[alanohio]

It occurred to me recently that OOTP Perfect Team is a textbook example of diminishing returns.

Early on, time and effort matter. Building a roster, learning the auction house, and making smart decisions all feel impactful. But as more seasons pass, more cards are released, and more players invest heavily in both time and money, the curve changes.

Progress stops being additive and becomes defensive.

At a certain point, you’re no longer improving your team — you’re just trying not to fall further behind. Power creep raises the ceiling every cycle, and those who establish an early advantage benefit from compounding effects: earlier access to top-end cards, better auction leverage, deeper meta knowledge, and the ability to absorb variance. That advantage doesn’t plateau; it compounds.

For players outside that top tier, returns flatten. More grinding or spending yields less relative improvement, and eventually there’s a ceiling you simply can’t break through, regardless of effort. Variance can mask this for a while, but over time it becomes clear that the sim isn’t deciding who wins, only how competitive the loss looks.

I don’t think this means Perfect Team is “broken” or poorly designed — it’s doing what a live-service collectible mode is built to do. But it does mean that the mode quietly shifts from a game of choices and progression into an ecosystem where long-term parity is impossible.

Recognizing that has helped me enjoy PT more for what it is: something that’s most rewarding early in the cycle, when decisions still matter, rather than a mode where everyone can realistically keep pace forever.

I’m curious how others see this — especially long-time players who’ve watched the curve change over multiple years.