Competitive balance discussion

[shockenawe]

Originally Posted by OzzyOz23

This is going to be a long post, and please forgive me if I repeat anything that was written previously by others. I just feel the need to contribute to this discussion.

Even though I haven't posted on these forums over the years, I am a long time lurker & have considered myself a silent member of the OOTP community since at least version 6.5, which is when I converted over from Baseball Mogul. Mostly I came by for mods and ideas, occasionally reading up on stats-only debates & other hot button topics. PT has inspired me to become a more vocal member, as I have had a blast talking ball on Discord, and figure for all this community here on the boards has given me, I should give back a little too.

I have been on both sides of this....in previous baseball card games I was strictly F2P all the way thru. And not a fan of whales, to say the least. However, I have gone full NWO, errr...whale on this game for a number of reasons I won't bore you with. I will say, however, that if my hard earned money was "wasted" on anything, I'm glad it's Marcus and his R&D - or even R&R - since OOTP has brought me countless hours of pleasant distraction over the years.

I think in our heads and hearts, most of us enjoy that we "beat" this game over time. Some, like me, buy it year in and year out, despite knowing we will handily best the AI in short order. Thus, the creation of personal house rules and frequent requests for an improved AI to present the user a better natural challenge. Which I think is at the root of some people's disdain for what they feel they are seeing in PT. Uncontrolled limits that are either based on random luck (a 400k card drawn) or financial flexibility. Which somehow feels unfair because the feeling is this game can't quite be beat with enough innovation, unlike OOTP, which can be beaten over time due to the limits of the AI.

Is there a right answer? Marcus would have to pay me handsomely in PP to get it if I had it. But, it seems he thought hard about that and put in relegation to remedy it. That it's hard to lose games and have lost seasons seems to be the flip side of being a GM. Wasted "years" happen. Losing Sucks. Strategies must be adjusted in response. From what I've observed, having a team of diamonds and perfects will get a team to the playoffs. But, what wins championships is strategy - suitable park factors, undervalued players, platoons, players that fit your team, individual player strategies, innovative bullpens. And it's baseball....in a playoff series, anything can happen. Braves fans can tell you all about it. It's tough being the Oakland A's or Milwaukee Brewers or Cleveland Indians or Tampa Rays, but those teams make it work, in the same leagues with the Yankees and Redsox and Cubs and who nots. And, obviously as you move up levels, it gets harder. If the Toledo MudHens win the International League & get promoted to MLB, the same things that worked in AAA won't necessarily work in the majors. But, I'm sure they would try to figure out something that would work.

This is a long winded way of saying it's only been 5 or 6 weeks now. An incredibly small sample size. If PT isn't for you, that's cool. Personally, I probably won't play it in OOTP 20, and if I do, it will be F2P to give myself a new challenge. But, a lot of the hand wringing reads like people accustomed to winning that are having a hard time dealing with adversity in a game they are used to dominating. I fully believe in debate, and hope it moves things forward in a productive manner. But, I feel like threads like this do more to push people away than grow the community. And I hope it does grow via PT, as these boards have noticably slowed the last couple of years. Which is a shame because OOTP is, in my opinion, the greatest sports game out there.

Best of luck to all and thank you for taking the time to read this.

This is well said. Ultimately, people seem to want to win with the path of least resistance and if they face that resistance, they want to point to everything other than being outplayed by their competitors. Unfortunately for them, real players in Perfect Team aren't as easy to outsmart as the AI in the base game.

This comes from the perspective of a FTP player who will have 3 very different teams in diamond leagues as of Monday, and one that might make a perfect league depending on how the playoffs go this weekend. I enjoy the challenge of trying new things and experimenting with different set ups to try to beat the cookie cutter lineups. Maybe others should try it.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by shockenawe

Ultimately, people seem to want to win with the path of least resistance and if they face that resistance, they want to point to everything other than being outplayed by their competitors. Unfortunately for them, real players in Perfect Team aren't as easy to outsmart as the AI in the base game.

Great summary; you nailed it.

[Dogberry99]

I think it is an excellent partial summary. The desire to win influences many, I agree. However, the lower point earning potential from fewer achievements also compounds this issue. Losing is bad, but what is worse is discovering that you do not have access to the points required to rebuild it. Tank, and you're a cheater. Sell off your best cards to try to get the points needed to get better cards, and you're also throwing off the competitive balance in a detrimental manner.

If you built a bad team, there's not many options other than to just wait for those cheap bronze achievements. and wait. and wait. and wait.

[Westheim]

Why does it "concern" some people what other people are doing with their own money?

[bobbycockstrong]

I cant speak for others but people can spend as much money as they want, and Im not particularly concerned. The thread is titled "competitive balance" though, so money seems to come up because it gives you a competitive advantage.

At the end of the day, this is a video/computer game. If you look at pretty much any other known video/computer game that has a competitive/ranked mode they dont allow you to achieve a dominant competitive balance advantage over your opponent due to currency (whether its your own money, or even currency that you earn in game from play time).

Part of that is tied to many competitive/ranked games having a "skill" component which you actually control (with your mouse/keyboard/controller), which is the dominant factor in competition. A person can use their skill (aim, micro, style, etc) to overcome what appears to be a superior opponent on paper.

In OOTP the "skill" is your ability to manage your assets. Unlike most other competitive/ranked games, where you can not purchase/improve your asset pool because its either not possible or once competition starts its finite and capped (you choose a character, a load out of guns in FPS, a nation in an RTS, etc) prior to the game starting, that theoretically all of your opponents also have access to - and then you play. In many of these games, which are often "f2p" people still spend money on them but they are on cosmetic things or DLC/expansion to enable further content. In OOTP, people spend money on competitive assets.

I think thats why people continue to complain. And why there is technically no "competitive balance". If you win OOTP PT (whatever that means, i guess winning WS in Perfect leagues), did you win because you truly were the best/outskilled your opponent? Or did you win because you had a massive competitive advantage due to larger asset pool available? Who knows, but seems like the later is at least possible, if not more likely. In other competitive/ranked games, its literally not possible because the games attempt to achieve a competitive balance.

OOTP doesnt attempt to achieve that. Its unbalanced. I dont think that is up for dispute. But if thats the intent, then thats perfectly fine with me. The vast majority of people will NEVER win a perfect league WS, even if they spend thousands of dollars. Just like the vast majority of people will NEVER "win" at competitive call of duty, league of legends, counterstrike, DOTA, Starcraft, whatever game, even if they play 16 hours a day trying to be the best. Thats just how it goes. Those games however, do attempt to achieve "competitive balance", which OOTP does not - but OOTP is not those games so there you go.

[Maddox]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

At the end of the day, this is a video/computer game. If you look at pretty much any other known video/computer game that has a competitive/ranked mode they dont allow you to achieve a dominant competitive balance advantage over your opponent due to currency (whether its your own money, or even currency that you earn in game from play time).

The thing is though that almost every Ultimate Team style game has this same problem. You see the same kind of complaints in MLB the Show. Even with them having a 50% sales on their currency. The most expensive cards on their marketplace are $100 investments if you just want to buy it outright.

And while it is true that you control those players so it takes some skill their are still complaints, especially early in the year of people just buying their teams.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

but OOTP is not those games so there you go.

Worth repeating

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

OOTP doesnt attempt to achieve that. Its unbalanced. I dont think that is up for dispute. But if thats the intent, then thats perfectly fine with me. The vast majority of people will NEVER win a perfect league WS, even if they spend thousands of dollars. Just like the vast majority of people will NEVER "win" at competitive call of duty, league of legends, counterstrike, DOTA, Starcraft, whatever game, even if they play 16 hours a day trying to be the best. Thats just how it goes. Those games however, do attempt to achieve "competitive balance", which OOTP does not - but OOTP is not those games so there you go.

One of the neat things about OOTP is that an ordinary guy COULD win a perfect league title with a F2P team. You could never win at the highest level of StarCraft unless you were an elite player with mad skillz.

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by Maddox

The thing is though that almost every Ultimate Team style game has this same problem. You see the same kind of complaints in MLB the Show. Even with them having a 50% sales on their currency. The most expensive cards on their marketplace are $100 investments if you just want to buy it outright.

And while it is true that you control those players so it takes some skill their are still complaints, especially early in the year of people just buying their teams.

Yeah same with games like FIFA.

But at the end of the day, generally better PLAYERS will tend to beat better TEAMS.

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by Orcin

One of the neat things about OOTP is that an ordinary guy COULD win a perfect league title with a F2P team. You could never win at the highest level of StarCraft unless you were an elite player with mad skillz.

Yeah but this ordinary guy that wins perfect with a f2p team probably has "mad OOTP skillz" in the sense of their strategy/players they use with their available resources/etc. And their "skills" are even more apparent if they are doing it at a competitive disadvantage. So its not really an equal comparison since you could probably never win a perfect league title if you are just stringing together random players with no purpose (i.e. "no skill").

And even if you are f2p, you can STILL have a competitive balance advantage.

Again, this has nothing to do with money. f2p player packs some 100k+ PP card and sells it. They now have a competitive balance advantage and didnt spend a penny. They build a great team. They win. Congrats. But they still had a competitive balance advantage against many other players because they had access to a larger pool of resources.

Its about true competitive balance, aside from whether you spend money or not. Money provides you a competitive balance advantage (due to greater access to resources), but so does pack luck for f2p players.

Thats why i favor something like a combined overall ratings average cap - since you can still spend as much money as you want, or get lucky in packs - and therefore buy players, etc - but at the end of the day there is an established competitive balance framework you have to operate within, and thus you achieve a semblance of competitive balance.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

Thats why i favor something like a combined overall ratings average cap - since you can still spend as much money as you want, or get lucky in packs - and therefore buy players, etc - but at the end of the day there is an established competitive balance framework you have to operate within, and thus you achieve a semblance of competitive balance.

This is a boring league where everyone has the same players. Len Barker, Ichiro, and a cast of cheap 2018 Live diamonds are on every team. You save your big points for Trout and Betts. Ho hum.

[bailey]

You need 1/2 million points to build a competitive perfect league team. You can earn those points through a LONG TERM and PATIENT plan of accumulating achievement points. So the game is balanced, real money just accelerates the process of being competitive.

Let's hope for 20, they don't have such obvious "must have" value plays like Trout and Betts.

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by Orcin

This is a boring league where everyone has the same players. Len Barker, Ichiro, and a cast of cheap 2018 Live diamonds are on every team. You save your big points for Trout and Betts. Ho hum.

How is that any different from having no cap? eventually you will get all the same perfect and diamond players and the best golds (Im sure plenty of people are already at or close to this point in perfect league). Only difference is that some teams havent gotten there yet because they havent had the resources (PP or pack luck) to do so yet.

Additionally, in a cap system, with the addition of more batches of cards per what the developers said, there will be a lot more combinations of players. Sure some people might use ichiro, but honestly there are cards that are just as good with similar ratings (low silvers). Not everyone will have ichiro on their team. And why would you have cheap diamonds when there are expensive/better non-live diamonds? Its a ratings cap, not a PP cap. You will have to make choices, but you can still get the best/most expensive cards if you choose - just with trade offs. As it stands you dont have to make choices, there are clear "best players" and you can get them all if you want, but most people cant/wont because they dont have access and may never have access to the resources required to do so.

Again, im simply coming back to the concept of "competitive balance" that the thread is allegedly about. Whether a ratings caps is boring or not, which id disagree with you there based on what I lightly mentioned above, is an opinion/preference on how you want the game to be. Competitive balance is not an opinion/preference. Either it is or it isnt, and thats all im really discussing.

As it stands, I havent seen a case to say that the game is competitively balanced. As I said in my previous post, perhaps that is working as intended and there is no intention to ever balance things (only the devs know), but this thread is about "competitive balance" - hence my comments.

[Maddox]

Originally Posted by Orcin

This is a boring league where everyone has the same players. Len Barker, Ichiro, and a cast of cheap 2018 Live diamonds are on every team. You save your big points for Trout and Betts. Ho hum.

How would you suggest to fix it?

It does not matter what system you put into place there will always be a meta lineup. There will always be guys whose combination of skills, availability and price will mean that they are the most common.

As long as perfect Joe Dimaggio or 97 Ty Cobb are 100,000 points more than perfect Mike Trout then most teams will have Trout. If Dimaggio was as common a card as Mike Trout then Dimaggio would be on every perfect league team

If MLB could clone Mike Trout and gave every team a chance have their own Mike Trout in CF then I can't think of a single team that would not jump at the chance.

[zrog2000]

Originally Posted by shockenawe

This is well said. Ultimately, people seem to want to win with the path of least resistance and if they face that resistance, they want to point to everything other than being outplayed by their competitors. Unfortunately for them, real players in Perfect Team aren't as easy to outsmart as the AI in the base game.

This comes from the perspective of a FTP player who will have 3 very different teams in diamond leagues as of Monday, and one that might make a perfect league depending on how the playoffs go this weekend. I enjoy the challenge of trying new things and experimenting with different set ups to try to beat the cookie cutter lineups. Maybe others should try it.

What is funny about this is that the path of least resistance for whales is to spend money. They don't even have to outsmart anyone if they have no restraint in spending.

I'm getting tired of anyone who says anything at all regarding taming unlimited spending whatsoever in every league being accused of wanting everything handed to them. The whales are the ones who are getting everything handed to them in exchange for money.

Sure that's what the whales want and that's what OOTP wants, but it's not what everyone wants. If this game isn't for non-whales and nothing will ever be done to address anyone's desires for better competition, then it should just be stated and ban everyone who says anything about it so we can all just leave for good.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Maddox

How would you suggest to fix it?

It doesn't need to be fixed, because it is working fine as is.

[shockenawe]

Originally Posted by zrog2000

What is funny about this is that the path of least resistance for whales is to spend money. They don't even have to outsmart anyone if they have no restraint in spending.

I'm getting tired of anyone who says anything at all regarding taming unlimited spending whatsoever in every league being accused of wanting everything handed to them. The whales are the ones who are getting everything handed to them in exchange for money.

Sure that's what the whales want and that's what OOTP wants, but it's not what everyone wants. If this game isn't for non-whales and nothing will ever be done to address anyone's desires for better competition, then it should just be stated and ban everyone who says anything about it so we can all just leave for good.

I'll be more direct with you since you didn't get the point.

You can beat people who spend money without spending a dime. If you want to be more competitive, then be more competitive. Build a better team. There are a lot of great players out there that don't cost a ton of points.

Voila, problem solved!

[boxner1]

Originally Posted by Maddox

It does not matter what system you put into place there will always be a meta lineup. There will always be guys whose combination of skills, availability and price will mean that they are the most common.

Unlikely in a ratings cap league. Some managers will buy one or two 100's and only be able to fill out a roster with 40's. Others will spread out their cap with all mid-level players. Some will spend most of their cap on pitching, others will spend it mostly on batting. You should gets lots of variety of players and likely no duplicate teams.

If OOTP feels a ratings cap league wouldn't be monetized then charge a flat fee or a monthly fee for it. I suspect quite a few would be willing to pay a reasonable fee for such a competitive league. It would basically be similar to the online leagues with salary caps. Many of us in those leagues pay the commish to cover his costs, so it's already an established system.

[bobbycockstrong]

Originally Posted by shockenawe

I'll be more direct with you since you didn't get the point.

You can beat people who spend money without spending a dime. If you want to be more competitive, then be more competitive. Build a better team. There are a lot of great players out there that don't cost a ton of points.

Voila, problem solved!

Yeah you can beat people that spend 1 million dollars on the game without spending a cent, that has nothing to do with competitive balance though. Thats your "skill" in OOTP, building a good team, knowing the players, etc.

But lets pretend you and I have equal "skill" in OOTP and we both decide that we are not going to spend a penny on the game. And we make new teams. And you pull 1 gold in your starter packs and a bunch of bronze and sub-bronze. But I pull a historical perfect and a rare non-live diamond. And then I decide to sell them and now I have a 400k PP pool and you have none after you spent your initial 1000 on a few cheap good players on the AH. And then i build a stacked team with that 400k. And then lets pretend we played 162 games against each other. You are honestly going to tell me that you are going to beat me? Now before you claim otherwise, remember we have the same "skill". All that is different here is that I have vastly superior resources to you. So of course you arent going to beat me. If we played this scenario out 100 times you would be lucky to "beat me" once. But ill just tell you "get competitive" its fine l2p.

There is a difference between being good/skill and "competitive balance". People continue to miss/overlook/fail to grasp that, it seems.

[zrog2000]

Originally Posted by shockenawe

I'll be more direct with you since you didn't get the point.

You can beat people who spend money without spending a dime. If you want to be more competitive, then be more competitive. Build a better team. There are a lot of great players out there that don't cost a ton of points.

Voila, problem solved!

There are no great cheap players out there that can compete with a team that cost $5000 or more. And that's in perfect, where everyone worth a damn will end up at some point. And this problem will only get worse as all of the teams in perfect become more and more perfect. There is a virtual wall that everyone without an unlimited budget will reach and that is why this discussion should be taking place. Even players who thought they were whales will reach that wall when they are overrun by players who are bigger whales. No matter how much strategy you use, there is a limit to how good you can do without spending a lot of money.

I just saw a team run through gold with a .750 winning percentage and he swept the entire playoffs with a run differential of over 60. It's a shame that other 29 managers in the league weren't better with strategy?

When that team gets to perfect, I bet some other whales in his division will end up quitting. There is literally nothing that you can do to stop that team because he can counter any strategy you might use with his full reserve roster of historical perfects.