PT: Combinator limits 6 and 13 and chem on.

gustoes · 11-26-2024, 10:37 PM

There have been a lot of ideas about combinators limits... so this just another and food for thought.

Highlight of this suggestion would to be to create a known consistent standard or expectation for combinators and chemistry.
The configurations at this point as combi limits were introduced mid year to tweak/balances things seem too scattered. I think those changes were good considering mid year and all the varying concerns but it feels too noisy.

chem on chem off, cc this cc that no cc 26cc some cc, 1cc whats the point on top of your standard eligibility and era criteria. Perhaps just needs to be dialed in a bit more?

No zero cc. Thought is.. if you're going to have CC's.. then have them.
1 cc/3cc etc. What's the point?
26 cc... too big of a gap, over specialization, race to top then exponential snowball from dominating the prize pool

Suggestion:
Combinator limits of just 6 and 13
&
Chemistry always on.
That's it!

So whether a cap or year range/era or iron or diamond... it's always chem on and combinators of 6 or 13.

Forces players in to the CC world but reachable varied & competitive builds with 6cc limit. (assuming improvements on access/fairness to attaining cc's)

While the ceiling of 13CC is gap control ensuring the top players/performers or spenders are always chased forcing continued investment, grabbing new release cc cards, adding big LE's in the mix, or chasing advanced chemistry configs to stay at the top. With the gap more reasonable and win rates knocked down at the top a bit, those top players can also branch out spending/achieving more.)

Same for chemistry.. if you're going to have chemistry. Have chemistry. Always on.

Assuming 13cc max and avoiding the 26cc cardtype chem crazyness or nerfing/adjusting card type chemistry and boosting real relationship chem links... just leave Chemistry always on.

Encourages players to actually go for those rare chemistry relationships without being irrelled from a 26cc cardtype wash and actually having a full lineup of tournaments to use those cards/investment instead of half or more of them having chemistry off.

This takes two features OOTP introduced.. combinators and chemistry and actually has them on.. consistent and streamlined path forward with two cool features while keeping balance. (I think?)

I'd say ptcs should also cap at 13 so that the players that qualify can actually use the cards that got them there... removing 0cc/3cc etc routes to qualification and 6 cc means the expectation was at least half way.

Anyway... I do definitely like the idea of knowing what to expect with cc's and chem and there are likely other ways to dial in. This is just one idea and there are probably better ones out there

====================

--Create relationship tweaks for FL/pt elite similar to what was done for nel so that all cc inventory opens up to a reasonable upgrade path)

--and obviously some qol improvements for actually obtaining and upgrading the cc's. Maybe tournament currency which can be used for boosting, auctions for cc's so access to them on market is fair, bulk buy orders for low end food or better ways to get food.. all the other good feedback from discord.

Other ideas.

Tournament dashboard and ptcs tracking
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=354688

Better ways to get cc food?
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=355800

Chemistry explorer / Manage cards (include not owned)
https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=355327

gustoes · 01-21-2025, 12:58 PM

I've heard the gradual cc cap thought floated around...
My concern would still be the desire of creating a known consistent standard or expectation... if you're going to have combinators,,, zero or 3cc combi limits seem next to pointless. Then whatever "gradual" over-season movement is applied to tournaments cc limits, IF too frequent makes will seem to make the lesser requirements pointless. Just have a reasonable floor from the get go. The game and some of the cc stuff is complex by default.. which is fine and sometimes even good but if you can achieve less moving parts somewhere that is good too. I get the idea of easier entry because I've been all for that but if you're going to have combinators then have them and if you're going to have a floor, have a meaningful floor. The issue was always the ceiling imo; uber specialization/pockets/fragmentization. With a better ceiling, a push in is good. Race to zero, race to 3??? I imagine that "race to the top" is a good thing for business and player excitement, especially at the beginning of the game cycle, so might as well have a reasonable floor and reasonable race/ceiling. (note: when I say floor or ceiling re cc's, it's for cc limits but no mandatory.. players could still choose to enter a 6cc or 13cc tournament with zero or 1 cc if they wanted.)

If I had to envision a gradual system, something like this might be a clear standard. Two sets, each serves a purpose.

First half forces engagement with purposeful floor of 6 without pointless zero or 3cc formats while having a ceiling that is reasonable.
Second half ups the ceiling but still avoids the 26cc so tier domination will still be softer while encouraging top managers to spread out/get creative/work hard to stay on top while still having a floor that based on last half of pt25 would be a sweet spot,,, especially since hopefully with pt26 improvements and clear expectations more players will likely dig in for pt26 creating thriving competition/spending/activity in ALL formats

First half CC’S
6CC 23.08%
13CC 50.00%
13CC 50.00% PTCS
18CC 69.23% PTMS

Second half
6CC (One set of quicks for late season newbies to graduate to 12cc floor)
12CC 46.15%
18CC 69.23%
18CC 69.23% PTCS
26CC 100.00% PTMS/PTWC

(Yes, I'd say avoid the 26cc the entire cycle.. this gives TE and LE a space which is also good while 18cc is plenty for business imo. Forces top managers to include te/le/chem in their skillful building and collecting.
Exception would be 2nd half ptms and ptwc)

Simple, low maintenance, purposeful, players know what to expect, good floor, good ceiling, more balance, great competition.
Well, I speculate anyway but am surely missing something... just food for thought.

5/24/25: New idea. 13 ve, chem on. all tournaments, all year.

11-26-2024, 10:37 PM	#1
gustoes Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2023 Location: East of Toronto ON Posts: 147	Perfect Team: Combinator limits 6 and 13 and chem on. There have been a lot of ideas about combinators limits... so this just another and food for thought. Highlight of this suggestion would to be to create a known consistent standard or expectation for combinators and chemistry. The configurations at this point as combi limits were introduced mid year to tweak/balances things seem too scattered. I think those changes were good considering mid year and all the varying concerns but it feels too noisy. chem on chem off, cc this cc that no cc 26cc some cc, 1cc whats the point on top of your standard eligibility and era criteria. Perhaps just needs to be dialed in a bit more? No zero cc. Thought is.. if you're going to have CC's.. then have them. 1 cc/3cc etc. What's the point? 26 cc... too big of a gap, over specialization, race to top then exponential snowball from dominating the prize pool Suggestion: Combinator limits of just 6 and 13 & Chemistry always on. That's it! So whether a cap or year range/era or iron or diamond... it's always chem on and combinators of 6 or 13. Forces players in to the CC world but reachable varied & competitive builds with 6cc limit. (assuming improvements on access/fairness to attaining cc's) While the ceiling of 13CC is gap control ensuring the top players/performers or spenders are always chased forcing continued investment, grabbing new release cc cards, adding big LE's in the mix, or chasing advanced chemistry configs to stay at the top. With the gap more reasonable and win rates knocked down at the top a bit, those top players can also branch out spending/achieving more.) Same for chemistry.. if you're going to have chemistry. Have chemistry. Always on. Assuming 13cc max and avoiding the 26cc cardtype chem crazyness or nerfing/adjusting card type chemistry and boosting real relationship chem links... just leave Chemistry always on. Encourages players to actually go for those rare chemistry relationships without being irrelled from a 26cc cardtype wash and actually having a full lineup of tournaments to use those cards/investment instead of half or more of them having chemistry off. This takes two features OOTP introduced.. combinators and chemistry and actually has them on.. consistent and streamlined path forward with two cool features while keeping balance. (I think?) I'd say ptcs should also cap at 13 so that the players that qualify can actually use the cards that got them there... removing 0cc/3cc etc routes to qualification and 6 cc means the expectation was at least half way. Anyway... I do definitely like the idea of knowing what to expect with cc's and chem and there are likely other ways to dial in. This is just one idea and there are probably better ones out there ==================== --Create relationship tweaks for FL/pt elite similar to what was done for nel so that all cc inventory opens up to a reasonable upgrade path) --and obviously some qol improvements for actually obtaining and upgrading the cc's. Maybe tournament currency which can be used for boosting, auctions for cc's so access to them on market is fair, bulk buy orders for low end food or better ways to get food.. all the other good feedback from discord. Other ideas. Tournament dashboard and ptcs tracking https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=354688 Better ways to get cc food? https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=355800 Chemistry explorer / Manage cards (include not owned) https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=355327 __________________ Perfect Team Feature Requests Sometimes convoluted .... but for the greater good, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. Last edited by gustoes; 11-28-2024 at 06:48 PM.

01-21-2025, 12:58 PM	#2
gustoes Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2023 Location: East of Toronto ON Posts: 147	I've heard the gradual cc cap thought floated around... My concern would still be the desire of creating a known consistent standard or expectation... if you're going to have combinators,,, zero or 3cc combi limits seem next to pointless. Then whatever "gradual" over-season movement is applied to tournaments cc limits, IF too frequent makes will seem to make the lesser requirements pointless. Just have a reasonable floor from the get go. The game and some of the cc stuff is complex by default.. which is fine and sometimes even good but if you can achieve less moving parts somewhere that is good too. I get the idea of easier entry because I've been all for that but if you're going to have combinators then have them and if you're going to have a floor, have a meaningful floor. The issue was always the ceiling imo; uber specialization/pockets/fragmentization. With a better ceiling, a push in is good. Race to zero, race to 3??? I imagine that "race to the top" is a good thing for business and player excitement, especially at the beginning of the game cycle, so might as well have a reasonable floor and reasonable race/ceiling. (note: when I say floor or ceiling re cc's, it's for cc limits but no mandatory.. players could still choose to enter a 6cc or 13cc tournament with zero or 1 cc if they wanted.) If I had to envision a gradual system, something like this might be a clear standard. Two sets, each serves a purpose. First half forces engagement with purposeful floor of 6 without pointless zero or 3cc formats while having a ceiling that is reasonable. Second half ups the ceiling but still avoids the 26cc so tier domination will still be softer while encouraging top managers to spread out/get creative/work hard to stay on top while still having a floor that based on last half of pt25 would be a sweet spot,,, especially since hopefully with pt26 improvements and clear expectations more players will likely dig in for pt26 creating thriving competition/spending/activity in ALL formats First half CC’S 6CC 23.08% 13CC 50.00% 13CC 50.00% PTCS 18CC 69.23% PTMS Second half 6CC (One set of quicks for late season newbies to graduate to 12cc floor) 12CC 46.15% 18CC 69.23% 18CC 69.23% PTCS 26CC 100.00% PTMS/PTWC (Yes, I'd say avoid the 26cc the entire cycle.. this gives TE and LE a space which is also good while 18cc is plenty for business imo. Forces top managers to include te/le/chem in their skillful building and collecting. Exception would be 2nd half ptms and ptwc) Simple, low maintenance, purposeful, players know what to expect, good floor, good ceiling, more balance, great competition. Well, I speculate anyway but am surely missing something... just food for thought. 5/24/25: New idea. 13 ve, chem on. all tournaments, all year. __________________ Perfect Team Feature Requests Sometimes convoluted .... but for the greater good, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. Last edited by gustoes; 05-24-2025 at 05:59 PM.