el_gringo's Guide to Maximizing a F2P Approach to PT

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by sansterre

You should expect:

2.98 Common Cards, sellable for 7-ish PP apiece, worth 21 PP
2.25 Bronze Cards, sellable for 120-ish PP apiece, worth 270 PP
0.625 Silver Cards, sellable for 1000-ish PP apiece, worth 625 PP
0.125 Gold Cards, sellable for 3000-ish PP apiece, worth 375 PP
0.02 Diamond Cards, sellable for 10000-ish PP apiece, worth 100 PP
0.002 Perfect Cards, sellable for . . . honestly no idea.

You are overstating the low-end prices. The average common is about 6 PP. The average bronze card is more like 75PP. Still, your theory is sound.

[sansterre]

Originally Posted by Orcin

You are overstating the low-end prices. The average common is about 6 PP. The average bronze card is more like 75PP. Still, your theory is sound.

That's fair. I'm only quoting values of what I've been able to sell things for over the first few days. Someone who has done this longer, as you have, would know better than I.

[Cactusguy21]

I've been mostly unable to sell bronzes, even for 30. And commons don't sell at all, unless they are 5-6, then maybe.

It's really annoying actually. I can't buy a bronze for less than 50, but I can't sell one even at 30. Once I saw a bunch of people bidding a bronze up to like 150, when I had the exact same card for sale at 40.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Cactusguy21

Once I saw a bunch of people bidding a bronze up to like 150, when I had the exact same card for sale at 40.

This can happen due to the timing of the auction. Maybe they want the card now, so they bid on the one that is closing soonest.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Orcin

This can happen due to the timing of the auction. Maybe they want the card now, so they bid on the one that is closing soonest.

Exactly. Timing is really important with auctions. I won't bid on a card that's hours away from finishing. What's the point? There might be a better card that comes up, or someone will likely beat my bid even if not.

[GPBBall]

I must add Archie Bradley. He's had a 0 era for me over 20 games in the entry pool.

[Josquin]

The nice thing with Perfect Team is that you can see the stats of all the instances of a certain card in your league. So especially at the end of the season with popular cards, you can see a good sample of simulated outcomes for a particular card.

The simulation engine has certain biases, so that the overall rating of a card is not a 100% accurate reflection of its performance during real gameplay. There are cards with relatively high overall ratings that consistently underperform, and vice versa.

Finding the undervalued cards is part of the fun in building a winning team on a shoestring PP budget.

[spartacus007]

I can imagine the average auction prices will vary a *lot* early on the game, and won't stabilize until after a good month or so. It's hard predict how much cards will sell for a couple months from now

[sansterre]

Also, Jerry Vasto is a 53 point lefty, whose stats are 78/51/48, which seems unusually good for a 53 pointer.

[sansterre]

Throwing it out there, I absolutely wrecked my rookie league with a modified version of the principles in this guide and I was 20-5 on the first day of A ball.

I definitely got lucky on my early packs (drawing gold/diamond maybe 25% more than was probable) which made a huge difference in the amount of capital I was able to recycle into my team. And I was only about 500 for the first half of the rookie season (because my team was almost all bronze and commons with only the occasional silver/gold, as my park demands a very specific kind of compliance to maximize player value). I just cycled my PP over and over until I started getting the players my park needed, and won about 75%+ of my games in the last three months of the season.

I started my team on the Sunday before the first leagues, so I make no representations that my leagues are as strong as some of the front leagues, but I'm just plugging this strat for people looking for ways to improve without spending money.

[zrog2000]

Originally Posted by drhay53

I really can't think of any good reason why you would want to allow cards to gain position experience. I really hope the team decides to change this and make the cards static on that front.

Because if you took any shortstop and played him enough games at 2nd base, he'd be at least as good as he was at shortstop with enough experience, even with no change in ability. Basically, you're saying that you don't want shortstops to be able to play 2B at all and that seems kind of ridiculous.

[captainbuttercream]

Originally Posted by zrog2000

Because if you took any shortstop and played him enough games at 2nd base, he'd be at least as good as he was at shortstop with enough experience, even with no change in ability. Basically, you're saying that you don't want shortstops to be able to play 2B at all and that seems kind of ridiculous.

Similar thing with left/right fielders.

[Josquin]

Originally Posted by sansterre

Throwing it out there, I absolutely wrecked my rookie league with a modified version of the principles in this guide and I was 20-5 on the first day of A ball.

I definitely got lucky on my early packs (drawing gold/diamond maybe 25% more than was probable) which made a huge difference in the amount of capital I was able to recycle into my team. And I was only about 500 for the first half of the rookie season (because my team was almost all bronze and commons with only the occasional silver/gold, as my park demands a very specific kind of compliance to maximize player value). I just cycled my PP over and over until I started getting the players my park needed, and won about 75%+ of my games in the last three months of the season.

I started my team on the Sunday before the first leagues, so I make no representations that my leagues are as strong as some of the front leagues, but I'm just plugging this strat for people looking for ways to improve without spending money.

What remains to be seen is the amount of randomness being injected into the simulations. This would manifest itself in two ways:

1. Team W-L records deviating significantly from their Pythagorean record (i.e. less talented teams routinely beating more talented teams due to luck).

2. Large variation in a player's performance year-to-year.

Finding the right amount of randomness is probably the most critical aspect of making a game like this work. Not enough randomness, and the players with the highest-valued cards will always win. Too much randomness, and the player cards become like pure lottery tickets -- the card ratings don't mean anything.

Only time will tell whether the balance is right.

[genuvar]

Ive really enjoyed my Wally Backman and as a 63 bronze he still makes his way onto a roster that is mostly silver/golds now.

[drhay53]

Originally Posted by zrog2000

Because if you took any shortstop and played him enough games at 2nd base, he'd be at least as good as he was at shortstop with enough experience, even with no change in ability. Basically, you're saying that you don't want shortstops to be able to play 2B at all and that seems kind of ridiculous.

I've posted about this in other places and what you said is actually exactly the opposite of my opinion. I think players should either a) have higher ratings at similar positions, or b) have lesser penalties for being placed in other positions.

I actually feel that the game is a bit behind the times as far as the move toward defensive versatility in real MLB. We've seen lots of players play a position for the first time ever at the ML level and perform well. I think a good SS in the game should basically automatically be a good 2B in the game without needing to "train" them. Especially because as you "train" them they're going to be horrible for a while just because they don't have "experience". I don't think allowing one attribute to change on the cards is a very good decision.

[captainbuttercream]

Platooning a position is a great way to have 2 lower rated players 'overperform' and match the output of a higher rated player. I currently have Paul Waner (1932) and Allie Clark (1948) in a right/left platoon split and they are putting up great numbers. Both are rated in the low-mid 60s so they are dirt cheap, but they're putting up the numbers of a high silver/gold player.

The other guy is available of the bench as a pinch hitter, so it's not like he's useless on hit day off.

[Josquin]

Originally Posted by captainbuttercream

Platooning a position is a great way to have 2 lower rated players 'overperform' and match the output of a higher rated player. I currently have Paul Waner (1932) and Allie Clark (1948) in a right/left platoon split and they are putting up great numbers. Both are rated in the low-mid 60s so they are dirt cheap, but they're putting up the numbers of a high silver/gold player.

The other guy is available of the bench as a pinch hitter, so it's not like he's useless on hit day off.

Agreed. L/R splits seem to be really important in this game, since most pitchers have lower ratings against opposite-handed hitters, and most hitters have lower ratings against same-handed pitchers, so in a L vs. L or R vs. R matchup, the hitter is faced with a double whammy of adverse ratings adjustments.

That's why I try to stock up on switch hitters, and platoon the positions where a good switch hitter is not available.