Recruiting more people to play gold and silver tournaments!

[allenciox]

So I have been checking my record of games in bronze, silver, and gold tournaments, and I notice that silver and gold b07-t32s seem to take a lot longer to fill this season than last. Average number of minutes between the start of b07-t32:

bronze: 8 minutes
silver: 42 minutes
gold: 55 minutes

So, let's get more of these silver and gold tournies going... Come on in, the water's fine!

[Torgonius]

Cost of entry for bronze - accessible to pretty much everyone, and mistakes and experimentation is inexpensive. Tournaments fire constantly from abut 8am - midnight ET every day, slower between midnight and 8am, but still faster than gold or silver.
Cost of entry for silver - a kidney and possibly a lung depending on your local organ black market fluctuations. Tournaments fire off with the same frequency as intelligent life being found on earth.
Cost of entry for gold - a kidney or a lung, tournaments fire once a year or so.

I get exponentially more chances at the same packs in bronze for much less than silver or gold. Maybe if the prizes in gold and silver weren't standard packs, they'd be more attractive.

[ineedplayerpics]

Originally Posted by Torgonius

Cost of entry for bronze - accessible to pretty much everyone, and mistakes and experimentation is inexpensive. Tournaments fire constantly from abut 8am - midnight ET every day, slower between midnight and 8am, but still faster than gold or silver.
Cost of entry for silver - a kidney and possibly a lung depending on your local organ black market fluctuations. Tournaments fire off with the same frequency as intelligent life being found on earth.
Cost of entry for gold - a kidney or a lung, tournaments fire once a year or so.

I get exponentially more chances at the same packs in bronze for much less than silver or gold. Maybe if the prizes in gold and silver weren't standard packs, they'd be more attractive.

I fully agree with this! Bronze BO7 is the way to go

[EvvCat]

Why does anyone spend the points to build and maintain silver or gold tournament teams to win the same rewards as bronze tournaments offer?

10 packs is 10 packs. Torgonius is mostly right - the only thing I might disagree on is that silver tournaments are maybe a little more common than finding intelligent life on earth.

[bailey]

I'll toss my 2 cents in favor of iron tournaments where just about anything you enter can win. Sadly, the powers that be discriminate against iron by not offering bo7, but bo5's can be lucrative, nevertheless.

[Torgonius]

Originally Posted by bailey

I'll toss my 2 cents in favor of iron tournaments where just about anything you enter can win. Sadly, the powers that be discriminate against iron by not offering bo7, but bo5's can be lucrative, nevertheless.

In the time it takes me to type "Best of 5", 5 iron Best of 5's have fired.
I was playing them on my new team today with pretty much random iron live cards and picked up 20+ packs.

I am in favor of making both the higher level quicks and the weeklies more attractive. If I could get 5 gold packs for winning a gold tournament, I'd invest the PP in building a team. It would have to be 10 silver packs for silver tournies, because the price of silver cards is just stupid right now.

And the weeklies are just so -EV to me. Why tie up one of 3 slots for 5 or 6 days at a 1 in 128 chance at a card when I can grind that same slot into a several dozen (if they win) packs of cards in the same time?

[neugey]

No incentive to play silver or higher or salary cap tourneys if the rewards match the iron/bronze level. Yes there are some silver and gold cards gathering dust in my collection, but gotta roll with the structure currently in place.

[Hertston]

I was playing exclusively gold for a while, but am starting to return to silver and bronze teams more frequently. Consistent success in gold is now far too dependent on possession of over-powered cards significantly superior to base cards of the same value being introduced to the game post-release and it's becoming increasingly difficult to remain competitive. At least while trying to play the main game as well. There is something wrong when 128 player tourneys have a gold card as top prize, whatever their value limit, IMHO.

[allenciox]

So I don't necessarily agree that gold or silver "has" to be expensive. In gold, there are two cards that dominate their positions: Dallas Keuchel at Pitcher, and Mookie Betts at RF. Keuchel is 8 or 9k and Mookie is 22k. Mookie is the only 20k+ card that is really important to acquire. Carrasquel is a mainstay at SS. His cost? about 4k.

Many of the top gold cards (especially pitchers) are future legends. They can generally be had for between 2k and 4k. Most of the rest you will end up buying if you want to complete FOTF missions (including Carrasquel) anyway.

Yes, you can spend a fortune acquiring Magadan at 1B, Evers and Madrigal at 2B, etc. But I didn't. And I have a better winning percentage at gold than I have at bronze.

[Hertston]

Originally Posted by neugey

No incentive to play silver or higher or salary cap tourneys if the rewards match the iron/bronze level. Yes there are some silver and gold cards gathering dust in my collection, but gotta roll with the structure currently in place.

That's not the only dynamic, or IMHO even an overly significant one. It's not about what you win so much as how often you do; to keep those packs flowing. There are fewer tourneys running as you go up the caps, but there are also exponentially fewer players with teams that perform consistently well in them. If you have a competitive team and some idea how to deploy it, you will win more often in silver and gold than in bronze and iron. The flipside is that cards 'gathering dust' won't generally do (you have far fewer to select from, for a start); and there is a price of admission to acquire the cards needed to win packs consistently in silver and above. At gold it gets expensive, and you need to seriously consider whether any additional rewards are worth the PP you must consistently put in to keep acquiring them.

[Hertston]

Originally Posted by allenciox

In gold, there are two cards that dominate their positions: Dallas Keuchel at Pitcher, and Mookie Betts at RF.

I wouldn't disagree with Betts, although there are several good alternatives at RF, but I would on Keuchel. Neither his numbers nor his performance across a considerable number of tourneys suggest 'dominance', or anything like IMHO; something I think is reflected in the dramatic drop in his auction price. I use him, but have a half-dozen other SPs I'd happily use instead.

If I had to pick one must-have player at gold it would actually be Johnson because of his unique mix of good hitting numbers and extreme flexibility in deploying them.

[tomnov]

I've pondered if additional packs should be offered as prizes for the earlier you enter a tournament and the longer you sit waiting.

After all, who wants to be one of the first to enter a gold tournament and sitting for hours waiting for it to begin, when you can enter 5 bronze tournaments in the meantime and then perhaps still bomb the gold tournament as one of the last 2 or 3 to enter.

[getalife1798]

Live tournaments are where it's at.

More random results - no real meta

Shame more people don't play them.

[Bunktown Ballers]

Hey, yall like playing in tournaments good for you. I dabble a little.

[tomnov]

Originally Posted by getalife1798

Live tournaments are where it's at.

More random results - no real meta

Shame more people don't play them.

You mean PD tourneys? Most of what you say is true. But results are a little TOO random, and someone who excels in game strategy VS an otherwise evenly matched team doesn't have the time to set up such strategies, therefore nullifying their skill.
Or in the instances where strategies can be implemented, the reward at the end is pitiful, 1K PP or so; realistically worth 1 SPk, when a 'random' win in a standard tournament, which you only have to adjust maybe every few weeks when new content comes out or players are re-rated, is worth 5x or 10x that value, and all you have to do is enter and check that the game hasn't altered your roster.

PD tournaments = too much time invested for too little reward, IMO

EDIT: Maybe if the game would save individual strategies for players you've used before, then you can adapt the team strategy to the team you've drafted, and use the setting that adapts individual player strategies to the overall team strategy, PD would be more than 'just random'.

[Clavette]

Cant compete with gold teams that have the pp to buy the negro league sets. I've got a pretty strong gold team without those cards but I've got no chance when going up against them.

[Clavette]

Originally Posted by tomnov

You mean PD tourneys? Most of what you say is true. But results are a little TOO random, and someone who excels in game strategy VS an otherwise evenly matched team doesn't have the time to set up such strategies, therefore nullifying their skill.
Or in the instances where strategies can be implemented, the reward at the end is pitiful, 1K PP or so; realistically worth 1 SPk, when a 'random' win in a standard tournament, which you only have to adjust maybe every few weeks when new content comes out or players are re-rated, is worth 5x or 10x that value, and all you have to do is enter and check that the game hasn't altered your roster.

PD tournaments = too much time invested for too little reward, IMO

EDIT: Maybe if the game would save individual strategies for players you've used before, then you can adapt the team strategy to the team you've drafted, and use the setting that adapts individual player strategies to the overall team strategy, PD would be more than 'just random'.

This 100%

[getalife1798]

Originally Posted by tomnov

You mean PD tourneys?

No - tournaments that feature just live series cards. There is a 16 and 32 team 1625 cap that various different strategies have won.

[Hertston]

Originally Posted by Clavette

Cant compete with gold teams that have the pp to buy the negro league sets. I've got a pretty strong gold team without those cards but I've got no chance when going up against them.

Hmmm..? As I said above I consider Heavy Johnson particularly useful, but can't think of any more without adequate alternatives. If anything, the Negro League cards are a tad under-powered compared to Keuchel, Betts, Evers, etc, let alone some of the special edition exotica that keeps popping up as whale-bait that nobody else can afford. What cards are you thinking of?

[allenciox]

Originally Posted by Clavette

Cant compete with gold teams that have the pp to buy the negro league sets. I've got a pretty strong gold team without those cards but I've got no chance when going up against them.

"No chance" is an exaggeration --- but yes, there are some negro league cards that are quite useful (albeit not required) in silver and gold. But this might be one of the cheapest routes to getting what you need. The negro league set is undoubtedly +EV and has been for awhile. The reason is in the toppers: Jackie Robinson blows every other 2B out of the water, and Oscar Charleston is (in my opinion) the best CF in the game right now.

So build up negro league set, you can either sell or keep the toppers, and you get all these useful silver and gold cards essentially gratis.