Live cards

Bunktown Ballers · 05-31-2021, 08:26 PM

Why are LIVE CARDS such piles of crap? Live Pitchers you can attribute straight at the MOVEMENT rating which generally low. Why are pitching cards other than LIVE not all crap? I had a picher card turn into a perfect 100 today...whoopee-do only because I can sell it for 20,000 PP. I sure would like to use that card....I did...SUCKS really bad from a pitcher that's really really good. They can't even be used in the lowest levels. It just really confusing why there are even in the game if they not going to be good nor usable.Same goes with hitters card. Why are they made so terrible? Someone has to know why

BB

professor ape · 05-31-2021, 09:55 PM

Part of the issue is that most of the top cards are PEAK or representative of a players best season which is generally an outlier. Basically the Live cards are good for Live only tournaments with rare exception.

ncap99 · 05-31-2021, 10:38 PM

Think of them as the starter set. They are much easier to get, will get you to probably gold or even diamond level but need to be replaced to win. And there are live only tournaments so you can always do that.

Hertston · 06-01-2021, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

Why are LIVE CARDS such piles of crap? Live Pitchers you can attribute straight at the MOVEMENT rating which generally low. Why are pitching cards other than LIVE not all crap? I had a picher card turn into a perfect 100 today...whoopee-do only because I can sell it for 20,000 PP. I sure would like to use that card....I did...SUCKS really bad from a pitcher that's really really good. They can't even be used in the lowest levels. It just really confusing why there are even in the game if they not going to be good nor usable.Same goes with hitters card. Why are they made so terrible? Someone has to know why

BB

I hate to say it, but 'poor design'. The introduction of two sets of missions subsequent to the initial (far too easy) MLB ones that gifted halfway decent historics to all and sundry only made it worse, as did assorted editions of current MLB players, many still in their prime, noticeably more pokey than their live card. And as you say, other than live only tournaments, the MLB players are just annoyances after you have been playing a few weeks, with even the perfects just becoming 20K PP awards. It's a terrible waste of the image rights.

It's too late for this year, but it needs a radical rethink before next. My preferred solution would actually be to remove all non-live cards altogether with the exception of those given as mission and tourney prizes.. which should strongly reflect the performance levels of MLB cards of equivalent value.

I would even happily pony up for a separate 'historic' version of the game provided OOTP didn't try to flog a new version every year. If they insist on monetizing it, add in sets of historic ball parks or fork out on whatever image rights they can trace to replace existing designs, and sell them as DLC. A set of decent cartoons for the most recognizable players' cards maybe. Alas, I fear all we will see is the loot-box mobile crap

.

Abnerdoubleday · 06-01-2021, 11:01 AM

In addition to why are most live cards so bad, there is the question as to why live cards are rated completely different than other cards? For example, SP Brandon Woodruff got bumped to 100 with 93/66/67 ratings. Those ratings likely wouldn't even earn a diamond rating in a non-live card. While the overall ratings shouldn't be taken too seriously for roster decisions, over-rating live cards certainly negatively affects the value of packs.

chazzycat · 06-01-2021, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

Why are LIVE CARDS such piles of crap?

Dunno why I bother responding to all of these threads...probably something wrong with my brain, like I enjoy bashing my head against a wall over & over. But let's try again.

Look, packs have to be filled with bad cards. Think of it like gambling, which it essentially is. The house always wins. They win because they control the odds, and to make the math work, they can't let the players win too much. Only enough to keep them coming back for more (buying more points to gamble more).

Think of it this way: when you play a slot machine, the majority of your spins are losers. You win nothing. But in OOTP, since it is a card collecting game, you can't open a pack of "nothing" because that would not be fun at all. There must be a separate class of cards that represent a losing spin. That's why live cards exist, they fill that niche.

In game design terms, it honestly makes perfect sense. Especially considering that this game is intended to be a showcase of baseball talent throughout its entire history...making the current players the lower tier of cards is downright reasonable. It's such a strange thing to get worked up about!

ineedplayerpics · 06-02-2021, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

Dunno why I bother responding to all of these threads...probably something wrong with my brain, like I enjoy bashing my head against a wall over & over. But let's try again.

Look, packs have to be filled with bad cards. Think of it like gambling, which it essentially is. The house always wins. They win because they control the odds, and to make the math work, they can't let the players win too much. Only enough to keep them coming back for more (buying more points to gamble more).

Think of it this way: when you play a slot machine, the majority of your spins are losers. You win nothing. But in OOTP, since it is a card collecting game, you can't open a pack of "nothing" because that would not be fun at all. There must be a separate class of cards that represent a losing spin. That's why live cards exist, they fill that niche.

In game design terms, it honestly makes perfect sense. Especially considering that this game is intended to be a showcase of baseball talent throughout its entire history...making the current players the lower tier of cards is downright reasonable. It's such a strange thing to get worked up about!

That’s not fair! I want every card to be good

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abnerdoubleday

In addition to why are most live cards so bad, there is the question as to why live cards are rated completely different than other cards? For example, SP Brandon Woodruff got bumped to 100 with 93/66/67 ratings. Those ratings likely wouldn't even earn a diamond rating in a non-live card. While the overall ratings shouldn't be taken too seriously for roster decisions, over-rating live cards certainly negatively affects the value of packs.

This is what I was meaning to ask. A 100 LIve is so different than a 100 anything else. And it goes straight on down from diamond to iron. And I just don't get how they update live cards. How off are they from their true value to what value StatHead gives it. No hiding I'm a White Sox fan so how does a relief pitcher win pitcher of the month in the American League but his card drops from a 93 to and 89. I have other issues all over the set but what difference does it matter what we think. It's like in the same time period Carlos Rodon rises from a 69 to a 81. What's the difference? Or the timeframe? Hokey at best. I'm sure everyone has some questions about queationble ratings

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ineedplayerpics

That’s not fair! I want every card to be good

You right..You shouldn't bother bc you don't understand. I receive 20,000 PP Quick Selling a 100 Verlander but not a 100 CY Young, but we all know the Young is the much better card.. It's not your "I want every card good" whine, I just like my brand new $100 bill to have as much value as a 50 year old $100 bill. Simple enough you think

chazzycat · 06-02-2021, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

No hiding I'm a White Sox fan so how does a relief pitcher win pitcher of the month in the American League but his card drops from a 93 to and 89

You aren't alone in being perplexed with some of the ratings changes in the last update. Referring to Liam Hendriks, many of us were surprised he went down because he pitched very well during the update. Lucas has explained that it was a residual effect from his poor April: https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=329248

But this is a wholly separate issue from the general "live cards suck" rant you are always going off about.

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

Dunno why I bother responding to all of these threads...probably something wrong with my brain, like I enjoy bashing my head against a wall over & over. But let's try again.

Look, packs have to be filled with bad cards. Think of it like gambling, which it essentially is. The house always wins. They win because they control the odds, and to make the math work, they can't let the players win too much. Only enough to keep them coming back for more (buying more points to gamble more).

Think of it this way: when you play a slot machine, the majority of your spins are losers. You win nothing. But in OOTP, since it is a card collecting game, you can't open a pack of "nothing" because that would not be fun at all. There must be a separate class of cards that represent a losing spin. That's why live cards exist, they fill that niche.

In game design terms, it honestly makes perfect sense. Especially considering that this game is intended to be a showcase of baseball talent throughout its entire history...making the current players the lower tier of cards is downright reasonable. It's such a strange thing to get worked up about!

You right..You shouldn't bother bc you don't understand. I receive 20,000 PP Quick Selling a 100 Verlander but not a 100 CY Young, but we all know the Young is the much better card.. It's not your "I want every card good" whine, I just like my brand new $100 bill to have as much value as a 50 year old $100 bill. Simple enough you think

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

You aren't alone in being perplexed with some of the ratings changes in the last update. Referring to Liam Hendriks, many of us were surprised he went down because he pitched very well during the update. Lucas has explained that it was a residual effect from his poor April: https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=329248

But this is a wholly separate issue from the general "live cards suck" rant you are always going off about.

SHADDUP. Jeez these homers only think 1 direction..to please the makers

chazzycat · 06-02-2021, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

You right..You shouldn't bother bc you don't understand. I receive 20,000 PP Quick Selling a 100 Verlander but not a 100 CY Young, but we all know the Young is the much better card.. It's not your "I want every card good" whine, I just like my brand new $100 bill to have as much value as a 50 year old $100 bill. Simple enough you think

help me understand! I would like to know why you are so upset by this. It seems completely natural for live cards to be worse. Yes exactly, you quicksell the Verlander, keep the Cy Young. What's the problem with that?

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

You aren't alone in being perplexed with some of the ratings changes in the last update. Referring to Liam Hendriks, many of us were surprised he went down because he pitched very well during the update. Lucas has explained that it was a residual effect from his poor April: https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=329248

But this is a wholly separate issue from the general "live cards suck" rant you are always going off about.

I can take a team of non-live Gold cards vs your team or 100 LIVE only cards and have a better winning percentage after 162 games...year after year after year....LIVE CARDS SUCK

chazzycat · 06-02-2021, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

SHADDUP. Jeez these homers only think 1 direction..to please the makers

LOL ok. I was very critical of this last live update, maybe try reading the thread...but they did respond with some information to help make sense of it, so I passed that onto you to help you understand. It'll be the last time I try to help you.

Bunktown Ballers · 06-02-2021, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

You aren't alone in being perplexed with some of the ratings changes in the last update. Referring to Liam Hendriks, many of us were surprised he went down because he pitched very well during the update. Lucas has explained that it was a residual effect from his poor April: https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=329248

But this is a wholly separate issue from the general "live cards suck" rant you are always going off about.

So next update Cheezycake Liam Hendricks should have a better card than this update no matter if he sucks for every game since May 31? So rating are 1 month behind actual update?

chazzycat · 06-02-2021, 02:21 PM

No. Basically, he gave up so many homers in April (4 HR in 9 innings is terrible) that he hit the maximum amount of MOV rating that a player can change in 1 month, so there was still some left over effect and that got applied in May.

I didn't like it either, didn't make much sense. But at least it's an explanation...not totally random.

chazzycat · 06-02-2021, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunktown Ballers

I can take a team of non-live Gold cards vs your team or 100 LIVE only cards and have a better winning percentage after 162 games...year after year after year....LIVE CARDS SUCK

No one is disputing this. Yes, live cards suck, without a doubt. The question is, why do you care so much? The decision was made years ago, and they have stayed consistent with it. Why not move on and try using non-live cards since they are better?

BatAround · 06-03-2021, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

No one is disputing this. Yes, live cards suck, without a doubt. The question is, why do you care so much? The decision was made years ago, and they have stayed consistent with it. Why not move on and try using non-live cards since they are better?

Because it's the internet, where you can scream, complain, be completely rude to other people, and relentlessly criticize the developers when they come into the forums to give explanations, and have little to no ramifications for being such a downer. Over a game, no less.

ncap99 · 06-03-2021, 03:47 PM

Live cards are supposed to be an easy to obtain starter set. There are live only tournaments if you want to stay in that box. This game would get boring extremely fast if you didn't have better cards to look forward to that were very difficult to obtain. I do somewhat understand the criticism of how a 100 live is worse than most low diamond historical, but as was stated before it has been very consistent and easy to understand through the history of perfect team. I have no idea how ratings are derived but I assume it has something to do with stat allocation in reverse with a cap of 100. So if you were to remove the cap many historical cards in particular would probably be 125s or 130s but that would just jack around the entire tiering system and be more confusing.

05-31-2021, 08:26 PM	#1
Bunktown Ballers All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Louisiana Posts: 1,589 Infractions: 0/2 (3)	Live cards Why are LIVE CARDS such piles of crap? Live Pitchers you can attribute straight at the MOVEMENT rating which generally low. Why are pitching cards other than LIVE not all crap? I had a picher card turn into a perfect 100 today...whoopee-do only because I can sell it for 20,000 PP. I sure would like to use that card....I did...SUCKS really bad from a pitcher that's really really good. They can't even be used in the lowest levels. It just really confusing why there are even in the game if they not going to be good nor usable.Same goes with hitters card. Why are they made so terrible? Someone has to know why BB

05-31-2021, 09:55 PM	#2
professor ape All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The belly of the beast Posts: 1,498	Part of the issue is that most of the top cards are PEAK or representative of a players best season which is generally an outlier. Basically the Live cards are good for Live only tournaments with rare exception. __________________

05-31-2021, 10:38 PM	#3
ncap99 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 318	Think of them as the starter set. They are much easier to get, will get you to probably gold or even diamond level but need to be replaced to win. And there are live only tournaments so you can always do that.

06-01-2021, 11:01 AM	#5
Abnerdoubleday Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 203	In addition to why are most live cards so bad, there is the question as to why live cards are rated completely different than other cards? For example, SP Brandon Woodruff got bumped to 100 with 93/66/67 ratings. Those ratings likely wouldn't even earn a diamond rating in a non-live card. While the overall ratings shouldn't be taken too seriously for roster decisions, over-rating live cards certainly negatively affects the value of packs.

06-02-2021, 02:21 PM	#17
chazzycat All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 1,685	No. Basically, he gave up so many homers in April (4 HR in 9 innings is terrible) that he hit the maximum amount of MOV rating that a player can change in 1 month, so there was still some left over effect and that got applied in May. I didn't like it either, didn't make much sense. But at least it's an explanation...not totally random.

06-03-2021, 03:47 PM	#20
ncap99 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 318	Live cards are supposed to be an easy to obtain starter set. There are live only tournaments if you want to stay in that box. This game would get boring extremely fast if you didn't have better cards to look forward to that were very difficult to obtain. I do somewhat understand the criticism of how a 100 live is worse than most low diamond historical, but as was stated before it has been very consistent and easy to understand through the history of perfect team. I have no idea how ratings are derived but I assume it has something to do with stat allocation in reverse with a cap of 100. So if you were to remove the cap many historical cards in particular would probably be 125s or 130s but that would just jack around the entire tiering system and be more confusing.