Obviously not this year
-
@the_canuckler said in Obviously not this year:
Trust me when I say it’s not worth responding to OP
Minersvillemafia 2.0
-
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
-
@the_canuckler said in Obviously not this year:
Trust me when I say it’s not worth responding to OP
But it is ok for you and your crowd to go to every thread i create and try to sabotage conversation?
I made a thread welcoming xbox users and i am nothing but nice and that is who i am.
your little group is just pissed b/c i don't back down from your bs thread derailing posts. Just like the one i just quoted! Litearally had nothing to do with convo just personal bashing trying to influence new readers. You are pathetic
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
-
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
-
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
It is just another avenue to play offline, except there would actually be a point in playing 9 inning games vs the CPU. No need to get rid of Conquest.
I would imagine the rewards would be packs and stubs. I suppose they can add choice packs, specific cards, XP, or whatever else as well. Usually the reward levels are tiered, with rewards being packs and stubs.
-
- Repayable
- Rewards based on difficulty selected.
- BR / Events type restrictions to force you to use different cards.
- CPU theme teams.
think babe ruth grind from last year but entirely in conquest.
it would be nice to have best of each team/ division/ league/ coast or area/ card type teams to play. - Wouldn't be opposed to some maps with 6 or 9 inning games occasionally.
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
It is just another avenue to play offline, except there would actually be a point in playing 9 inning games vs the CPU. No need to get rid of Conquest.
I would imagine the rewards would be packs and stubs. I suppose they can add choice packs, specific cards, XP, or whatever else as well. Usually the reward levels are tiered, with rewards being packs and stubs.
Sounds like something i would do as long as it doesn't replace conquest. And are you using whatever players you want? Or are there parameters?
-
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
It is just another avenue to play offline, except there would actually be a point in playing 9 inning games vs the CPU. No need to get rid of Conquest.
I would imagine the rewards would be packs and stubs. I suppose they can add choice packs, specific cards, XP, or whatever else as well. Usually the reward levels are tiered, with rewards being packs and stubs.
Sounds like something i would do as long as it doesn't replace conquest. And are you using whatever players you want? Or are there parameters?
Maybe a new "barn storming" mode or something along those lines would be really cool. I just really want them to not have any full games within moments. full games should be in conquest or another mode.
-
@agent512_psn said in Obviously not this year:
- Repayable
- Rewards based on difficulty selected.
- BR / Events type restrictions to force you to use different cards.
- CPU theme teams.
think babe ruth grind from last year but entirely in conquest.
it would be nice to have best of each team/ division/ league/ coast or area/ card type teams to play. - Wouldn't be opposed to some maps with 6 or 9 inning games occasionally.
So moments meet conquest interesting!
-
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
It is just another avenue to play offline, except there would actually be a point in playing 9 inning games vs the CPU. No need to get rid of Conquest.
I would imagine the rewards would be packs and stubs. I suppose they can add choice packs, specific cards, XP, or whatever else as well. Usually the reward levels are tiered, with rewards being packs and stubs.
Sounds like something i would do as long as it doesn't replace conquest. And are you using whatever players you want? Or are there parameters?
You can use whatever you want. It's not events. If you want to use your best team, or a team to complete dailies or TA, that up to you.
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
The way other games do it, you can choose the difficulty level you want to play on, and the reward points you receive coincide with your performance against that team, on that difficulty.
Probably 1 game per weekday, 2 on the weekends would be the sweet spot for amount of games.
Is it 1 time play through? For instance someone can't play it on rookie get rewards and then play on veteran? Essentially double dipping?
You play the battle once, on your chosen difficulty. That's all you get. Then you wait for the next battle to be active.
So this mode wouldn't replace conquest just be another avenue for offline rewards?
What kind of rewards would you suggest? Are we talking diamond players or just perhaps packs, stub, and xp?
It is just another avenue to play offline, except there would actually be a point in playing 9 inning games vs the CPU. No need to get rid of Conquest.
I would imagine the rewards would be packs and stubs. I suppose they can add choice packs, specific cards, XP, or whatever else as well. Usually the reward levels are tiered, with rewards being packs and stubs.
Sounds like something i would do as long as it doesn't replace conquest. And are you using whatever players you want? Or are there parameters?
You can use whatever you want. It's not events. If you want to use your best team, or a team to complete dailies or TA, that up to you.
Then i have a problem with it if that's the case. People who spend money on players (early game) would have advantage. Rewards would then have to be same for everyone along with difficulty.
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
Im hearing ‘meaningful games vs CPU’, I’m thinking ‘Franchise mode’
Solution would be to allow DD cards to be used in Franchise mode. Everybody wins.
-
I really miss Solo Battlees in DD. Because except of Conquest, there is nothing where you can use your team offline.
When you complete Conquest once, there is no point in playing it for second time. In Solo Battles you could get rewards weekly based on your skill and difficulty on what you played those games -
@red_ted_is_back said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
Im hearing ‘meaningful games vs CPU’, I’m thinking ‘Franchise mode’
Solution would be to allow DD cards to be used in Franchise mode. Everybody wins.
You are missing the point. The collection part of DD. Completionists are a major section of DD players.
-
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
@red_ted_is_back said in Obviously not this year:
@formallyforearms said in Obviously not this year:
Solo/squad battles would be a nice addition for the strictly offline crowd. It gives users an opportunity to play meaningful 9 inning games against the CPU.
Im hearing ‘meaningful games vs CPU’, I’m thinking ‘Franchise mode’
Solution would be to allow DD cards to be used in Franchise mode. Everybody wins.
You are missing the point. The collection part of DD. Completionists are a major section of DD players.
Yes I did. I’m a non-DD player so I hope you can forgive me. I still think I might have something though
-
@foresticek_psn said in Obviously not this year:
I really miss Solo Battlees in DD. Because except of Conquest, there is nothing where you can use your team offline.
When you complete Conquest once, there is no point in playing it for second time. In Solo Battles you could get rewards weekly based on your skill and difficulty on what you played those gamesYou can use DD Cards to play CPU Offline 9 inning games.
Playing conquest is more than just the hidden rewards 1 time only.
Some like it b/c it is only 3 inning games. You can also use conquest as a tool for daily missions. 15 inning with dodgers players for instance._ put players from dodgers play 1 game and you have daily reward.
Or you can stack you team with specific player to work towards team affinity. The whole time earning xp and program points as well.
It is a strategy mode like Risk, which is one of the reasons why i would like to see dif starting points on US map.
-
I’ve had nothing but positive interactions on this forum and will continue to do so..it’s a known fact that there are people that play strictly offline..it’s a known fact that there’s people that focus online..people do conquest for inning stars...or certain programs. You shouldn’t be so insecure about a video game dude lighten up..quit complaining about being talked down too when you obviously weren’t, then try and talk down to other by trying to flex that you have a famous ball player in the family. Grow up
@grizzbear55_psn said in Obviously not this year:
@htonsecurity5x said in Obviously not this year:
I dunno..it gets pretty menotonous, but I do understand the importance of conquest to the offline playing crowd.
And why would you automatically call it a mode for the offline "crowd?"
So am i to assume the "online" crowd doesn't play it to gain points for Boss cards? Or the "Online Crowd" never plays it to gain points for the team affinity?
Get the hell outta here with your poor attempt of trying to split community into online or offline groups. Can't stand people like you that try present themselves as a superior to others. Why because you play MP? The game is Baseball the love of the game is why we all buy it.
And you even described it as "monotonous" so maybe all the more reason to maybe spruce it up.
-
Ans to add, I’d like to see more conquests for all stages of affinity. As well as programs. There should be one conquest map per week or bi weekly for something..there is no point of playing a conquest map twice. If you’re looking for the 15 inning daily mission. Load up your team play vs cpu as the home team and play an inning and a half and be done with it...when the new game drops and the content is coming wide open, repeating conquests isn’t an option
