars players. That's the point. Some people only look at the animations and attributes and that's all that matters. It could be Ryan Gosling, Ariana Grande, or Papa Smurf, and as long as the attributes looked good, that's all that would matter to them.
I look at the players as representations of the actual player. There are others like me, who prefer more realistic representations over complete fabrications.
You are right that both Utley and Belle arent deserving of HOF. But they at least were considered amongst the best at their positions for a prolonged period of time. I guess I should have said "almost all".
-
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
Sure, but look at the immortals and career arc players. Everyone of them were HOFers or will be.
The 99s were
Berra, Piazza, Brett, Eckersley, Trout, Kershaw, Jackie, Musial, Ted Williams, Ripken, Chipper, Ruth, Griffey, Pujols, Seaver, Gossage, Ryan, Wagner, Gibson, Sandberg, Feller.All are deserving of being rated amongst the best. You want to flip Schmidt and Chipper, that's fine with me. The difference was one rating was based on best of career, while the other was based on a particular year. The ratings were at least somewhat fair and not inflated for the sake of "lineup diversity". If all that matters is lineup diversity and attributes, then it wouldnt matter if they made Papa Smurf and Pikachu and gave them 95 rated cards too. There has to be a rhyme or reason for rating systems.
And yes, I wouldve complained about 17 or 19 for that reason as well.
There's an ocean of difference between juicing cards of actual ballplayers and projections for the sake of a more interesting roster, and "adding Papa smurf". Heck, this the game had NPB players like Sadaharu Oh and Koji Yamamoto, I would be even happier. Also, as much as I love Chase Utley and Albert Belle, they won't make the Hall of Fame
Papa Smurf has played the same amount of MLB games as most of those fabricated future stars players. That's the point. Some people only look at the animations and attributes and that's all that matters. It could be Ryan Gosling, Ariana Grande, or Papa Smurf, and as long as the attributes looked good, that's all that would matter to them.
I look at the players as representations of the actual player. There are others like me, who prefer more realistic representations over complete fabrications.
You are right that both Utley and Belle arent deserving of HOF. But they at least were considered amongst the best at their positions for a prolonged period of time. I guess I should have said "almost all".
Here's where you're disconnecting with yourself. All the Prospect cards were prospects that were highly touted, and have good potentials. Future Star's cards is the same, but on another level. I have no issue with them using their newly acquired Minor League rights like this. Having prospects that are rated well get good cards in this game is extremely different than fantasy characters. In fact, it's at the same level as Faces of The Franchise cards. Were you irritated when Matthew Boyd got a, 86? Or when Brian Anderson got an 85? Do Finest cards bother you, like when Nola had a 92?
-
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@formallyforearms said in Third inning boss revealed:
@ImDFC said in Third inning boss revealed:
@SteelyMacBeam said in Third inning boss revealed:
@the_dragon1912 said in Third inning boss revealed:
Before anyone complains about these bosses you gotta know this is a DIRECT result of the complaints of the “there are way too many 99s I can’t compete” crowd from last year
Well the problem is that they inflate the ratings of cards like....well...Shane Victorino. Good player but at no point in his career was he a 90 rated player.
They've been juicing cards as long as DD has existed. I don't understand why it's only become an issue recently
I've only played 18 and now 20. I wouldve had an issue with any year prior to this if I played it. Pepe Alazar, 90+ rated Victorino, 90+ rated players who haven't ever played in the majors, all are equally terrible ideas.
You would've hated 17, when players like Koji Uehara, Wade Davis, Bret Saberhagen, and Mike Scott had 99s, And Kenley Jansen not only had a 99, he also had a 98! At the end of the day, DD is a fantasy mode, so you're going to get fantasy ratings, and you've always gotten a lot of them (Chipper Jones better than Mike Schmidt, for example. Nobody with a functioning brain would think that's the case, but in MLB 18 one had a 99 and the other didn't)
Sure, but look at the immortals and career arc players. Everyone of them were HOFers or will be.
The 99s were
Berra, Piazza, Brett, Eckersley, Trout, Kershaw, Jackie, Musial, Ted Williams, Ripken, Chipper, Ruth, Griffey, Pujols, Seaver, Gossage, Ryan, Wagner, Gibson, Sandberg, Feller.All are deserving of being rated amongst the best. You want to flip Schmidt and Chipper, that's fine with me. The difference was one rating was based on best of career, while the other was based on a particular year. The ratings were at least somewhat fair and not inflated for the sake of "lineup diversity". If all that matters is lineup diversity and attributes, then it wouldnt matter if they made Papa Smurf and Pikachu and gave them 95 rated cards too. There has to be a rhyme or reason for rating systems.
And yes, I wouldve complained about 17 or 19 for that reason as well.
There's an ocean of difference between juicing cards of actual ballplayers and projections for the sake of a more interesting roster, and "adding Papa smurf". Heck, this the game had NPB players like Sadaharu Oh and Koji Yamamoto, I would be even happier. Also, as much as I love Chase Utley and Albert Belle, they won't make the Hall of Fame
Papa Smurf has played the same amount of MLB games as most of those fabricated future stars players. That's the point. Some people only look at the animations and attributes and that's all that matters. It could be Ryan Gosling, Ariana Grande, or Papa Smurf, and as long as the attributes looked good, that's all that would matter to them.
I look at the players as representations of the actual player. There are others like me, who prefer more realistic representations over complete fabrications.
You are right that both Utley and Belle arent deserving of HOF. But they at least were considered amongst the best at their positions for a prolonged period of time. I guess I should have said "almost all".
Here's where you're disconnecting with yourself. All the Prospect cards were prospects that were highly touted, and have good potentials. Future Star's cards is the same, but on another level. I have no issue with them using their newly acquired Minor League rights like this. Having prospects that are rated well get good cards in this game is extremely different than fantasy characters. In fact, it's at the same level as Faces of The Franchise cards. Were you irritated when Matthew Boyd got a, 86? Or when Brian Anderson got an 85? Do Finest cards bother you, like when Nola had a 92?
Some of those do bug me, but the majority of them have at the very least, proven capable and/or successful at the major league level. The finest cards are rewarding players for having the best seasons of that year. They boost them to overly high levels, but I can reconcile that knowing it's at the end of the year, and they at minimum earned a right to be boosted, based on their play that season.
