Thoughts on lack of position training in PT22?

daves · 12-21-2021, 12:01 PM

the limited training in PT22 was a major change. But was it too much of a change? AROD joined the Yankees as a SS and was converted to 3B because of Jeter. I find that I got rid of great players like Mays because they only play one position in this game with no training possibility. In RL, if you have 2 great players that play one position, you convert one to another position to keep both. That is not the case in PT.

Sorry Tris, your a great outfielder, but you have to be the dh and I have to have a less talented player in LF because Ty is a better CF and you can't play anywhere else!

Tinkerman · 12-21-2021, 01:09 PM

Yes a bit too much. Really, the problem in previous versions was just that CF/SS trained to be the best fielders everywhere. As long as trained players are in general only realistically backup/cover, I think it would be good to have more positional training again. My theme team has always had to include players I don't want just to cover positions, which detracts from the fantasy element quite a bit.

TwanLX2000 · 12-21-2021, 01:14 PM

IDK... I personally appreciated the more realistic approach to multi-positional training, based on where these historical players actually played. It required us to get more creative in the middle infield and with defense in the corner outfield. We were also forced to construct lineup depth that complemented the abilities of our everyday players. I enjoy game characteristics that require more nuance to constructing a lineup, as opposed to rolling out the nine best hitters in the game and sticking them anywhere to make their bats play.

And while I jest, I don't know if the A-Rod / Jeter example is the greatest, since it was a poor on-field decision to cater to the ego of a less talented shortstop.

Maybe if the game added a rating for "flexibility" to determine how likely a player would be willing to learn a new position for the sake of their team?

I'm also FTP, so maybe I selfishly thought it leveled the playing field a bit. It was a lot more affordable to find a top tier defensive 2B than to purchase the most expensive infielder in the game who happens to be trainable at 2B.

HRBaker · 12-21-2021, 01:54 PM

I find it a bit ironic some will say PT is not real baseball, it's a card collecting game - yet others want position training and minor leagues.

Conflicting wishes.

daves · 12-21-2021, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBaker

I find it a bit ironic some will say PT is not real baseball, it's a card collecting game - yet others want position training and minor leagues.

Conflicting wishes.

It is not real baseball, but I wish it was.

HRBaker · 12-21-2021, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daves

It is not real baseball, but I wish it was.

That's fair, but I'm now convinced we can't have both - at least under the "PT" label

Kushiel · 12-21-2021, 05:08 PM

I hope they never bring back all the training. In past versions with training it caused less players to be used. Seeing the same faces in all the lineups was even worse than now.

bailey · 12-21-2021, 06:27 PM

I'd rather they do away with training instead of training to 75% effectiveness. What exactly does that mean? Does a 2B with 99 range 90 error and 90 arm play more effectively at 2B than a SS trained at 2B with 99 range 90 error and 90 arm?

Just do away with training altogether and the fielding ratings on the card are 100% effective for all eligible positions.

ubernoob · 12-21-2021, 07:02 PM

Yeah the training was awful.

It was super nice to do, but it really limited the card choices even more than they are this year.

Hertston · 12-22-2021, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBaker

I find it a bit ironic some will say PT is not real baseball, it's a card collecting game - yet others want position training and minor leagues.

Conflicting wishes.

Not really. More like differing perceptions. Recognising what PT currently is in practice doesn't imply any desire or preference for it remain that way, particularly at any cost to 'real baseball' fidelity if that can be implemented in a workable fashion.

thejojo · 12-22-2021, 12:54 PM

I think it's better the way it is now than it was.

HRBaker · 12-22-2021, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hertston

Not really. More like differing perceptions. Recognising what PT currently is in practice doesn't imply any desire or preference for it remain that way, particularly at any cost to 'real baseball' fidelity if that can be implemented in a workable fashion.

Agreed, but I'm not convinced "baseball reality" is a goal of the OOTP/COM2uS team for PT. I think their opinion is the classic game is the "real baseball" simulation for guys like me, and perfect team is the profit driver for guys that enjoy the high level of competition and are willing to invest in it.

Hertston · 12-22-2021, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBaker

Agreed, but I'm not convinced "baseball reality" is a goal of the OOTP/COM2uS team for PT.

Absolutely. I was not suggesting it was. The purpose of PT is to generate profits, hence the 'baseball' frame of OOTP has been partially adapted to the model that has proved effective in other CCGs. With the launch of the mobile app, and consequent reduction in the proportion of the player-base coming to PT via a history playing OOTP, I can only see it moving further in that direction.

Oddly enough, my biggest gripe with PT as a CCG is that most of the 'C's' aren't worth 'C-ing'. They need to put some effort and, if necessary, money into getting photos or real artwork (good cartoons, maybe?) for historics and put brief player bios on the 'back' of each card. Make it so even those cards without the best numbers are worth acquiring for their own sake. I have 4,400 cards and no interest whatsoever in all but 100 of them (including tourney teams). That's absurd.

HRBaker · 12-22-2021, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hertston

Absolutely. I was not suggesting is was. The purpose of PT is to generate profits, hence the 'baseball' frame of OOTP has been partially adapted to the model that has proved effective in other CCGs. With the launch of the mobile app, and consequent reduction in the proportion of the player-base coming to PT via a history playing OOTP, I can only see it moving further in that direction.

Oddly enough, my biggest gripe with PT as a CCG is that most of the 'C's' aren't worth 'C-ing'. They need to put some effort and, if necessary, money into getting photos or real artwork (good cartoons, maybe?) for historics and put brief player bios on the 'back' of each card. Make it so even those cards without the best numbers are worth acquiring for their own sake. I have 4,400 cards and no interest whatsoever in all but 100 of them (including tourney teams). That's absurd.

VERY interesting idea. If they would attempt to format the cards like the old Conlon Collection that Megacards use to publish, the card collecting part of the game would become classic.

HomerD · 12-31-2021, 01:14 AM

I find it hilarious that many of the generic pictures show hitters hitting from the wrong side or pitchers throwing with the wrong arm. It probably takes 10 seconds to mirror the generic sketch, and a few extra lines of code to look up which image to use.

Also, I realize they are trying to make the truly elite players stand out from the crowd, but having Rogers Hornsby and Ted Williams as great defensive players is just nuts. There should be some element of uncertainty about whether to play the 65 defense Hornsby at 2B or go with the 110 defense of Grich, for example.

And this would further reduce the sameness of the lineups of the very best teams.

daves · 12-31-2021, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomerD

I find it hilarious that many of the generic pictures show hitters hitting from the wrong side or pitchers throwing with the wrong arm. It probably takes 10 seconds to mirror the generic sketch, and a few extra lines of code to look up which image to use.

I agree and I pointed this out in PT19. Annoying to have a right-handed batter pictured on a lefty batter. You would think this was an easy fix going forward.

But the worst was the Giordi LaForge from Star Trek picture cards in PT20. They actually updated the pictures 1/2 through the game since it was soo bad.

dishnet34 · 12-31-2021, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daves

But the worst was the Giordi LaForge from Star Trek picture cards in PT20. They actually updated the pictures 1/2 through the game since it was soo bad.

Is it bad that I kinda missed those after a while? :P

FancySkunk · 01-02-2022, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daves

But the worst was the Giordi LaForge from Star Trek picture cards in PT20. They actually updated the pictures 1/2 through the game since it was soo bad.

I still defend those from a conceptual point of view. The 3D models were decent. The major issue with them is that the player + background picture were all washed out in the same color. Giving them one of the generic photograph backgrounds, and not washing the model out would have gone a long way.

The solution to just reuse the 70s art was okay for 21, but should have been temporary. If we get that art again in 23, I'm going to be a little disappointed. Don't get me wrong the 70s art is good, it just seems a little silly seeing the luscious flowing locks on representations of more modern players.

HomerD · 01-02-2022, 12:36 PM

Was the norm in the 70's. And, frankly, I don't get the long hair and beards of today's players - having done both at one time in my life, it was a pain to care for them. I can only imagine how greasy and dirty a player's hair and beard are after a game in the hot sun featuring several hard slides on the basepaths.

johnwlits · 01-06-2022, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBaker

I find it a bit ironic some will say PT is not real baseball, it's a card collecting game - yet others want position training and minor leagues.

Conflicting wishes.

The tournaments feel like enough of a minor league analogue to me in that it's an opportunity to keep using the lesser cards in one's collection and it can still net you real bonuses in PT awards or cards. All the cards in your collection are potentially worth putting in lineups of some type based on the tournaments.

In terms of the training this year, I don't mind generally that they tried to mess with the training by limiting it, because limiting it in some way is probably for the best, but it feels like a waste for me to not be able to play Luis Aparicio at 2B when I also have Luke Appling in the starting lineup. Some of it is kind of silly. I could see a LF not being able to play RF, but the other way around? I don't know. And a SS who can't play 2B? Okay.

Obviously this is mostly going to affect people doing theme teams...but there are a lot of people who do theme teams, so...

12-21-2021, 12:01 PM	#1
daves Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 3,863	Thoughts on lack of position training in PT22? the limited training in PT22 was a major change. But was it too much of a change? AROD joined the Yankees as a SS and was converted to 3B because of Jeter. I find that I got rid of great players like Mays because they only play one position in this game with no training possibility. In RL, if you have 2 great players that play one position, you convert one to another position to keep both. That is not the case in PT. Sorry Tris, your a great outfielder, but you have to be the dh and I have to have a less talented player in LF because Ty is a better CF and you can't play anywhere else! __________________

12-21-2021, 01:14 PM	#3
TwanLX2000 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 197	IDK... I personally appreciated the more realistic approach to multi-positional training, based on where these historical players actually played. It required us to get more creative in the middle infield and with defense in the corner outfield. We were also forced to construct lineup depth that complemented the abilities of our everyday players. I enjoy game characteristics that require more nuance to constructing a lineup, as opposed to rolling out the nine best hitters in the game and sticking them anywhere to make their bats play. And while I jest, I don't know if the A-Rod / Jeter example is the greatest, since it was a poor on-field decision to cater to the ego of a less talented shortstop. Maybe if the game added a rating for "flexibility" to determine how likely a player would be willing to learn a new position for the sake of their team? I'm also FTP, so maybe I selfishly thought it leveled the playing field a bit. It was a lot more affordable to find a top tier defensive 2B than to purchase the most expensive infielder in the game who happens to be trainable at 2B. __________________ Working hard to be in the conversation.

12-21-2021, 01:54 PM	#4
HRBaker Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 2,369	I find it a bit ironic some will say PT is not real baseball, it's a card collecting game - yet others want position training and minor leagues. Conflicting wishes. __________________ *HRB*

12-21-2021, 05:08 PM	#7
Kushiel All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Deep in the Heart of Texas Posts: 1,810	I hope they never bring back all the training. In past versions with training it caused less players to be used. Seeing the same faces in all the lineups was even worse than now. __________________ *Favente Deo supero*

12-21-2021, 07:02 PM	#9
ubernoob Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 300	Yeah the training was awful. It was super nice to do, but it really limited the card choices even more than they are this year. __________________

12-21-2021, 01:09 PM	#2
Tinkerman All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2019 Posts: 1,941	Yes a bit too much. Really, the problem in previous versions was just that CF/SS trained to be the best fielders everywhere. As long as trained players are in general only realistically backup/cover, I think it would be good to have more positional training again. My theme team has always had to include players I don't want just to cover positions, which detracts from the fantasy element quite a bit.

12-21-2021, 06:27 PM	#8
bailey Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 3,368	I'd rather they do away with training instead of training to 75% effectiveness. What exactly does that mean? Does a 2B with 99 range 90 error and 90 arm play more effectively at 2B than a SS trained at 2B with 99 range 90 error and 90 arm? Just do away with training altogether and the fielding ratings on the card are 100% effective for all eligible positions.

12-22-2021, 12:54 PM	#11
thejojo Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2020 Posts: 393	I think it's better the way it is now than it was. __________________ [IMG]https://challenge.ootpdevelopments.com/pt24signatures/thejojo.jpg[IMG]

12-31-2021, 01:14 AM	#15
HomerD Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2021 Posts: 125	Yes I find it hilarious that many of the generic pictures show hitters hitting from the wrong side or pitchers throwing with the wrong arm. It probably takes 10 seconds to mirror the generic sketch, and a few extra lines of code to look up which image to use. Also, I realize they are trying to make the truly elite players stand out from the crowd, but having Rogers Hornsby and Ted Williams as great defensive players is just nuts. There should be some element of uncertainty about whether to play the 65 defense Hornsby at 2B or go with the 110 defense of Grich, for example. And this would further reduce the sameness of the lineups of the very best teams.

01-02-2022, 12:36 PM	#19
HomerD Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2021 Posts: 125	But short hair and no facial hair Was the norm in the 70's. And, frankly, I don't get the long hair and beards of today's players - having done both at one time in my life, it was a pain to care for them. I can only imagine how greasy and dirty a player's hair and beard are after a game in the hot sun featuring several hard slides on the basepaths.