Community Forum

I think as an idea it's great. I also think they implemented it in the literal worst way they could have.

Having some form of Power-Up/Prestige program is perfectly fine with me. But limiting it to online only is a terrible call. The generic +3 that was featured this year wasn't really that amazing for most cards. Some crossed certain thresholds or had various effects like that, but overall it just wasn't enough to really move the needle that much. It was more of a "badge of honor" type thing for those that grinded online a lot. Which, fair play, as rewarding people for playing the game is sensible.

But I still see no reason why it can't be a combined effort between online and offline. As Chuck mentioned above, the way they developed the various programs with a mix of online and offline missions is the way to go. I didn't really touch Ranked all year because I just didn't enjoy how the game played online this year. I spent a fair amount in Events, though, and usually got annoyed by people trying to boost before the gameplay annoyed me. These types of things shouldn't really affect the way people play.

So if people can earn them offline, that's even better. For those that don't want to play online at all, they can still earn something new and it will keep them engaged with the game. Even if there IS an online requirement for ABs or IP or something, with a loose requirement like that it should deter a lot of people from boosting. Instead of being able to go in and attempt to boost for Hits or XBH or K's or whatever, if you just need x Plate Appearances then you're much more likely to play. If you need 211 IP with a pitcher, you're much more likely to actually play.

My galaxy brain theory was that something like this was being introduced in 2021 with how the strike zone played in 2020. But now I'm not so sure.

It would add some variance to roster construction, but exactly how much? If Piazza was more readily available and had terrible framing attributes, would everyone still use him because he mashes? With how the game plays I don't know that it would actually end up mattering all that much and would probably create added frustration since it literally would just be added RNG. Everyone was using Foxx even though he had less than stellar defensive ratings. Power/offense reigns supreme.

They'd really have to overhaul defense significantly for the defense to matter more in general. If they added in a pitch framing mechanic it could open a whole new can of worms. Plus, with the eventual Rise of the RoboUmps, I'm not sure it would even be worth the devtime to innovate, test and implement.

If they aren't going to use dedicated servers or have some way of seeing what the connection will be like then having some way of backing out of a laggy game is necessary.

I don't care if I'm the away team. I like the variety and the occasional stadium that isn't Shippett. I do care if I'm going to be in an absurdly laggy game that eats up the relatively minimal time I have to play the game.

This is on SDS to fix the server and latency situation. I know what everyone is saying in regards to home hunting but there will always be people on each side of an extreme. Before I realized you could test the connection last year, I ended up in games that were so laggy and terrible that it made me want to stop playing the game entirely. And within the confines of Ranked, deciding to just ditch a game due to latency and have to work twice as hard to climb isn't a great experience.

They either need to make pitch speeds universal with PCI size decreasing as you go, or introduce a difficulty-specific set of playlists for people to choose from.

I understand not wanting to alienate people that can't handle HoF or above. But I also avoided RS most of the year because I just don't want to play this game on All-Star in a "competitive environment." So it works both ways in a sense.

Have an AS playlist, HoF playlist and Legend playlist. AS can be for casual players or folks that just want to avoid too many sweaty games or to even try out cards. HoF can be for people like me that want competitive games where strategy and skill/input need to matter more. And Legend can be there for the highest level players to play each other without having to grind through lower levels "just because" and just open up the freedom to play.

I'd happily jump into a Legend game not expecting to win but expecting the game to be more tense and assume I'm gonna struggle against great players. I'd play almost exclusively on HoF. I would never play AS.

This is one of the only games I can remember playing online where I couldn't actually choose what I was playing and get forced to just go through the motions.

@bhall09 said in Theme teams:

What are some theme teams you like to use? Conquest is getting rather boring and I’ve still got 3-4 teams I want to finish. I’ve done all the other maps and still about half the team ones to go. Looking for ways to change it up, maybe freshen it up so I can at least finish off these last few without beating my head against a wall.

Do you have all the Affinity stuff maxed out? If you still have missions available to grind that's what I've been doing. Just mixing and matching to grind affinity missions combined with dailies when I have them.

I know some people have been constructing "Rival" teams for the Conquest maps. Like if you play the Braves, only use players that are rivals of that team. That sounds like a fun way to add variety without stretching too far.

I'd love something like this. If it was expanded to be able to adjust line-ups or possibly even do exchanges through the app that would be amazing. Not sure how viable that stuff is but just a basic market application would be appreciated.

I just got Chipper today. I don't remember the timestamp but I believe my order was placed on 10/29. Just passing along for those still waiting.

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”

1. What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?

2. Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?

This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.

I would assume the "Jammed penalty" is simply a reduction in your chances for a positive outcome on a result that reads "jammed." I don't think it's something that carries over. Or if it does, I would assume the more "jammed" results you end up with the less likely you are able to get hits with that result.

If it does carry over, if - That’s where the problems start for me. You can’t have hidden cumulative penalties that you don’t know you’re racking up and don’t know how to get rid of, or if they expire. That’s then into the realms of nerfing good swings because the game says “I don’t think you’ve taken enough pitches, or you’ve been jammed too often.” That would indeed be the much maligned “RNG trumping user input” we hear so often with no proof.

Agreed 100%. The game does a better job confusing the player than helping them potentially improve. I've had to dumb myself down so much to continue playing the game without quitting again and accepting that the game is what it is. I remember seeing that big patch they put out that added the new swing feedback info and laughed because I don't think it made anything clearer - I think it just added more variables that lead to confusion.

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

“To combat inflated offense, certain hitting mechanics are slightly harder in DD games and certain penalties for mistakes are also higher. Most of these result in making it slightly harder to put the ball in play (fouls and misses), with flexible hitting and waiting for a better pitch being key. As another example, even though Babe Ruth can hit occasional home runs while jammed, in DD the jammed penalty ramps up slightly faster and these kind of opposite field home runs should be less frequent than normal. Similar rules exist for chasing pitches out of the strike zone etc.”

1. What the hell is a “jammed penalty” and where do I find that explanation?!?

2. Once I’ve incurred a penalty for being jammed or chasing pitches out of the zone, how do I become unpenalized? When do I lose this invisible black mark against my name? Or is that not how it works? Where can I find this explanation?

This your RNG right here. Unexplained invisible penalties that nerf you based on strange factors like trying to hit too many jammed home runs with Babe Ruth.

I would assume the "Jammed penalty" is simply a reduction in your chances for a positive outcome on a result that reads "jammed." I don't think it's something that carries over. Or if it does, I would assume the more "jammed" results you end up with the less likely you are able to get hits with that result.

Primary Sinker.
Secondary Sinker.
Sinker.
Sinker.
Sinker.

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@thepapadell said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.

I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.

The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.

I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.

In one of their updates/patch-note drops this year, they did specify something about pitch type and location being a big factor in hit result.

If you look at this example specifically, you had Chapman pitching. He throws very hard so it's not out of the question that your opponent could have been late. I guess you would have the context for where their bat speed was before that pitch. But if your opponent was swinging late, then a change-up on the outer half would have sped their bat up considerably and with a hitter like Arenado, a good swing in that instance would (hopefully) produce a hit and most likely an XBH.

He was early swinging most of the game, I started Darvish and he was cruising with a 5-1 lead until the previous inning, when it got out of hand and ended up tied at 5-5. I pulled Darvish for a PH and brought in Chapman to face Griffey, Arenado and Soto. He eventually struck out with Griffey on a slider breaking down and away. That was the first pitch of the next AB to Arenado, I was looking to throw the change up down and away and hopefully steal a strike or induce a rollover. My input wasn’t great, releasing the ball early, which left it higher than intended and Arenado promptly dumped it out.

I find these discussions fascinating because we don't know how the game actually works.

If your input wasn't optimal, which obviously left the pitch up, then whatever that factored into the outcome was surely buoyed by their timing on the swing. I guess we could try to go deep in analyzing Darvish's speeds versus Chapman but a breakdown of each and every swing wouldn't amount to much.

It's also possible that your opponent simply ran into one. If you missed your input and the pitch was left in a hittable position, even someone struggling with timing all game could pop one out at a moment's notice.

@ComebackLogic said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

@mitchhammond24 said in Analysis of an opposite field home run:

The swings are often weird like that in the replays. I think it was great input by the opponent tho.

I don’t have an issue with the outcome, Arenado is entitled to go with that pitch, but after the game, the analysis showed PCI placement as a 9. I honestly can’t define that as great input personally, if it’s accurate, which is kind of what I’m asking for opinions on.

The feedback makes no sense in the context of the batted ball outcome, unless as @theu715 and @thepapadell suggested, by design, the game now adjusts for pitch speed, location and break when considering what should be deemed good or bad timing for each individual swing. You’d think that would be ground breaking and revolutionise hitting completely, but it’s still not really working in my opinion. Plus SDS don’t tell us what they’re trying to show in such instances, so we’re generally unsure if it’s just a random occurrence or a small part of a greater design.

I’m sure I could post another thread that would contradict this line of thought as the game is just so inconsistent overall.

In one of their updates/patch-note drops this year, they did specify something about pitch type and location being a big factor in hit result.

If you look at this example specifically, you had Chapman pitching. He throws very hard so it's not out of the question that your opponent could have been late. I guess you would have the context for where their bat speed was before that pitch. But if your opponent was swinging late, then a change-up on the outer half would have sped their bat up considerably and with a hitter like Arenado, a good swing in that instance would (hopefully) produce a hit and most likely an XBH.

The ball not touching the bat is probably some form of desynch.

In terms of the swing and result, I actually don't see an issue. Pitches on the outer part of the plate require "later" timing to be "good" in the game. To put it in baseball terms, the hitter let the ball travel through the zone before getting the barrel to the ball and driving it to RF. In MLB: The Show terms, they swung later. From an objective point-of-view this doesn't appear to be a bad result and not as bad as some swing outcomes can be in the game.

@ComebackLogic said in To all the players who say that people who complain about the game need to “git gud”:

@Chuck_Dizzle29 said in To all the players who say that people who complain about the game need to “git gud”:

@ComebackLogic said in To all the players who say that people who complain about the game need to “git gud”:

@eatyum said in To all the players who say that people who complain about the game need to “git gud”:

Hitting doesn't need a nerf imo, we don't want to go back to mlb 19 the lineout. The quite simple fix is if I get good input on my pitch, it should go where I wanted it. I, like you, enjoy pitching more, but nerfing people who consistently get good input on swings is never the answer.

Of course that’s not the answer, the answer is the one solution SDS have strenuously avoided for fear of alienating the subsection of the player base who are terrible at the game but buy stubs in order to get better cards in the hopes of competing.

Let’s see, they’re happy to mess with pitch speeds, more than happy to mess with swing timing windows, although I’m going to credit them with not messing that up this year in a far too extreme manner as they have previously, they’re happy to mess with the success rate of good and perfect swings in order to dictate outcomes, they’re happy to try and give bad hitters more home runs on badly timed or placed swings........ But there’s a solution I advocated years ago that’s never been implemented and it makes a lot of sense.

Namely, reduce PCI size and area for contact. As you move up the difficulty settings, leave the pitch speeds consistent and timing windows, but demand greater accuracy with PCI placement by shrinking the area for contact. This will buff pitching by generating more swings and misses and stop those endless AB with a dozen foul balls on pitches way outside the zone that extend ABs undeservedly and negate the ability of the pitcher to fool the hitter into swinging at a bad pitch with bad timing. On the hitting side, it would be much tougher to hit, but you could reward perfect swings at a really high rate, due to the increased difficulty of actually getting that swing off. Therefore actually creating the feeling of rewarding good input. And yet - Never been tried as a stand-alone thing. Ever. Isn’t that just crazy? No need for laser beam pitch speeds, super narrow timing windows, every other pitcher having to have a sinker. Just make it harder to make contact. Doesn’t this sound super reasonable?

Not exactly, only because the PCI doesn't represent the barrel. It's why you can have good timing, ball completely in the top of the PCI, but pop out to the catcher. The HRs that occur with poor timing and poor PCI placement are most likely occuring after poor pitching input as well. Someone has to win when both users make bad inputs.

The only current issue I have is early timing on pitches away are not getting many rollovers. Especially offspeed pitches like cutters and sliders. They are getting roped more often than not.

The game isn't always about perfect input. Getting into good counts and swinging at good pitches is also important. The vast majority of people I play against swing at anything in the zone. Can I get perfect input on a well placed pitch, yes. Does that mean I should've swing at it necessarily, no. If the pitcher makes a good pitch that has high confidence he's always going to have an advantage over the hitter.

Just think about that for a second. “Can I get perfect input on a well placed pitch, yes. Does that mean I should've swing at it necessarily, no.” Why would you not swing at it when there’s absolutely no penalty for choosing to swing at a pitchers pitch? As you said “early timing on pitches away are not getting many rollovers. Especially offspeed pitches like cutters and sliders. They are getting roped more often than not.” Exactly- More often than not, they’re not generating realistic contact and this is another huge, yet separate, issue as regards pitching. I can throw an absolutely perfect slider to Mike Trout with a righty and if I execute it well and have it break off the corner down and away, there should be practically no chance of it being pulled for a 400 foot home run to left field. I can live with an oppo taco home run in this instance, even a dinger to center if he muscles it out of the park, it’s tough to take as a pitcher when you did your job and made your pitch, but that’s baseball. It’s those crazily unrealistic outcomes that drive me nuts and I’ve never played baseball. To anyone with actual experience of the game, it must be even more laughable.

Pitching is already at a huge disadvantage this year due to the huge PCI and excessive foul tips and giving hitters the opportunity to pull any pitch, in any location, just by swinging early and not making good contact with the barrel (not that we have a barrel, haha!)on top of all the rest of the bad stuff (hangers on reasonably good input, strikes not called on the black etc) is overkill. That’s why I suggested the first step ought to be reducing both inner and particularly outer PCI size in order to generate more swings and misses. This will also encourage hitters to be far more selective at the plate, because they won’t be able to count on constant foul tips to bail them out on bad swings.

I’d advocate for this over reduced swing timing windows, which in my experience makes bad hitters feel helpless at the plate. When those 200mph sinkers are warping by, you really feel like you have no chance to see the ball well. With the PCI reduction I’m proposing as an alternative to narrowing swing timing windows, all you’d have to do is be more selective as a hitter and improve your plate discipline, which is totally within your own control, rather than creating a meta of swinging stupidly early and getting rewarded.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it actually kinda like this earlier in the year? Wasn't the PCI smaller? With the increased pitch speeds and smaller PCI it was actually possible to strike people out on All-Star. Then they patched the game 400 times and left us where we're at now.

The timing windows have been nutty all year so I don't think that's any better or worse. If they made the PCI smaller and reduced the absurd number of foul-tips and actually called strikes-strikes, I'm curious to see what the overall effect would be.

The event feels like a good example of how bad the pitcher/hitter balance is this year. Absolutely gigantic PCI and an infinite number of foul-tips before your good input ends up middle-middle for a long HR.

The game felt especially bad today. And not the usual "this game sucks" bad because I think most of us are used to that by now.

But it legitimately felt all over the place. The pitch speeds felt faster than the last event that was actually on Hall of Fame. I ran into a GOLD Mark Buehrle out of the bullpen and I was late on his weak-[censored] fastballs down the middle. It just felt like a complete guessing game in terms of trying to get my timing down in pretty much every game.

And not just on my end. I pitched against players that had cards with some healthy batting averages that I was making look absolutely foolish. I have faith in my sequencing, but I was making these dudes look like they never played the game before with off-speed. In pretty much every game I played today, we ALL looked like idiots on anything slow. It was strange to say the least and completely unrewarding on either side of the L.

I'm not stuck on this one because I refuse to even attempt it. I absolutely hate moments and Moments like 3 XBH are why. All the bad elements of Moments leads to getting so annoyed by the game I don't even want to play it. And I either finally finish it and shut my console off for a week because the game pissed me off or finally give up and not turn my console on for a week because it pissed me off.

I did all the other Moments in the program and just built a team in Events stacked with 3B and Candyman/Kaline to work on the Tigers' hits at the same time. As opposed to tilting myself with the Moment, I spent all day grinding Affinity maps and the event working on stats and spent most of my day playing. That wouldn't have happened if I even attempted the Moment. I didn't finish either of the online missions today. That was probably helped by the fact that I ran into plenty of people who just quit after hitting and didn't get as many ABs as I would have otherwise.

But I'm fairly close and will probably finish it the next time I sit down to play. I got a lot accomplished stat grind wise because I skipped that Moment. I would make a healthy suggestion to anyone struggling with it to the point of agony to skip it (at least for now) and just build a team in the Event and mindlessly grind away there. At least you can work on Prestige/missions there as well.

The CPU is beatable in this game 99.8% of the time. But when the CPU wants to win it will win and you can't do anything about it. Being able to see the CPU PCI is almost cruel when you see outcomes like this.

If it makes you feel better, I was walked off last night by the Padres by Trent Grisham, Left on Left, on a Very Early swing on a fastball that was an absolute dot up and away. I didn't check the PCI rating because I didn't want to take up a bed in the psych ward but 4 sounds about right for that one, too.

The World Series and Monthly Programs were vastly more fun and tolerable than big groups of Moments. I can handle Moments if they aren't overly tedious which is rare. But being at the mercy of the CPU is just so suboptimal from a consumer perspective and content being tied behind Moments feels lame.

However, I see no reason they couldn't offer both. For those that prefer the potentially quick nature of Moments let them have Moments. Just clean them up. But have the stat grinds available as well and have them all be worth enough program points or whatever to unlock the content.

The Player Programs were cool this year, but most of the progress was tied behind Moments with online only missions being the only stat grind in most. While I can handle playing the CPU in a full game most of the time, there ARE times where I would prefer a quicker path to the content. So between Moments/stat grind missions, I see no reason they couldn't utilize both to provide options to players. I've turned my console off in disgust after spending way too much time on Moments even after unlocking the card. And Moments do a great job of making me never want to even use the card because of the PTSD.

The Monthly and World Series are good examples of how more efficient paths to unlocking don't leave that negative association. I didn't want to set myself on fire after doing those.

I was also predominantly a meter pitcher last year but switched to analog this year for the same reason. Overall it does feel like analog is more accurate for whatever reason. With meter, I can hit perfect consistently and the number of pitches that go 10 inches away from location on perfect is crazy this year. A couple days ago I hit perfect 3 times in a row, all primary pitch fastballs with a fresh pitcher, and each one sailed above the strike zone and put me behind 3-0. I was trying meter again just for fun. Switched to analog and threw three straight strikes.

Pitching is just worse this year in general. So whether it's a slider or two adjusted or what, meter is noticably worse than last year to me. But I see the same stuff with analog. In event games with Maddux last night, using analog, I was nailing my inputs pretty well only to watch every single offspeed pitch get sucked into the middle of the zone. And later in that game or the next, I had Rodney in and the analog meter showed my stick going a completely different direction than I was pushing it. Missing by a little on either side of the ring I can understand. But when the game randomly, visually shows my stick press in the opposite direction I do not understand as I know which way I'm pressing it.

But again, overall analog feels way more accurate. And misses on analog don't always go middle middle. You'll throw accidental dots on some of your worst pitches. Whereas meter, anything goes on any pitch.

But overall, pitching sucks this year so this late in the year I would recommend using what you're comfortable with. No matter what you're going to get negative outcomes on your good inputs at some point each game. It didn't take me long to adjust to analog so it's worth a shot trying to see for yourself. I do think it's quite a bit better than analog.

But I always have the yearning to go back to meter because I just prefer it.

They don't need to eliminate online grinds - they just need to provide the option for offline. As someone that WANTS to play this game online non-stop, I just haven't gotten to the point where I accept how poor it plays and grinds it anyway. So I'll shift back to offline and then there's only so much to do. Moments are awful, Showdown is the most annoying game mode I've played and neither uses our DD team or count for innings/stats.

I don't think it would affect anything negatively to have the option for both. The way it is this year, the online missions are quicker to finish than offline. I don't think that's unfair since online would typically he more difficult, but a better balance between on and offline would surely land in the right spot.

One of the things SDS really nails is the XP Reward Path. You get rewarded for doing literally anything in the game. They can use this template for the stat based missions to reward online and offline. For those that will play online no matter what nothing changes. For those that don't want to play online or don't do it as often, they aren't being forced to do something they don't want and potentially being burned out or pushed away.