Idea for PT22 - Separate Leagues for F2P/P2W

[Cowboys3356]

I am sure this idea has holes and needs some flushing out but here is the basic idea that I think will address a large number of the frustrations that many users currently have with PT21.

For PT22 there would be two leagues:

Free to Play (f2p): users that spend ZERO dollars after initial purchase
Pay to Win (p2w): users that spend $1 or more after initial purchase
~would only apply to League play, tournaments remain unchanged for now

We could call it something else to be more PC but for now this is the easiest way to describe it.

So everyone on Day 1 starts as f2p status but as soon as a user spends any money (doesnt matter if it is $1 or $10k) their status changes to p2w.

For league play all users are grouped together by their status. The tier system of Stone/Iron/Bronze/Silver/etc etc all the way to PL remains the same but now two separate groupings exist. So there would be a f2p Perfect League and a p2w Perfect League.

I assume it is possible for the devs to create something that would automatically change a user's status if they buy PP. If the game doesn't currently track this behind the scenes then I would think it is very doable.

The game experience for p2w would remain the same as now with no changes in when they could buy PP.

The main difference for the f2p user would be they could ONLY buy PP (thus changing their status to p2w) on Sundays before league selection runs. This would be to prevent an exploit such as a person being assigned to a f2p league and then spending a bunch of money to buy players and win the league. Sure they would be bumped over to p2w the next week but for the week they were in f2p it would ruin the experience for everyone else.

Now this does not entirely level the playing field but it helps. In p2w you will still have big team differences because someone spending $100 probably wont have the same level of team as someone spending $10k. And in f2p you would still have differences because a person playing 10 hours a day flipping cards on the AH, running tournaments constantly, etc is going to have an edge over a casual player who checks in once a week. But at least now on the f2p side the difference in teams is created by time invested and skill, not financial dominance.

I am sure people can pick this apart and still find reasons to complain about the structure and the devs might say it is too much work but i think instead of complaining we need to explore ideas like this that could add value to the game and make it better, not just tear it down with negativity.

Ok that's all I got, hopefully some people smarter than me can find a way to make something like this work and bring some joy back to the long time players who seem to be a bit lost out there right now. Good luck!

[eldur00]

Originally Posted by Cowboys3356

I am sure this idea has holes and needs some flushing out but here is the basic idea that I think will address a large number of the frustrations that many users currently have with PT21.

For PT22 there would be two leagues:

Free to Play (f2p): users that spend ZERO dollars after initial purchase
Pay to Win (p2w): users that spend $1 or more after initial purchase
~would only apply to League play, tournaments remain unchanged for now

We could call it something else to be more PC but for now this is the easiest way to describe it.

So everyone on Day 1 starts as f2p status but as soon as a user spends any money (doesnt matter if it is $1 or $10k) their status changes to p2w.

For league play all users are grouped together by their status. The tier system of Stone/Iron/Bronze/Silver/etc etc all the way to PL remains the same but now two separate groupings exist. So there would be a f2p Perfect League and a p2w Perfect League.

I assume it is possible for the devs to create something that would automatically change a user's status if they buy PP. If the game doesn't currently track this behind the scenes then I would think it is very doable.

The game experience for p2w would remain the same as now with no changes in when they could buy PP.

The main difference for the f2p user would be they could ONLY buy PP (thus changing their status to p2w) on Sundays before league selection runs. This would be to prevent an exploit such as a person being assigned to a f2p league and then spending a bunch of money to buy players and win the league. Sure they would be bumped over to p2w the next week but for the week they were in f2p it would ruin the experience for everyone else.

Now this does not entirely level the playing field but it helps. In p2w you will still have big team differences because someone spending $100 probably wont have the same level of team as someone spending $10k. And in f2p you would still have differences because a person playing 10 hours a day flipping cards on the AH, running tournaments constantly, etc is going to have an edge over a casual player who checks in once a week. But at least now on the f2p side the difference in teams is created by time invested and skill, not financial dominance.

I am sure people can pick this apart and still find reasons to complain about the structure and the devs might say it is too much work but i think instead of complaining we need to explore ideas like this that could add value to the game and make it better, not just tear it down with negativity.

Ok that's all I got, hopefully some people smarter than me can find a way to make something like this work and bring some joy back to the long time players who seem to be a bit lost out there right now. Good luck!

Been debated to death, maybe moreso in previous versions of PT. In short, it will never happen.

[Marleigh]

Stupid idea for both OOTP as a business as it discourages small purchases, and for players as it discourages small purchases.

[Cowboys3356]

Awesome!! Then everyone just go back to whining and complaining!!

Good talk

[dkgo]

Terrible idea every time it gets posted with no chance of ever happening

[Ty Cobb]

Never...going...to...happen.

This is, after all, a business.

[Magus978]

Non-starter. Absolute non-starter. I'm all for giving F2P teams an opportunity to thrive if they know what they're doing, but as stated by others in the thread, it makes negative sense for the company.

Intentions are good, just not gonna happen.

[Spieler]

This topic has been beaten to death for years, but for the sake of discourse.

IMHO, the only realistic way to separate FTP and P2W players (using the definition in the OP) is to create two separate economies, NO switching allowed. Separate economies means separate auction houses, league structures, etc. Good old Tris Speaker would likely have a 'last 7' in an F2P world wildly different from the 'last 7' in the P2W world. Thus no switching...

Again, IMHO, the only viable way as a business to make this model feasible, is to hand out cash prizes to P2W leagues, warm fuzzies to F2P leagues. OOTPDev has already stated such structures would make life extremely complicated (i.e. expensive) with the various international loot box/gambling laws et al. (Unless you live in Schleswig-Holstein.) Policing that is a nightmare. This game, in the big picture, is a niche game to be honest. They aren't selling millions or billions of copies, and thus not the commensurate budget to take on that level of risk.

For a company their current size, I wouldn't touch this with a 10-foot pole.

[Westheim]

Let me put it this way...

No.

[tomnov]

Maybe the developers could throw the f2p dogs a bone, and issue a trophy to the f2p guy (or gal) who performs best in each league. Maybe even run a few daily or weekly f2p tournaments.
Myself, I'm pretty much locked into f2p, unless I get a larger stimulus check in the near future. I'll play the perfect game until I get tired of getting my brains bashed in, then I'll go back to the normal game.
I have to budget to buy the game each year. I actually contemplated skipping this year, since I didn't anticipate any new content with baseball not happening for months, but the prospect of the 'dream bracket' created by MLB made me bite.
I didn't play PT the last 2 years, as I heard and imagined the game as a money pit, but I've had a little fun with it so far; I built a team last nite to play in the Diamond-cap 1750 daily tournament, and snuck thru to the 2nd round with my all-diamond OF I craftily assembled by paying attention to some bargains in the AH.
It is quite a time suck to even be a little bit competitive, but still more interesting than what is passing for baseball minus 1/3 of their stars and all of the crowds. But I'll probably skip buying the game entirely next year, as the stagnation of progress a f2p player can expect in PT, combined with the stagnation of baseball in general this season, just adds up to zero impetus to get a newer version.

[Marleigh]

Originally Posted by tomnov

Maybe the developers could throw the f2p dogs a bone, and issue a trophy to the f2p guy (or gal) who performs best in each league.

Why do people think they deserve special prizes for not spending any money?

[QuantaCondor]

Originally Posted by tomnov

Maybe the developers could throw the f2p dogs a bone, and issue a trophy to the f2p guy (or gal) who performs best in each league. Maybe even run a few daily or weekly f2p tournaments.
Myself, I'm pretty much locked into f2p, unless I get a larger stimulus check in the near future. I'll play the perfect game until I get tired of getting my brains bashed in, then I'll go back to the normal game.
I have to budget to buy the game each year. I actually contemplated skipping this year, since I didn't anticipate any new content with baseball not happening for months, but the prospect of the 'dream bracket' created by MLB made me bite.
I didn't play PT the last 2 years, as I heard and imagined the game as a money pit, but I've had a little fun with it so far; I built a team last nite to play in the Diamond-cap 1750 daily tournament, and snuck thru to the 2nd round with my all-diamond OF I craftily assembled by paying attention to some bargains in the AH.
It is quite a time suck to even be a little bit competitive, but still more interesting than what is passing for baseball minus 1/3 of their stars and all of the crowds. But I'll probably skip buying the game entirely next year, as the stagnation of progress a f2p player can expect in PT, combined with the stagnation of baseball in general this season, just adds up to zero impetus to get a newer version.

You could always join one of the big F2P friendslists (BFF or OL). Both of them tend to give recognition and accolades to the players who are high performing. Though, I think the main thing joining those lists makes people realize is that the ceiling on a dedicated F2P player is much higher than you'd think.

[ronhatch]

Personally, I think the more interesting split is actively managed vs. AFK.

Since the game currently doesn't have any way to tell it you are no longer interested, abandoned teams continue to float around... and in fact can earn a ton of points that can then be used if the player eventually comes back. I'd be interested in a mostly voluntary set of leagues that disallowed roster changes during the season (or limited them in specific ways). The reason I say "mostly" voluntary is that I think it would make sense to move teams there if the player didn't log in at all in the previous week (or month, or whatever).

[ronhatch]

Originally Posted by Marleigh

Why do people think they deserve special prizes for not spending any money?

Why do people care who "won" when some players bought an advantage?

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by ronhatch

Why do people care who "won" when some players bought an advantage?

So you'd revoke all World Series titles won by the evil pay-to-win New York Yankees?

[ronhatch]

Originally Posted by Westheim

So you'd revoke all World Series titles won by the evil pay-to-win New York Yankees?

I'd be happy to, just because I hate the Yankees... but that's an entirely different situation. In a video game, unlike real life, it's entirely possible for everyone to come in on 100% equal footing.

Edit: Oh, and to be more clear... the Yankees have more money than other teams because they have more fans. As much as I hate it when they win anything, I still have to admit that in the big picture there are more people happy when they win. That's real-world economics for you.

[spreznym530]

In this thread: somebody honestly and kindly presents an idea. Other users show up and find many different ways to scold him and call him stupid.

Why tf must he be subjected to ridicule? It’s easy to explain why it’s not feasible without being a dick. He’s just spitballing, doing nobody any harm. Utterly miserable people.

[dkgo]

Originally Posted by ronhatch

I'd be happy to, just because I hate the Yankees... but that's an entirely different situation. In a video game, unlike real life, it's entirely possible for everyone to come in on 100% equal footing.

Edit: Oh, and to be more clear... the Yankees have more money than other teams because they have more fans. As much as I hate it when they win anything, I still have to admit that in the big picture there are more people happy when they win. That's real-world economics for you.

What is "100% equal footing?"

Is a new player equal to someone who has been playing since PT19?

What about people who work from home and can spam tournaments all day compared to someone who works on a jobsite without computers?

How about someone who has a master's in data analytics?

I'd take my chances against the teams who just put in money compared to the ones who really know what they are doing.

[ronhatch]

Originally Posted by dkgo

What is "100% equal footing?"

Is a new player equal to someone who has been playing since PT19?

What about people who work from home and can spam tournaments all day compared to someone who works on a jobsite without computers?

How about someone who has a master's in data analytics?

I'd take my chances against the teams who just put in money compared to the ones who really know what they are doing.

Oh, good grief.

Equal opportunity, not equal outcome.

[dkgo]

Like how everyone has equal opportunity to buy points at the same cost?

Spending money is less of a factor in success than spending time.