Tournaments General Discussion

[waittilnextyear]

I'm disappointed that the devs are basing the training/no training decision on a poll that people could vote on as many times as they wanted. It's clear that both "factions" are relatively large, but I'd like a better reasoned out deliberation than slightly over 50% beat slightly under 50%, so that's that.

I will say that I voted (once) for training. I would prefer to have it. But, as a compromise, hopefully OOTP21 will feature more cards that come standard with multi-positional eligibility. The mode is already completely ahistorical so I don't get the justification that some of the best SS of all time wouldn't be able to play 2B or 3B or even 1B.

[The_Savage_1]

I should add, though, I think OOTPD have done a magnificent job with tournaments and I'm thoroughly enjoying.

[Dogberry99]

I'm not convinced that their decision was based solely on the poll. I think the poll just confirmed to them that there was not an overwhelming preference within the community, opening the way forward for them to act in accordance with their own preferences.

Based on this, the decision to remain without training in tournaments make a lot of sense. They are a small development team, and figuring out how to incorporate training would likely be quite difficult with how all the game mechanics currently work - if its even possible at all.

Since there is ambivalence on this topic, it makes sense for the small dev team to move on to other projects (21, mobile apps, whatever) and call this one good, or at least good enough.

[daves]

How do you view more than 6 tournaments you participated in or all that you participated in?

[bailey]

Originally Posted by daves

How do you view more than 6 tournaments you participated in or all that you participated in?

On the entry page at the top there is a button "your tournaments" sort by "created desc" also clicked status "finished". You can also sort of the various types and modes.

[micpringle]

Whilst personally I would have preferred training to carry over, I believe there is absolutely an argument in having the two treated differently, and that's because the goals of regular PT and those of tournaments are very different.

Regular PT is about building a squad, over time, that's competitive. It's about creating a legacy. It's about pushing for promotion, or scrapping against relegation. Each card you purchase, be it in packs or the AH, is then yours to mould how you see fit. Its history may be written, but its future is not.

Tournaments on the other hand are simply a card game–you have a stack, and your opponent has a stack, and ultimately it's about who can put the best hand together in order to win the match.

OOTP is a true and proper baseball sim. Tournaments are a card game. PT sits somewhere in between, trying to blend together the best of both.

Tournaments shouldn't really be seen as an extension to PT, but rather a third play mode of OOTP. If a player really wanted to, they could play tournaments exclusively, only dipping into PT to use the AH and manage their collection.

[mcdog512]

Originally Posted by micpringle

Whilst personally I would have preferred training to carry over, I believe there is absolutely an argument in having the two treated differently, and that's because the goals of regular PT and those of tournaments are very different.

Regular PT is about building a squad, over time, that's competitive. It's about creating a legacy. It's about pushing for promotion, or scrapping against relegation. Each card you purchase, be it in packs or the AH, is then yours to mould how you see fit. Its history may be written, but its future is not.

Tournaments on the other hand are simply a card game–you have a stack, and your opponent has a stack, and ultimately it's about who can put the best hand together in order to win the match.

OOTP is a true and proper baseball sim. Tournaments are a card game. PT sits somewhere in between, trying to blend together the best of both.

Tournaments shouldn't really be seen as an extension to PT, but rather a third play mode of OOTP. If a player really wanted to, they could play tournaments exclusively, only dipping into PT to use the AH and manage their collection.

That's a pretty good way to look at it.

[Orcin]

Perfect Team is where you build the card collection that is used for both the weekly seasons and the tournaments. It does not make any sense to have Luke Appling playing 2B in the weekly season but unable to play 2B in a tournament. The specific card in my collection is either capable of playing 2B or not. Training should be treated the same for the two activities within the game.

[micpringle]

You’re making the assumption it’s the same card though, which it clearly isn’t—at best it’s a copy. One for each tournament you enter.

If it were the same card, it would show all the PT history in tournaments, and participation in tournaments would be reflected in PT—neither of which happens.

I agree that training should be part of the copy, but what I disagree with is that the decision to not allow training in tournaments should therefore mean training is also removed from PT.

[bailey]

If I had known training wasn't going to carry over, I would not have sold Anson because now I need him for tournaments. I emphasize defense on my main squad, so after training Boggs there, Anson didn't cut it, nor did Norm Cash, also sold. Oh, well, scammed again, like Combining Babe Ruth!

[waittilnextyear]

My team has participated in 28 tourneys so far.

5 first place finishes. 2 diamond packs (96 Mariano Rivera came from one of them and he's going for 60-70K right now). 1 second place finish. 3 third/fourth place finishes. 9/28 = finishing in the money nearly one-third of the time.

Note that in the Universe-->Managers and Rankings tab, apparently I have 7 tournament wins so I'm not sure how that is being counted.

Finally got my silver team to win a tourney. That squad is feeling more finished although there are a couple of cards I'd still like to add.

Also curious as to how my 1750 cap team will fare tomorrow...

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by waittilnextyear

My team has participated in 28 tourneys so far.

5 first place finishes. 2 diamond packs (96 Mariano Rivera came from one of them and he's going for 60-70K right now). 1 second place finish. 3 third/fourth place finishes. 9/28 = finishing in the money nearly one-third of the time.

Note that in the Universe-->Managers and Rankings tab, apparently I have 7 tournament wins so I'm not sure how that is being counted.

Finally got my silver team to win a tourney. That squad is feeling more finished although there are a couple of cards I'd still like to add.

Also curious as to how my 1750 cap team will fare tomorrow...

7 tournament rewards, maybe?

I joined <=diamond, gold, silver & bronze tournaments most recently in succession. First the diamond... I did worse & worse after making it to the quarter-finals (lost to Golden Grizzlies) in the diamond tournament. I think this is because I've been working with the diamond cards in regular PT and built all of my rosters just before each tournament after joining them. So my diamond team was fine-tuned...I vaguely remember sorting out some of my gold players...and have little experience with most of the silver & bronze players in the recent past. All of them were enjoyable side projects anyway, & I got to see some of the cards I haven't used in awhile in action at least.

[dkgo]

It would be cool if the "Tournament Wins" ranking was instead some sort of tournament points that are awarded based on how many teams are in it. As is it's just a matter of who spams the most 8-man DoD and Bo3

[One Great Matrix]

While I concur with you, dkgo, I see two other options:

1. Post total tournaments or tournament losses as well, say 100/550...

2. Hit the "ignore" button in my brain. There's an overload of data anyway, we can't concern ourselves with all of it.

[dkgo]

I've only looked at it once and you really have to search to find it anyway so not really a big deal. Just seems to be missing an opportunity to make it useful. Your total "Tournament Score" could range from 1 point for winning an 8 man do-or-die to like 25 points for a 128 man Bo7 or something.

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by Jackgoboom

I gotta say Im not totally convinced by the total realism argument. Especially when you consider for example, that we have had rookie live cards coming into the game as perfects, and live pitchers suck at the higher levels of play.

We are using guys that generally never played together. Do we really think that if you have two elite shortstops that can hit, one plays and the other goes to the bench? No you move one to 2b or 3b.

If the card has the stats to play a certain position I don't see the problem with them being able to train to do so.

That argument would make some sense to me if a PT franchise resembled a real one & you didn't come by more than 50 or 60 players but since teams sometimes have reserve Major League talent in the 1000s, I think it's fair enough that you would have to base your lineups on a) history or b) projected future.

Athough fantasy, these teams are bound by real possibility...or the mode wouldn't work.

Guys who aren't trained up at a position do often play it well enough anyway esp. if they have good outfielder or infielder ratings...just not at an elite level.

[Jackgoboom]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

That argument would make some sense to me if a PT franchise resembled a real one & you didn't come by more than 50 or 60 players but since teams sometimes have reserve Major League talent in the 1000s, I think it's fair enough that you would have to base your lineups on a) history or b) projected future.

Athough fantasy, these teams are bound by real possibility...or the mode wouldn't work.

Guys who aren't trained up at a position do often play it well enough anyway esp. if they have good outfielder or infielder ratings...just not at an elite level.

The key word is sometimes though mate, I'm not sure that that many have as much reserve talent as you think, especially the FTP players.

I've put money in the game and do have a lot of cards, but my Tournament open team is significantly weaker than my normal team.

If you have a lot of top cards huge advantage, but I guess that is the point and it is why at some stage training will be abolished.

Just a sidenote. We are still relying on, to an extent, a certain view of what a players stats should look like. Ill just go back to my earlier point. Does anyone really believe that top modern pitchers would really be this awful in comparison to the pitchers of other eras?

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by dkgo

I've only looked at it once and you really have to search to find it anyway so not really a big deal. Just seems to be missing an opportunity to make it useful. Your total "Tournament Score" could range from 1 point for winning an 8 man do-or-die to like 25 points for a 128 man Bo7 or something.

Yeah, I guess. Or the total number of teams in the tournament. 8 teams=8 128=128.

Or 1 less. 64=63. Just because then it would represent the number of teams that didn't win the tournament you did. But then again...maybe more like the total rounds in the tournament. But then again...ha...forget it.

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by Jackgoboom

The key word is sometimes though mate, I'm not sure that that many have as much reserve talent as you think, especially the FTP players.

I've put money in the game and do have a lot of cards, but my Tournament open team is significantly weaker than my normal team.

If you have a lot of top cards huge advantage, but I guess that is the point and it is why at some stage training will be abolished.

Just a sidenote. We are still relying on, to an extent, a certain view of what a players stats should look like. Ill just go back to my earlier point. Does anyone really believe that top modern pitchers would really be this awful in comparison to the pitchers of other eras?

Fine point, mate. It isn't that big of a deal, though, is it?

[Jackgoboom]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Fine point, mate. It isn't that big of a deal, though, is it?

First world problem true, but it is just a discussion But I will take your point and will shut up and move on