Perfect Team Achievements

[Jamee999]

500 PP for having a batting champion.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by Ile

I understand that, but let's say I got a diamond roster. I bench them for a few weeks and get relegated to the bottom. Then I switch em all back in and proceed to crush everything in my way for a few seasons to rack up as many of these achievments as possible in order to gain a maximum amount of PP.

I know it sounds ridiculous, and I personally will never do that, but my experience from similar games tells me there will be a lot of people that will do this if an achievment pays the same regardless of what league you play in.

Edit: Or set strategies that maximize your chances of losing, etc.

How about if PT evaluates a team's top 25 cards (active or reserve) using the sell card now value and add that team's total number of PP to get a team's value. And put all the teams of like value in the same league.

For example, my team's top 25 cards are 1 gem (5000 PP), 2 golds (2*1000}, 7 silvers (7*100) & 15 bronze (15*25) that's 8075 PP and i have 2405 PP. That's 10,480 PP. Next season put me in a league with other teams around the same value.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Please keep in mind that we'll be fine-tuning the payouts of the achievements over the course of the beta

[Clavette]

Any chance for a 100+ win season giving PP?

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Clavette

Any chance for a 100+ win season giving PP?

You'll already get PP for making the playoffs We cannot give out too many PP or the whole system will collapse because of inflation.

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

How about if PT evaluates a team's top 25 cards (active or reserve) using the sell card now value and add that team's total number of PP to get a team's value. And put all the teams of like value in the same league.

That's level scaling and I hate when RPGs do that. When your team improves, whether by better managing, good market play, or buying pp, you need to get a sense on the field that it has gotten better. Otherwise there is no incentive to get better.

People would treat it like they do in RPG's... avoiding that level up as much as possible or in PT terms, stacking their teams with very good silvers instead of paying pp to buy golds/diamonds and play against better teams.

Besides, if you look at the diamonds a lot of them really aren't all that good. OVR is deceptive.

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Please keep in mind that we'll be fine-tuning the payouts of the achievements over the course of the beta

Good... I really hope the league level issue will be addressed.

I'd do it like

Entry level x1
Rookie Level x2
next level x4
.... x8

It sounds like a lot but when you think about it, if you put a team with a static level of ability in each league and look at the points they'd win with static rewards, I bet their pp income would be reduced at least as much as that if not more.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Good... I really hope the league level issue will be addressed.

I'd do it like

Entry level x1
Rookie Level x2
next level x4
.... x8

It sounds like a lot but when you think about it, if you putt a team with a static level of ability in each league and look at the points they'd win with static rewards, I bet their pp income would be reduced at least as much as that if not more.

Why should achievements be worth different amounts at different levels when you are playing teams at your level no matter where you are?

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by Orcin

Why should achievements be worth different amounts at different levels when you are playing teams at your level no matter where you are?

Three reasons off the top of my head:

1. Because throwing a shutout against one of the best teams in the game is a heck of a lot harder than doing it against some random new team, and should be recognized as such.

2. 25 pp here and there is significant for a rookie team which can be improved by adding a bronze or silver. It is next to useless for any team above that level.

and most importantly

3. Because otherwise you're giving people a big incentive to sandbag. They'll elect to avoid promotion and earn their pp by pounding rookie level teams senseless. Others will be on a downward race to get relegated once it looks like their teams aren't going anywhere. I guarantee that this will be rampant if there is no achievement scaling and it will seriously harm the game.

Look at the promotion thread and see how many people there aren't happy about being moved up. That shouldn't happen. Being promoted should carry enough benefit that everybody will strive for it.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Look at the promotion thread and see how many people there aren't happy about being moved up. That shouldn't happen. Being promoted should carry enough benefit that everybody will strive for it.

The few of us complaining are not happy about being promoted because a whopping 16 teams are being pulled through from each league, which means plenty of those who went .500 or less are being promoted. This is the first promotion week. Give it time to balance out.

[One Post Wonder]

I was a borderline wildcard team, and if it wasn't for you guys I'd probably be going 57-105 next year.

The only thing that reducing the pool means is that instead of promoted sub .500 teams taking a beating, it will be the teams like mine. But the principle will remain the same.

Having a bad year and losing games doesn't matter in and of itself. The big difference is in earnings. Next year if you'd stayed in the rookie league and won 90 games you might have earned, I don't know... say 3000 pp. In the league you're entering you're not going to earn half that. There's no achievements that reward you for being a punching bag.

But with achievement scaling you'd earn as many points being sub .500 in the higher league as someone with twice as many wins would earn in the lower league. And why not? Both teams probably have the same amount of talent after all.

[Orcin]

You want to change the game before it is officially released based on problems that don’t exist. You should just relax and see how things play out.

[sharknut]

600 for MVP Mike Trout. Thought that could be worth at least 1000, but he also got a Silver Slugger for 250 and 250 for Gold Glove

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by Orcin

You want to change the game before it is officially released based on problems that donÂ’t exist.

Betas are entirely about changing games before they are released. I'd rather a game is changed before its official release than after.

I can't show that a problem exists in PT (although I know the problem exists in similar games that have matured) so there's not much point in hammering on. But in a few months, if achievement rewards aren't scaled and sandbagging isn't commonplace then I will be very surprised.

[JaytheGreat]

1000 for winning the World Series
1000 for making it the Finals
500 for a Great Season (my score was 750)

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Betas are entirely about changing games before they are released.

No, betas are about fixing problems, and...

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

I can't show that a problem exists in PT

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by Orcin

No, betas are about fixing problems, and...

Hey, you win. I concede this internet disagreement to you.

But if any threads about sandbagging start showing up later, do the right thing and go post on them so that I can mock you (if I'm still around).

[stealofhome]

I put together as many of these as I could find into a google sheet located here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

[JynxMe]

I got an achievement not in the spreadsheet: "Rocket Game"
Not sure on what's required. Here's the details I have
May 20, 2040 Rocket Game - E. Plank 9.0 IP, 2 HA, 0 R, 0 BB, 16 K, 113 pitches vs the Denver Pipers
800 PP