Community Forum

@foresticek_psn said in Countering base stealing:

How you can throw over to 1st on Playstation?

L2+circle, L2+triangle for 2nd

@halfbutt said in Dave Roberts / Pedro Baez / Kenley Jansen:

I mean I think you have to admit the baseball gods stepped in there. Brett Phillips first plate appearance in like 17 days? How does he look at the first two pitches in? And the sinker down and away? Then he somehow gets a cutter on the plate and flares it into shallow right? You could not write that.

Every called strike was outside the zone, he was locked in.

Reboot PS4? I have had this happen if I didn’t close the application and went into rest mode.

If you hit square on conquest map it will show the goals for the map, for inning conquest maps you have to complete all the goals

Strike zone always fades away right before pitcher throws when hitting

work the count and be patient

@vagimon said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@dantheranman said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

After playing the USA conquest map for the 8th time (at least) I finally got a diamond pull (from these specific free packs) but it was Trout. I had to double check my inventory in the middle of the night to make sure it wasn't a dream haha

Do packs in conquest refresh every time you Restart?

no, the only repeatable reward is the 10 pack from completing the U.S.A. map again

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

The 1 in 50? Don’t think so, but if it is, it’s not accurate at all.

98% chance per each individual pack not having a diamond player is accurate

Having more packs does not increase your odds. Same chance per pack

What theory are you using to say this? Based on a 2% per pack odds, How many packs would you say ia diamond should come out using your math expertise? Interested to hear it.

No expertise or theory needed to explain... every pack has same odds 1:50 of having a diamond in it.

There is no magical number of packs to buy that will produce a diamond player. Sure the more packs you buy the likelihood of getting a diamond from a pack is certain to happen at some point but the odds are not in your favor

That really doesn’t say anything tho. It’s basically says 1:50 odds shouldn’t produce 1 in 50 with nothing to actually prove that. I’d like to see what it’s based on.

Ok... get a standard deck of 52 cards and take 2 out. Let's say the ace of spades is in the 50 cards and this represents a diamond player. Have someone shuffle the cards and you choose one card and your goal is to select the ace of spades. After selecting the card you put it back in the deck and it is reshuffled for the next card draw. Do this 50 times and let me know how many times you select the ace of spades. This is what the odds are based on.

and this was confirmed where?

This is confirmed everywhere as this is how probability works. Not really hard to understand. The probability of getting a diamond player is around 2% but the probability of not getting a diamond player is 98% PER PACK.

It even says on the pack odds screen about the probability of getting diamond, gold, silver, or bronze players.

I understand probability, but the math doesn't add up, by your "probability" diamonds would be pulled roughly once every 1000 packs or so. I don't get one every 50 packs, but if i totaled up my packs i'd say it been close to 1 in every 60-65 packs, which shoots your claim to shame. So once again, where is it confirmed? Are the odds they list per pack or....what they're claiming the amount of packs to pull one is?

Obviously you don't... as your 1 in roughly a 1000 packs "math" suggests.

Pack odds screen has your confirmation which I mentioned before:

The probability of this pack containing 1 or more of the following items
1:50 85 Diamond or better Player Item
1:10 80 Gold or better Player Item
1:3 75 Silver or better Player Item
1:1 65 Bronze or better Player Item

Probability = the extent to which an event is likely to occur, measured by the ratio of the favorable cases to the whole number of cases possible. So it is likely that you would get 1 diamond player out of 50 packs, but it isn't a guarantee. You could get between 0-50 diamond players from 50 packs.

Pack is singular, that means 1, so per pack... nothing there about how many packs it should take, or any guarantee of a diamond player in your next 50 packs.

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

The 1 in 50? Don’t think so, but if it is, it’s not accurate at all.

98% chance per each individual pack not having a diamond player is accurate

Having more packs does not increase your odds. Same chance per pack

What theory are you using to say this? Based on a 2% per pack odds, How many packs would you say ia diamond should come out using your math expertise? Interested to hear it.

No expertise or theory needed to explain... every pack has same odds 1:50 of having a diamond in it.

There is no magical number of packs to buy that will produce a diamond player. Sure the more packs you buy the likelihood of getting a diamond from a pack is certain to happen at some point but the odds are not in your favor

That really doesn’t say anything tho. It’s basically says 1:50 odds shouldn’t produce 1 in 50 with nothing to actually prove that. I’d like to see what it’s based on.

Ok... get a standard deck of 52 cards and take 2 out. Let's say the ace of spades is in the 50 cards and this represents a diamond player. Have someone shuffle the cards and you choose one card and your goal is to select the ace of spades. After selecting the card you put it back in the deck and it is reshuffled for the next card draw. Do this 50 times and let me know how many times you select the ace of spades. This is what the odds are based on.

and this was confirmed where?

This is confirmed everywhere as this is how probability works. Not really hard to understand. The probability of getting a diamond player is around 2% but the probability of not getting a diamond player is 98% PER PACK.

It even says on the pack odds screen about the probability of getting diamond, gold, silver, or bronze players.

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

The 1 in 50? Don’t think so, but if it is, it’s not accurate at all.

98% chance per each individual pack not having a diamond player is accurate

Having more packs does not increase your odds. Same chance per pack

What theory are you using to say this? Based on a 2% per pack odds, How many packs would you say ia diamond should come out using your math expertise? Interested to hear it.

No expertise or theory needed to explain... every pack has same odds 1:50 of having a diamond in it.

There is no magical number of packs to buy that will produce a diamond player. Sure the more packs you buy the likelihood of getting a diamond from a pack is certain to happen at some point but the odds are not in your favor

That really doesn’t say anything tho. It’s basically says 1:50 odds shouldn’t produce 1 in 50 with nothing to actually prove that. I’d like to see what it’s based on.

Ok... get a standard deck of 52 cards and take 2 out. Let's say the ace of spades is in the 50 cards and this represents a diamond player. Have someone shuffle the cards and you choose one card and your goal is to select the ace of spades. After selecting the card you put it back in the deck and it is reshuffled for the next card draw. Do this 50 times and let me know how many times you select the ace of spades. This is what the odds are based on.

@Untchable704 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@copassatguy said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

The 1 in 50? Don’t think so, but if it is, it’s not accurate at all.

98% chance per each individual pack not having a diamond player is accurate

Having more packs does not increase your odds. Same chance per pack

What theory are you using to say this? Based on a 2% per pack odds, How many packs would you say ia diamond should come out using your math expertise? Interested to hear it.

No expertise or theory needed to explain... every pack has same odds 1:50 of having a diamond in it.

There is no magical number of packs to buy that will produce a diamond player. Sure the more packs you buy the likelihood of getting a diamond from a pack is certain to happen at some point but the odds are not in your favor

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

The 1 in 50? Don’t think so, but if it is, it’s not accurate at all.

98% chance per each individual pack not having a diamond player is accurate

Having more packs does not increase your odds. Same chance per pack

@phillydave35 said in More Free Packs=Lower Odds:

Not that it makes it right, but everyone does realize it doesn’t have to be a diamond player, right? I get more of those ridiculous nameplates and icons that they use to justify there odds than I’d like that’s for sure.

It’s specific to 85 and up players

I’m not sure it’s a game bug as much as a controller issue. I noticed it happens to me when I use one controller and never when I use a different one.

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

Maybe more pressing issues to fix than a banner?

If they couldn't fix the banner issue back in march, what makes you think they could handle more serious issues?

They fix issues every year, part of code development... as is worrying about more serious issues first over a banner that as far as I know isn’t game breaking

I know they fix issues every year, but why put in patch notes they fixed it when it wasn't...

Mistakes happen? They could have fixed one scenario causing the issue and a new way to manifest the problem occurred.

Isn’t that what testing is for? Most of these issues should have been fixed/improved by now. Company has been in business for awhile. They say it’s a new hitting engine every year, but it’s not. They have to reprogram it every year because they rush things after beta. It’s just a poorly ran business.

If you fix an issue and you think it’s fixed why and how would you test for something you didn’t know about? If you have a way to test for unknown issues please share as software developers everywhere would love to know.

@not_Jsaac said in Sds and showdown is a joke:

@Riican_2 said in Sds and showdown is a joke:

I truly don’t get how people struggle with it so much

I complained and got a warning on me account and had been 3 for 3 in showdowns.... since I got a suspension on my account I’ve gone 0 for 2 with the worst luck ever. I’m convinced my RNG was affected.

You get 20 outs. I had 11 good good lineouts. 2 diving plays And a 98mph bunt into a double play.

It’s hard to score 8 runs when in my belief my RNG has been affected. That’s 15 of 20 outs stolen from me

Maybe your expectations of winning every time is more the problem than you actually losing a couple of games?

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

Maybe more pressing issues to fix than a banner?

If they couldn't fix the banner issue back in march, what makes you think they could handle more serious issues?

They fix issues every year, part of code development... as is worrying about more serious issues first over a banner that as far as I know isn’t game breaking

I know they fix issues every year, but why put in patch notes they fixed it when it wasn't...

Mistakes happen? They could have fixed one scenario causing the issue and a new way to manifest the problem occurred.

@braydencombs said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

It’s not a big deal, but the fact that it’s been talked about constantly and still not fixed should tell you all you need to know about them

That nobody is perfect and that there will never be perfect code put out by them or anyone else that has ever written software?

I saw a typo in one of the descriptions for a Glasnow moment... they should probably fix that too cause it’s just as game breaking as the banner.

@kingss35 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@SteelyMacBeam said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

They've done a very poor job of addressing the bugs in the game this year. I understand the pandemic, but SDS is a tech company in the 21st century. There's enough technology out there to continue to work on the game while working remotely.

I'd prefer they focus on gameplay rather than releasing content. I'm fairly certain the last patch was placebo.

The pandemic isn’t an excuse since they’ve released roster updates and multiple innings with tons of extra content since launch

This is based on your assumption that they can conduct business the same way they could prior to shelter in place? They’ve probably had content ready to go since before the game was released. Roster updates would be easy to update too. I’ll throw out an assumption that the developers probably don’t have development kits at home to work on issues and would have to be onsite to do so and I doubt they are listed as essential.

@Matt_42187 said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

@copassatguy said in how have they still not fixed the HR banner:

Maybe more pressing issues to fix than a banner?

If they couldn't fix the banner issue back in march, what makes you think they could handle more serious issues?

They fix issues every year, part of code development... as is worrying about more serious issues first over a banner that as far as I know isn’t game breaking