Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 26 Available - FHM 11 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 26 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Out of the Park Baseball 21 > Perfect Team 21

Perfect Team 21 Perfect Team 21 - The online revolution! Battle tens of thousands of PT managers from all over the world and become a legend.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-12-2020, 03:19 PM   #1
Catchthedamnball
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 170
Lightbulb PCTS Format and Payouts Could Use Some Work

For winning one of the PCTS finals, you received exclusive, best right-handed SP in the game, 100 Cy Young among other nice perks.

For placing 2nd, you received one of the first three copies of Goose Goslin, who instantly becomes the best DH vs RHP in the game.

For placing 3rd or 4th, you received one of the first six copies Jimmy Sheckard, who compares somewhat to SE Ted Williams and instantly becomes one of the best LF in open and open cap tournaments in addition to being a strong DH in the main game.

For placing 5th to 8th, you received Schoolboy Rowe, a top 10 RHP in the game with an argument for top 5.

For making only top 16 (or crashing out in round 1), you got 10k.

For context, several gold cap formats (including one of the ones featured in the PCTS) and several diamond cap formats with the same 32-team size run daily and payout 10k or 10 packs as the top prize. A strong team, such as one that made the PCTS finals in gold 1750, could conceivably win the daily early 1750 gold cap as consistently as twice a week.

Beyond the steep drop-off in reward after 5-8th place, giving 10k to a manager who spent a lot of time fine-tuning their team in order to make the final of a special one-time event that seeks to crown the best players in a particular format (at least I assume this is a goal of the PCTS), and then fine-tuning again to try and beat the other finalists, is pretty underwhelming.

To solve this, I have two proposals. The first is simple; make the rewards for the final a little more graduated, and extend the quality down to the bottom half of the finishers, so that everyone who made the finals is rewarded fairly for their appearance and appropriately for their performance. This also solves the issue of Rowe and Young being the two best rewards, an observation I have seen a fair amount of people make.

The second proposal involves reorganizing the qualifying structure to compensate for stronger depth of reward in the finals (h/t QuantaCondor on the following format ideas). Scrap the linearity, and especially scrap the bo5 format. Do one of two things instead. One would be to base qualification off of a points system; managers can earn points by placing in dailies/weeklies/monthlies of the corresponding tournament type throughout the cycle. Then, when the finals date arrives, X number of teams with the most points (or a certain amount of them?) qualify for the finals.

Alternatively, if OOTPD prefers to keep the formats secret until the tournament is announced, the signup process can be similar to this year's. In order to select a group of finalists, then, teams play X number of swiss rounds, with each set being a bo7, until a top cut can be determined (for people unfamiliar with this system, it involves pairing opponents with similar records each round with the aim of establishing a top cut without strength-of-schedule concerns-- nobody can qualify for the finals of a format simply by winning three best-of-fives against cupcake opponents). If it's not possible to code swiss bo7, then I imagine a league season-esque septuple round-robin (to mimic bo7) with 32+ team group size and smaller qualifying tournament sizes to minimize server strain could be an adequate substitute.

Of course, I'd like to add that this is just my two cents on what should be done to make PCTS better. Regardless of the imperfections, this first iteration was fun and I look forward to future improvements.
__________________




Catchthedamnball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 03:31 PM   #2
bailey
Hall Of Famer
 
bailey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,315
I think the prizes are fair, maybe scaling the 10K awards, starting at 20K and going down to 5K for 1st round loss. If anything, if someone spent a lot of money to build a team and gets frozen out of ever having Cy Young, may get frustrated and stop donating.
bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 03:55 PM   #3
dkgo
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,152
This is more than fair and way better than PT20 where a lot of open tournaments reward a million PP TOTD card for first and a 10K diamond for second
dkgo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 04:54 PM   #4
QuantaCondor
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 563
The thing I really want from a PTCS format is a confidence that you have to be a really strong player to get there. In the current format, that's just not true; we all know how swingy and random a set of ONE Bo5/Bo7 tourneys can be, and it's not very motivating to grind the format and put time and energy into solving it when you're one Bo7 low roll away from being booted.

Not to mention it feels odd to have someone with 1000 tourney wins in a format get no leg up whatsoever compared to a new player. You can still have an avenue for people who don't do tourneys to qualify. Have there be two avenues: one based on qualification points from dailies/weeklies/etc., and the other based on a last chance qualifier (with most spots coming from the qual. points route). This has proven to be successful in a lot of other similar eSports formats, no need to reinvent the wheel here.
__________________
Former leader of BFF, the definitive competitive PT group for F2P players. DM for info

F2P + restrictions. First F2P winner of PT21 Perfect League


F2P + restrictions. New team -> PT title in 8 weeks
QuantaCondor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 05:30 PM   #5
QuantaCondor
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 563
A separate comment for emphasis, since I think this point is worth mentioning: Supposedly the PTCS cards were curated to be awesome. That statement, and the poor quality of Sheckard and Goose relative to Hughson, makes me feel like they don't have a sense as to what's valuable or good at the high levels of their game. Any sort of basic model about how PL or DL works would IMMEDIATELY tell you how good Hughson is relative to the others; shoot, you could even eye-test it and get a good feeling.

I think there were a lot of good thematic things about the content program this year, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of (or any?) planning around the meta, player archetypes, and all that. That's probably the biggest missed opportunity I've seen in the content this year, and I really think OOTPD ought to have a numbers guy balancing the highlevel content they put out in context with the game's meta. It's really not so hard to predict a meta if you understand the game well enough; shoot, any of the best PT modelers in the community could probably just slap their current sheet onto PT22 and I bet it'd do a pretty good job at predicting the meta that comes out.
__________________
Former leader of BFF, the definitive competitive PT group for F2P players. DM for info

F2P + restrictions. First F2P winner of PT21 Perfect League


F2P + restrictions. New team -> PT title in 8 weeks
QuantaCondor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 05:30 PM   #6
QuantaCondor
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 563
(double posted, ignore)
__________________
Former leader of BFF, the definitive competitive PT group for F2P players. DM for info

F2P + restrictions. First F2P winner of PT21 Perfect League


F2P + restrictions. New team -> PT title in 8 weeks

Last edited by QuantaCondor; 09-12-2020 at 05:35 PM.
QuantaCondor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 05:43 PM   #7
Catchthedamnball
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey View Post
I think the prizes are fair, maybe scaling the 10K awards, starting at 20K and going down to 5K for 1st round loss. If anything, if someone spent a lot of money to build a team and gets frozen out of ever having Cy Young, may get frustrated and stop donating.
To clarify, I'm not against having Cy Young be the prize. Quite the contrary. What I'm saying is that a better reward structure (using the SEs they used as an example) potentially looks more like this:

1st - Cy
2nd - Schoolboy
3rd-4th - Goslin
5th-8th - Sheckard
9th-16th - SE (maybe diamond?) that's a step below Sheckard
17th-32nd - SE (maybe diamond?) that's a step below 9th-16th place reward
__________________




Catchthedamnball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2020, 06:22 PM   #8
bearcatbbal22
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catchthedamnball View Post
For winning one of the PCTS finals, you received exclusive, best right-handed SP in the game, 100 Cy Young among other nice perks.

For placing 2nd, you received one of the first three copies of Goose Goslin, who instantly becomes the best DH vs RHP in the game.

For placing 3rd or 4th, you received one of the first six copies Jimmy Sheckard, who compares somewhat to SE Ted Williams and instantly becomes one of the best LF in open and open cap tournaments in addition to being a strong DH in the main game.

For placing 5th to 8th, you received Schoolboy Rowe, a top 10 RHP in the game with an argument for top 5.

For making only top 16 (or crashing out in round 1), you got 10k.

For context, several gold cap formats (including one of the ones featured in the PCTS) and several diamond cap formats with the same 32-team size run daily and payout 10k or 10 packs as the top prize. A strong team, such as one that made the PCTS finals in gold 1750, could conceivably win the daily early 1750 gold cap as consistently as twice a week.

Beyond the steep drop-off in reward after 5-8th place, giving 10k to a manager who spent a lot of time fine-tuning their team in order to make the final of a special one-time event that seeks to crown the best players in a particular format (at least I assume this is a goal of the PCTS), and then fine-tuning again to try and beat the other finalists, is pretty underwhelming.

To solve this, I have two proposals. The first is simple; make the rewards for the final a little more graduated, and extend the quality down to the bottom half of the finishers, so that everyone who made the finals is rewarded fairly for their appearance and appropriately for their performance. This also solves the issue of Rowe and Young being the two best rewards, an observation I have seen a fair amount of people make.

The second proposal involves reorganizing the qualifying structure to compensate for stronger depth of reward in the finals (h/t QuantaCondor on the following format ideas). Scrap the linearity, and especially scrap the bo5 format. Do one of two things instead. One would be to base qualification off of a points system; managers can earn points by placing in dailies/weeklies/monthlies of the corresponding tournament type throughout the cycle. Then, when the finals date arrives, X number of teams with the most points (or a certain amount of them?) qualify for the finals.

Alternatively, if OOTPD prefers to keep the formats secret until the tournament is announced, the signup process can be similar to this year's. In order to select a group of finalists, then, teams play X number of swiss rounds, with each set being a bo7, until a top cut can be determined (for people unfamiliar with this system, it involves pairing opponents with similar records each round with the aim of establishing a top cut without strength-of-schedule concerns-- nobody can qualify for the finals of a format simply by winning three best-of-fives against cupcake opponents). If it's not possible to code swiss bo7, then I imagine a league season-esque septuple round-robin (to mimic bo7) with 32+ team group size and smaller qualifying tournament sizes to minimize server strain could be an adequate substitute.

Of course, I'd like to add that this is just my two cents on what should be done to make PCTS better. Regardless of the imperfections, this first iteration was fun and I look forward to future improvements.
Are you a member of discord? In the chat, Kris, who is the director of live services, said he would look into changes for future tournaments
bearcatbbal22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:29 AM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2024 Out of the Park Developments