DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS
-
My wheels are always turning in regards to how this game could be different. Sometimes my ideas are absolute garbage but sometimes they are a gem.
Have you ever considered making live series cards starting out as commons or two levels lower than previous year, at start of year. And based off of how well you do with them is how they progress. But at the same time the said card would have a ceiling based off of roster updates. When that ceiling is reached then it is collectible. Allowing premium type cards to be rolled out into packs?
For instance lets say i had Aaron Judge started off at highest silver and i progressed him to a 95 Diamond but it was only a 92 required to save him into LS Collection. Once i reached 92 i could choose to collect him. Or maybe he is having a bad year and his overall drops to an 84 and i have progressed him to 83 gold at that point, now only one more level then i can save him b/c roster update is now an 84.
This in turn would make it take longer for people to get the LS collection done so the LS cards would be more useful over time and not have LS Collections done on day 2 of games release. Or could also allow the LS Rewards not be revealed until a later date making competitive gameplay more balanced. This would also give staff more time to do other things and only doing roster update once a month?
Open for more discussion, just a brainstorm.
-
I like the thought of once a month roster updates. youd see less going up only to go down 2 weeks later (and vice versa) id think.
-
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
-
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
-
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Yeah I don't like your last idea. If I'm understanding you correctly the Live series collection would be the cost of 1 50 pack bundle on opening night. You would only have to open packs the one time.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Yeah I don't like your last idea. If I'm understanding you correctly the Live series collection would be the cost of 1 50 pack bundle on opening night. You would only have to open packs the one time.
No, because there would only be one card of each level in the pack. That's 6 cards. Five players and one item. There are 1,200 cards in the LS collection. That means a minimum of 240 packs. Because there aren't the same number of cards at each level (common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond) on a team, nor does each team have the same number of cards at each level, it would take significantly more packs to get the cards needed to complete the LS collection. And, as users begin to get dupes, those cards will be on the market to buy.
-
SDS isn't going to make the LS collection a stat grind, it's a huge money maker for them in the early game
-
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@the_dragon1912 said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Yeah I don't like your last idea. If I'm understanding you correctly the Live series collection would be the cost of 1 50 pack bundle on opening night. You would only have to open packs the one time.
No, because there would only be one card of each level in the pack. That's 6 cards. Five players and one item. There are 1,200 cards in the LS collection. That means a minimum of 240 packs. Because there aren't the same number of cards at each level (common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond) on a team, nor does each team have the same number of cards at each level, it would take significantly more packs to get the cards needed to complete the LS collection. And, as users begin to get dupes, those cards will be on the market to buy.
Your idea means 50 diamonds in 50 packs, you really think SDS is going to do that?
-
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@the_dragon1912 said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Yeah I don't like your last idea. If I'm understanding you correctly the Live series collection would be the cost of 1 50 pack bundle on opening night. You would only have to open packs the one time.
No, because there would only be one card of each level in the pack. That's 6 cards. Five players and one item. There are 1,200 cards in the LS collection. That means a minimum of 240 packs. Because there aren't the same number of cards at each level (common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond) on a team, nor does each team have the same number of cards at each level, it would take significantly more packs to get the cards needed to complete the LS collection. And, as users begin to get dupes, those cards will be on the market to buy.
There are less than 50 diamonds in the LS collection at the start of the year. Your idea literally cuts the pice of the live series collection down from 1.5 mil to 150k, at most
Not to mention that every single pack opened would guarantee 4000+ stubs returned. Either every single online card would have a million stub waitlist or they would have to stop giving out free packs -
@eatyum_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@the_dragon1912 said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Yeah I don't like your last idea. If I'm understanding you correctly the Live series collection would be the cost of 1 50 pack bundle on opening night. You would only have to open packs the one time.
No, because there would only be one card of each level in the pack. That's 6 cards. Five players and one item. There are 1,200 cards in the LS collection. That means a minimum of 240 packs. Because there aren't the same number of cards at each level (common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond) on a team, nor does each team have the same number of cards at each level, it would take significantly more packs to get the cards needed to complete the LS collection. And, as users begin to get dupes, those cards will be on the market to buy.
Your idea means 50 diamonds in 50 packs, you really think SDS is going to do that?
No, but 95% of the ideas put on this board will not be considered by SDS. My feelings aren't hurt if they don't like mine either. It doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see that change though.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR? Probabally the most played competive mode? And they force you to pay stubs to play the mode? I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
If i'm advocating for anything in my post it would be not allowing people to have a 99 end game type player day 2 LS Collection for only those who shell out money, and then hold events where said cards are obviously the most dominant and tell people to go up against said player for 60 win rewards. And in the same breath tell me events are fair for everyone
-
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Can't do it based on inventory. There's is to many packs being opened around the same time. Plus they would have to code it so once you received a pack; it would have to pull up your inventory. They can't even code the game right now.
Plus if they go by your inventory all someone has to do is put in an outrageous sell order for each Diamond they have and it won't include that card in their inventory.
-
@BIGPAPIx34x_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@Blind_Bleeder said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
I like the idea of live cards being set at the level the player is at on the field. It makes roster updates more meaningful. I like the idea of having monthly updates. This would also make roster updates more stable.
I would like to see the standard packs redesigned. One of each: item, common, bronze, silver, gold, and diamond based on the user's inventory. This would eliminate duplicates until the user has every card at each level. This would stimulate buying packs, and maybe even stubs because it would be more difficult to get them from flipping.
Can't do it based on inventory. There's is to many packs being opened around the same time. Plus they would have to code it so once you received a pack; it would have to pull up your inventory. They can't even code the game right now.
Plus if they go by your inventory all someone has to do is put in an outrageous sell order for each Diamond they have and it won't include that card in their inventory.
Good point!
-
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR?
BR != Ranked.
Probabally the most played competive mode?
I would guess Ranked is much more played than BR (the amount of WS rewards floating out there vs. the amount of Flawless rewards would seem to back that up, but I'm not a DEV and I don't have access to the back-end metrics, so we're both only guessing.
I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
Not everyone is a baseball nerd who wants to use the Orioles 4th starter and the A's backup catcher. They want to use the jacked-up versions of their favorite players both past and present. The only thing SDS can do is to parcel out those cards over the season and (other than 18), they've done a reasonably good job.
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR?
BR != Ranked.
Probabally the most played competive mode?
I would guess Ranked is much more played than BR (the amount of WS rewards floating out there vs. the amount of Flawless rewards would seem to back that up, but I'm not a DEV and I don't have access to the back-end metrics, so we're both only guessing.
I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
Not everyone is a baseball nerd who wants to use the Orioles 4th starter and the A's backup catcher. They want to use the jacked-up versions of their favorite players both past and present. The only thing SDS can do is to parcel out those cards over the season and (other than 18), they've done a reasonably good job.
Umm it is called " the year we dont mention".
you of all ppl i never would have thought i would have to tell that to. -
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR?
BR != Ranked.
Probabally the most played competive mode?
I would guess Ranked is much more played than BR (the amount of WS rewards floating out there vs. the amount of Flawless rewards would seem to back that up, but I'm not a DEV and I don't have access to the back-end metrics, so we're both only guessing.
I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
Not everyone is a baseball nerd who wants to use the Orioles 4th starter and the A's backup catcher. They want to use the jacked-up versions of their favorite players both past and present. The only thing SDS can do is to parcel out those cards over the season and (other than 18), they've done a reasonably good job.
I am well aware of what BR is and how i referred to it.
You are completely missing my point. And then trying to spin it into something else. Orioles 4th starter wtf are you talking about?
-
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR?
BR != Ranked.
Probabally the most played competive mode?
I would guess Ranked is much more played than BR (the amount of WS rewards floating out there vs. the amount of Flawless rewards would seem to back that up, but I'm not a DEV and I don't have access to the back-end metrics, so we're both only guessing.
I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
Not everyone is a baseball nerd who wants to use the Orioles 4th starter and the A's backup catcher. They want to use the jacked-up versions of their favorite players both past and present. The only thing SDS can do is to parcel out those cards over the season and (other than 18), they've done a reasonably good job.
I am well aware of what BR is and how i referred to it.
You are completely missing my point. And then trying to spin it into something else. Orioles 4th starter wtf are you talking about?
He is referencing the fact that from the sounds of it according to your idea of someone wants to complete the LS collection they have to grind with every single LS card. If I’m reading your post wrong let me know but that’s what I gathered from it too and in my opinion no thank you
-
@kovz88_MLBTS said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
Forcing people to use inferior cards isn’t a recipe for success. And advocating for fewer updates/less content seems … odd?!?
Oh really? Aren't they already forcing you to use "inferior cards" in BR?
BR != Ranked.
Probabally the most played competive mode?
I would guess Ranked is much more played than BR (the amount of WS rewards floating out there vs. the amount of Flawless rewards would seem to back that up, but I'm not a DEV and I don't have access to the back-end metrics, so we're both only guessing.
I never advocated for less content, i said less updates allowing Flashback n Legends being the cards you get in standard packs. Like the 85-88 that turn out to be irrelavant by AS break.
Not everyone is a baseball nerd who wants to use the Orioles 4th starter and the A's backup catcher. They want to use the jacked-up versions of their favorite players both past and present. The only thing SDS can do is to parcel out those cards over the season and (other than 18), they've done a reasonably good job.
I am well aware of what BR is and how i referred to it.
You are completely missing my point. And then trying to spin it into something else. Orioles 4th starter wtf are you talking about?
He is referencing the fact that from the sounds of it according to your idea of someone wants to complete the LS collection they have to grind with every single LS card. If I’m reading your post wrong let me know but that’s what I gathered from it too and in my opinion no thank you
Yes, you are reading it wrong. The idea i am suggesting is more of a long term collection idea. I will give a few hypotheticals to maybe clear it up. Again this is a "Rough draft suggestion".
So i suggested each card start 2 levels below what it was it's previous year. Those levels could be determined in different ways. One could be based off of tiers within a level. Like 85-88 diamond,89-93 is another tier,94-99 another tier however community agrees or developers were to implement.
Other level could be the simpler if they were a diamond previous year then they start off as a silver in new year but level of silver would factor into the level of diamond they were previously.
So for instance based off first example, if a LS card was a 95 diamond at final roster update previous year, but was determined to be a 92 diamond at start of the next version of game due to 3 year avg. Therefore due to my suggestion said card would start off as 83-84 gold.
Now with the once a month update this would allow the owner of said card to either use said card and upgrade it til it got to 92 diamond then that player is now lockable in the LS at that point. Once player is locked future roster update does not effect already locked cards. However if you are the type of person watching this player closely and you don't think it will maintain that 92 status and you think it might fall to 88 then you upgrade it to 88 and wait for update.
As far as how they are upgraded i feel like it could work similar to how pxp works only you are upgrading the overall of the card instead of a one time pxp attribute boost. So essentially still have pxp 1-5 like it is now, but also a pxp boost to overall. I will call this "OXP" (overall experience points)
This will allow for more market movement of LS cards throughout year until final roster update where prices for cards should reach highest cost and all levels locked for LS collection. Allowing the LS collection to not be collected within first few weeks of game.
Three other things to go along with that also to put a Maximum price of 150k on ALL LS cards ONLY and no minimum. And final collection rewards not unlocked until week of final roster Update making every TeamReward and Player, Div and League 99 Overalls of any card type in Flashback n Legend style. Once card is locked into collection overall can no longer progress. So if you lock it in as a 92 and it gets up to 95 ovr you are still only gonna have a player with 92 ovr attributes due to being locked in. So you might face same player somebody waited to lock in when it reached 95 perhaps.
As far as BR goes for the draft it will be based off ovr of the collection value not the upgraded value of player owned version. But use of card would still work toward owned version for use outside of BR.
So this would basically make final roster update uncollected comons all the way to Diamonds possibly worth up to 150 k max each. (max price negotiable 150 k migh be to high) just an example to try to make point.
-
@GrizzBear55_PSN said in DEAR SAN DIEGO STUDIOS:
My wheels are always turning in regards to how this game could be different. Sometimes my ideas are absolute garbage but sometimes they are a gem.
Have you ever considered making live series cards starting out as commons or two levels lower than previous year, at start of year. And based off of how well you do with them is how they progress. But at the same time the said card would have a ceiling based off of roster updates. When that ceiling is reached then it is collectible. Allowing premium type cards to be rolled out into packs?
For instance lets say i had Aaron Judge started off at highest silver and i progressed him to a 95 Diamond but it was only a 92 required to save him into LS Collection. Once i reached 92 i could choose to collect him. Or maybe he is having a bad year and his overall drops to an 84 and i have progressed him to 83 gold at that point, now only one more level then i can save him b/c roster update is now an 84.
This in turn would make it take longer for people to get the LS collection done so the LS cards would be more useful over time and not have LS Collections done on day 2 of games release. Or could also allow the LS Rewards not be revealed until a later date making competitive gameplay more balanced. This would also give staff more time to do other things and only doing roster update once a month?
Open for more discussion, just a brainstorm.
As someone who isn't a Legend level player, I don't like the suggestion about the live cards because it handicaps anyone who doesn't play at a high level. That's not fair at all.
-
We will say this is one of your garbage ideas
