Competitive balance discussion

[eldur00]

Originally Posted by Dogberry99

(added emphasis is my own)

This post from 2 pages ago faded into the background far too quickly as the rampant personal attacks on all sides continued unabated. It perfectly captures the reality that is earning points via achievements, whether that is your only source of points or not.

This game penalizes promotion. This is a problem.

I 100% agree with you. People wouldn't be talking about tanking and start debates about it if there was any kind of incentive to win at the top.

[traylor45]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Reading the discussion here and in the competitive balance thread, it's pretty apparent that there are some folks playing PT that just can't grasp the fact that someone has to lose.

If your team is good enough to be stuck in the diamond level, then your team is where it belongs. If you're not losing enough to be relegated or winning enough to be promoted then that's where you belong.

I don't understand the logic. It sounds like people want to be relegated to gold and win. Well, what happens when you win? You get promoted back to diamond. If you don't win, then you're in the same boat. You're stuck in gold until you make your team better.

I want to win at the perfect level.

I'm not good enough to compete at the perfect level (well I am/almost am, but for sake of argument).

At Perfect level, I get 1k points a week.

At Diamond Level I'll get 5-10k points/week.

At which level do I want to be at right now, if I want to win the Perfect level?

I want to be relegated back to Diamond so that I can actually earn PP.

It isn't about wanting to win against inferior competition, it's that the PP generation rewards winning, so the people wanting to be the best want to be at a level that they can generate PP. If I'm making 1k/week I'll never be able to compete at the Perfect level.

***I'm sure there's a few that do want to beat up on weaker competition, you have those in every sport/game...but that's not the motivating factor for most, especially in this thread I think.

[traylor45]

Originally Posted by Dogberry99

Further, I don't understand why nobody is discussing an increase to the number of teams being promoted and relegated each season as a possible viable solution. It seems like more fluidity with regard to competition level could go a long way to allaying the fears many have.

That, or at least an increase in the scope of the p/r system. Maybe the ability to raise or drop multiple levels...

Or just add more levels to the system, so that you are more closely aligned in skill level with your competition. At the Perfect level a team that is 100% 100's and best Diamonds is not playing the same game as a team that has a single 100, 4-6 diamonds and a handful of silver still on it.

And I've seen both in my 2 weeks at Perfect now. The level is just too broad as it stands.

This might take care of itself...but if the weaker team was good enough to advance, it is probably still too strong for Diamond, and as others have said, relegating it down is just going to cause the imbalance at the Diamond level instead of the perfect level.

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by traylor45

Or just add more levels to the system, so that you are more closely aligned in skill level with your competition. At the Perfect level a team that is 100% 100's and best Diamonds is not playing the same game as a team that has a single 100, 4-6 diamonds and a handful of silver still on it.

I agree that this could also be an acceptable solution. I just have seen people espouse it as a possible solution before, whereas I can't recall seeing anyone bring up increasing the amount of teams that are both promoted and relegated.

[matingly23]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Man, why didn't the 2001 Yankees just go home when they encountered the 116-win Mariners in the ALCS? That was an impossible battle!

My grasp of English is as firm as yours on any sort of point is weak. I also consider your way of patronizing me insulting. But I guess I should have expected to be attacked by someone who is completely cornered, and - still - has no point whatsoever.

If only you could realize that your stubborn refusal to own anything makes you look the more ridiculous. The missing T just as much as admitting that games are only fun if YOU win.

Keep snapping, it amuses me.

https://imgur.com/a/iEPqRNn

Was that the Mariners team?

Do you watch any baseball or understand the sport at all? If you're seriously comparing that to the Mariners, or just in denial. Or just too ashamed of your bad arguments and trying desperately to save face. It's sad. Pathetic.

And we're back to the "missing" T.

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by eldur00

I 100% agree with you. People wouldn't be talking about tanking and start debates about it if there was any kind of incentive to win at the top.

I'd personally change the word win to the word compete. Maybe even through in a try, as in "try to compete at the top" for good measure. I don't feel the need to always win. I'd be fine with losing far more games than I win at the Perfect level if such pathetic performances were not regularly accompanied by point gains far below average expectations.

However your point is valid nonetheless.

[thakfu]

Originally Posted by xekyn92

The mode as it exists in OOTP19 is undeniably pay-to-win and there’s nothing necessarily wrong with that (I myself have spent a good amount of money to support the developers).

The issue is the lack of variety, your team is stuck in one league and there’s virtually no skill involved at the higher levels, it’s simply a contest of who spent the most money. The developers aren’t going to hurt their bottom line, nor should they be expected to, but I think they need to find ways to make the game mode more engaging for F2P players so they don’t get stuck in a state of purgatory.

First and foremost we need to be able to enter leagues with our friends, the game right now feels incredibly isolated and the ‘community’ aspect of it is sorely lacking. Even being able to directly challenge my friends teams to an exhibition/showmatch that doesn’t reward any PP would be a nice addition.

Secondly, they need some alternate league/tournament structures that actually involve some strategy/skill and put players on a relatively equal footing, even if the main league system remains the same as it is now. There’s a lot of fun/gimmicky things they could do in this regard:

1) Leagues that only allow you to use iron, bronze, silver, gold etc cards or combinations/limitations of these, restricting the amount of diamond/perfect cards that can be used in order to make it more strategy based as opposed to who can assemble the most overwhelmingly talented set of cards. If i’m only allowed to use 1 perfect card, do I value having an ace more or should it be a position player? This would have the secondary effect of also encouraging players to retain/collect lesser rated cards instead of just autoselling everything that isn’t gold or above, they’ve put so much work into creating all of these interesting historical cards, why not give us opportunities to use them? Card collecting definitely needs more emphasis in PT, maybe give small PP rewards for completing certain historical team collections etc.

2) What about a game mode where we pay varying PP entry fees (like 1k/5k/10k to encourage people to buy PP still) and compete for the entire pot (with a tax skimmed off the top similar to the AH). To make it even funnier, make it entirely random, you don’t enter with your own cards, each participant gets 10-20 regular packs and you have to build the best roster you can with what you unpack (with all of the cards deleted at the end, perhaps the top 3 finishers get to keep one card or something). You could also have free entry versions of this that reward packs / modest amounts of PP as well, obviously you would have a limit on how many you can enter at once.

3) Draft leagues. Again have an entry fee perhaps so OOTP can still make a little money (in addition to prize payouts). Have it so the game randomly generates a random pool of cards from standard packs (like 10 packs for each player in the league) after which the players draft in a randomly determined reverse snake order until their rosters are built. It’ll challenge players to identify good late round card choices and make it so noone has an unfair advantage. Have us compete for a share of the PP, reward packs or maybe the opportunity to keep a card from our roster to be used in the main league.

There’s a ton of creative ways they can make the game more engaging for F2P players and provide opportunities to earn PP/packs/cards without outright ruining the pay-to-win model they’re using in the main game. They just need to provide people with alternatives to keep things fresh and exciting.

I think you're pretty spot on here. The problem isn't competitive balance and finding ways for the whales and little fish to play nice together, it's providing a varied experience. Being able to do more things with your team/collection is sorely needed. I think alot of these arguments go away if there is something else you can move onto once your team gets stuck on a level. Truth be told, I'm in year 3 at perfect level and boredom is starting to set in a bit, I kind of feel like I'm only still playing at this point because I have a little money sunk into the team. I basically started a themed 2nd team to freshen things up.

I don't think the current league model is terribly flawed, it was really fun working up the ladder. But, I do see how people might think you're punished for getting promoted. It isn't the losing nearly as much as the PP rewards slowing to a crawl. I've only played and lost 2 wild card games in my entire run at all levels, so it's not a losing thing. I've lost ALOT and still had fun. I just looked and I'm actually the 4th worst team in all of Perfect Level COMBINED. lol. But yeah, you do reach a point where things are starting to feel a touch pointless unless I toss another few dollars at the game. Would love to have some other challenge to put my team through.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

Its not even "F2P" per se. You can not spend a cent, pack an expensive card, sell it for several hundred thousand PP, and while you are still "F2P" you now have the same competitive advantage as people who bought 200k PP.

When it comes to "competitive balance", buying PP is the short cut guaranteed route, but you can still achieve a massive competitive advantage without spending a cent. Thats part of the conversation as well. Its rare, less likely from an odds percentage, but its there for sure to varying degrees. I have not spent a penny on PP, but I have benefited from a massive competitive advantage simply because I packed a 25k PP gold catcher once, sold it, and proceeded to destroy my competition with the competitive advantage gained by spending those PP resulting in 121 wins and a WS. 25K isnt even that much. Imagine if I packed a 400k card or something.

So the conversation, in my opinion, is not solely about money. Its not as simple as "P2W" vs "F2P" because there are other variables as well. Money is just the easy/common factor of separation between the quality of teams.

There are teams that are F2P that did not get that expensive card and what little they did get is on the reserve roster... well, at least one and my guess is there are others. So how is that not F2P?

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by <Pion>

There are teams that are F2P that did not get that expensive card and what little they did get is on the reserve roster... well, at least one and my guess is there are others. So how is that not F2P?

They're not saying that that is not F2P. They are saying that framing the discussion regarding Competitive Balance in terms of F2P and P2W is a False Dichotomy. (assuming I understood them correctly)

Late Edit: Actually, I'm not even certain I understood you correctly, much less the previous comment. When you say "on the reserve roster" are you referring to tanking?

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by Dogberry99

They're not saying that that is not F2P. They are saying that framing the discussion regarding Competitive Balance in terms of F2P and P2W is a False Dichotomy. (assuming I understood them correctly)

Late Edit: Actually, I'm not even certain I understood you correctly, much less the previous comment. When you say "on the reserve roster" are you referring to tanking?

No, not tanking, sorry for the confusion. Referring to getting one gold card in the initial 6 packs and the player is bad enough that they are no longer good enough to be on the 25 man roster. So they aren't helping the team with their play, nor are they worth much more than the 1000 sell it now price. So everything the team has going for them now was acquired through achievements earned. I was making the point that there are some that did not spend nor did they get a lucky break and yet are in Perfect level leagues. So it is possible to compete by only earning achievements.

[Mat]

Originally Posted by traylor45

I want to win at the perfect level.

I'm not good enough to compete at the perfect level (well I am/almost am, but for sake of argument).

At Perfect level, I get 1k points a week.

At Diamond Level I'll get 5-10k points/week.

At which level do I want to be at right now, if I want to win the Perfect level?

I want to be relegated back to Diamond so that I can actually earn PP.

It isn't about wanting to win against inferior competition, it's that the PP generation rewards winning, so the people wanting to be the best want to be at a level that they can generate PP. If I'm making 1k/week I'll never be able to compete at the Perfect level.

***I'm sure there's a few dicks that do want to beat up on weaker competition, you have those in every sport/game...but that's not the motivating factor for most, especially in this thread I think.

It is not normal to be earning 5-10k PP every week. If you are earning this much you are beating up on the weaker competition.

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by <Pion>

No, not tanking, sorry for the confusion. Referring to getting one gold card in the initial 6 packs and the player is bad enough that they are no longer good enough to be on the 25 man roster. So they aren't helping the team with their play, nor are they worth much more than the 1000 sell it now price. So everything the team has going for them now was acquired through achievements earned. I was making the point that there are some that did not spend nor did they get a lucky break and yet are in Perfect level leagues. So it is possible to compete by only earning achievements.

Ah, that makes more sense. Thank you for the clarification!

However, I don't think anything you're saying conflicts with anything they've been saying. It is absolutely possible for players to compete at the Perfect level with varying degrees of luck. This does not mean that they did not overcome competitive disadvantages to do so.

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by Mat

It is not normal to be earning 5-10k PP every week. If you are earning this much you are beating up on the weaker competition.

You may be correct. 5k-10k may be a bit too high of an estimate for a realistic version of this scenario. However, this does not invalidate the sentiment being expressed here, that competing at the Diamond level will yield more points than their team could reasonably be expected to accrue at Perfect. While the difference may not be as pronounced as in the example, it will still be large enough to be significant and noticeable.

[Mat]

5-10k is very high. I cannot remember the exact number but I have seen a comment from Markus saying PT is designed so users earn ~1500PP a week. Obviously there would be variance but this would be the median earned pp.

If you are deliberately moving down a league to earn more PP, then you are gaming the system.

[uschi_baerchen]

I spent 40 Euro (=50 Dollars) and made it to perfect for this season. I will be relegated since I am at the pace for 50 wins. BUT: I looked into the other Teams, most of them are NO whales, they have found a different way to be competitive. I will find out what they have done and has escaped my notice (e.g. one of the better Teams employs Machado at SS throughout who is on the brink of beeing sold by my Team). Maybe they have pitcher heavens so they must not care for movementrate for their pitchers and powerrate for their hitters and so beeing able to get bargains in AH. (By the way: a team with Betts/Trout is NOT a whale imho, since these hitters are providing - given their PP - a tremendous added pop and are no-brainers and no, I do not have them yet, I shall have to wait 40 weeks, but I do not feel at a competitive disadvantage because I am not willing to shell out another 50 Dollars for them, I simply will try to be competitive at D or G or S)

[uschi_baerchen]

Originally Posted by kingcharlesxii

It's extremelydifficult to search players since you can't search by ratings (plz add Markus!)and you can't look at players that aren't in the AH.

And here the skill drops in. The question is: “How doI find undervalued Players that can replace underperforming players on my team?”

• Know your underperformers
  1. for this you must define a meaningfull metrix, e.g. WAR per 600 PA forbatters, WAR per 200 IP for pitchers, but take whatever you like
  2. you also need the statistics for at least 1000 IP and 3000 PA, socollect them in a spreadsheet over several seasons
• Know the undervalued players
  1. For this you have to collect the player-data of the other teams in yourleagues
  2. You will get a metrix value and names, for these names you can search theprices in the AH
  3. Identify the positions, where your players suck and there is a highdifference to otherwise relatively cheap players from above
• Spent the minimum PP for the highest difference in pop

Some further thoughts:

• 1. Pitchers like Corbin, Dierker, Whitley, Kopech are way cheaper than10.000, have a look at them
  2. Batters like Ichiro, Simmons, Vizquel, McReynolds are way cheaper than2.000, Martinez is a mega-bargain, have a look at them
  3. As for catchers go with Realmuto since the catchers all suck (except thetotally overpriced ones)

You should get with the strategy eventually to Gold,maybe Diamond; for Diamond maybe Perfect you must dive a bit deeperunfortunately

[Markus Heinsohn]

Since this turned into a competitive balance discussion I'll merge this with the correct thread.

[eldur00]

Originally Posted by Mat

5-10k is very high. I cannot remember the exact number but I have seen a comment from Markus saying PT is designed so users earn ~1500PP a week. Obviously there would be variance but this would be the median earned pp.

If you are deliberately moving down a league to earn more PP, then you are gaming the system.

1500 is too low.



I've been in Bronze since the beginning and playing .401 ball lifetime and I earn 3000 points on average. That is without a single winning season under my belt.

[old timer]

Originally Posted by eldur00

1500 is too low.



I've been in Bronze since the beginning and playing .401 ball lifetime and I earn 3000 points on average. That is without a single winning season under my belt.

Yeah, 1500 PP/season seems really low. My career record is 500-526 and I've averaged 5677 PP/season (not counting this season). I never made less than 3k, even when I lost 102 games at diamond level.

[Zorro]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Since this turned into a competitive balance discussion I'll merge this with the correct thread.

Is that what this thread is? 🤔😰