Challenge Mode should be harder

[Orcin]

Current leaderboard:

#1: 93 seasons, .65 win %, 90% playoffs
#2: 74 seasons, .79 win %, 100% playoffs
#3: 57 seasons, .66 win %, 100% playoffs
#4: 86 seasons, .62 win %, 90% playoffs
#5:104 seasons, .62 win %, 90% playoffs

There's a sample of 414 played seasons, and the player made the playoffs over 90% of the time! Not a very challenging game. Well sure, these are the best. Ok, let's go deeper...

#26: 40 seasons, .62 win %, 80% playoffs
#27: 22 seasons, .75 win %,100% playoffs
#28: 25 seasons, .62 win %, 80% playoffs
#29: 15 seasons, .76 win %,100% playoffs
#30: 68 seasons, .54 win %, 50% playoffs

Finally, someone who only makes the playoffs HALF the time! But this is still just the best, right? Let's go way deeper.

#91: 13 seasons, .66 win %, 100% playoffs
#92: 22 seasons, .55 win %, 50% playoffs
#93: 29 seasons, .58 win %, 70% playoffs
#94: 23 seasons, .57 win %, 70% playoffs
#95: 18 seasons, .63 win %, 100% playoffs

Still, at #95, the player makes the playoffs 18 times in a row, and never misses. OOTP Challenge Mode should be harder than this, and the game overall should be more competitive and thus more realistic.

The best MLB franchise of all-time is the New York Yankees:

#1: 103 seasons, .57 win %, 50% playoffs

Compare that to the sample above where 13 of 15 players are better than the #1 all-time franchise. To me, that is a bigger realism problem than whether there are too many stolen bases, yet it gets no attention.

[Airdrop01]

But what about my example? I mean, of course if you pick a team with no budget constraint of consequence, or good players, it's gonna do that.

I mean, if I had managed the 46--- Cards, I'd get those numbers too.

Those leaders are a result of the teams, eras, etc. Not the mode itself.

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

I'm still waiting on someone (Orcin maybe) with more skill or patience or both than me to start with the standard 2017 game, as GM of the Royals, and succeed without manipulating the draft, without changing development schedules, without allowing draft pick trading, or trading of injured players.

So far, no takers. Let me tell you. It is NOT too easy.

Prove me wrong and post the dynasty reports year by year here.

I don't have the patience to play solo for very long but basically what you need to do is find players the CPU underrates. I think I traded most of the starters in the lineup except the SS, and found some cheap but productive 2 way players. With the money you save from trading some of the 8-10M players you can sign bullpen guys who start in FA, Brett Lawrie for 3B (or super utility), and a couple other spots.

Finding SP was the trickier part given how few prospects you start with. So get by with what you have + defence and go to the bullpen early and often.

The problem for me is I get bored playing solo and I have to sim game by game because I don't trust AI's management of the bullpen.

You can win but it's not easy especially if you're not moving picks.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

But what about my example? I mean, of course if you pick a team with no budget constraint of consequence, or good players, it's gonna do that.

I mean, if I had managed the 46--- Cards, I'd get those numbers too.

Those leaders are a result of the teams, eras, etc. Not the mode itself.

Did you look at the list of players above to see what teams they play? There is a mix of current day, pre-modern, golden age, and even some fictional.

The leader started with the New York Mets in 1962. Is that hard enough for you? He won 106 games in 1965 and 121 games in 1966. He continued with them until 1976, then he started with Brooklyn in 1872 and played through that era several times.

You keep bringing up the 1946 Cardinals... not everyone on the leaderboard is playing the 1946 Cardinals or even that era. But go look at the 1946 Cardinals. They won in 1946, but they didn't make the playoffs again until 1964. You can't just put the 1946 Cardinals on auto-pilot and dominate the late 40's and early 50's.

So my question is what era, teams, etc. are too easy? Should we not allow pre-war teams, post-war teams, 1962 Mets, any team with a winning record? Do you propose that Challenge Mode be limited to the 2017 Royals?

You can take any team from any era and quickly build a dynasty that is better than any all-time franchise. Challenge Mode should be harder than that. Maybe it takes 4-5 seasons to burn through all of the bad contracts that you get with the 2017 Royals. Once you get there, it is the same easy road that any other scenario offers. And by the way, there is nothing stopping a player from using the four exploits that you listed above on the 2017 Royals. I say they should be prevented from use by the mode.

I don't have time to sort through hundreds of players to compile their overall results. I wish OOTPD would do it. I am willing to bet that, if you compiled all of the seasons on the leaderboard, the overall winning percentage and percentage of playoff appearances would easily beat the Yankees.

You appear to be perfectly happy with a game that yields this type of results in its most challenging form. I am not. I think a mode that purports to challenge me should be hard enough that the average player on the leaderboard is at .500 and some are worse - regardless of team or era.

[Airdrop01]

I'm bringing up the Cards because of exactly what you say. Even a middling team like that (post 46) can be won with because of the economics.

I'm saying I don't know of anyone...literally... who has played and succeeded before they lost patience....with a team with the combination of bad contracts, ratings, economics, and owner as my personal example, the Standard Game start Royals. To win with them, you'd have to change development, allow draft pick trading, allow injured player trading, and then, MAYBE, you'd win in 10 years or more.

I don't have that kind of time on my hands between work, family and real world stuff. I posit winning with the OOTP version of some teams (eg KC) is much harder than winning with those same teams in real life...and that's pretty hard as is!!

So, I guess we just don't agree. I mean, not everyone has to agree, brother!

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

I'm saying I don't know of anyone...literally... who has played and succeeded before they lost patience....with a team with the combination of bad contracts, ratings, economics, and owner as my personal example, the Standard Game start Royals. To win with them, you'd have to change development, allow draft pick trading, allow injured player trading, and then, MAYBE, you'd win in 10 years or more.

We disagree because Challenge Mode is not limited to this scenario. Also, the limitations that you mention are not restricted in Challenge Mode. I could play the 2017 Royals and win 120 games in my fourth season, but how would you know that I did not use all of those tricks?

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

I'm bringing up the Cards because of exactly what you say. Even a middling team like that (post 46) can be won with because of the economics.

I'm saying I don't know of anyone...literally... who has played and succeeded before they lost patience....with a team with the combination of bad contracts, ratings, economics, and owner as my personal example, the Standard Game start Royals. To win with them, you'd have to change development, allow draft pick trading, allow injured player trading, and then, MAYBE, you'd win in 10 years or more.

I don't have that kind of time on my hands between work, family and real world stuff. I posit winning with the OOTP version of some teams (eg KC) is much harder than winning with those same teams in real life...and that's pretty hard as is!!

So, I guess we just don't agree. I mean, not everyone has to agree, brother!

You can definitely win sooner than 10 years.

[IanIachimoe]

where do you find the leaderboard for challenge mode?

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by IanIachimoe

where do you find the leaderboard for challenge mode?

There is a link on your profile page which comes up after you login.

[baseballonly]

You could join an online league...

[IanIachimoe]

Originally Posted by baseballonly

You could join an online league...

are there any online leagues that go day-by-day instead of weekly?

I know that would take forever, but I couldn't get immersed in my team checking in every 2-3 weeks.

[Markus Heinsohn]

There are indeed a few areas where we will make the game more challenging in OOTP 19. The first version of Challenge Mode got us a lot of good data which we can build on for the future

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

There are indeed a few areas where we will make the game more challenging in OOTP 19. The first version of Challenge Mode got us a lot of good data which we can build on for the future

I am really pleased to see this response. I look forward to the evolution of this mode of play. As far as I am concerned, the moderators could close this thread now because there is nothing more to say.

[Airdrop01]

No way, man. I'm awaiting the dynasty report.

[christophermichaels]

A lot of anger in this thread. I enjoy CM. But I also get that it's a work-in-progress. Give it a couple of years to let the developers see how it's being used so they can think of scenarios for improving it.

Some of the people on here are better players of this series than others. I caution folks to not make the mistake of thinking that makes someone a better or worse person. Let's be constructive in how we provide feedback to the developers to help shape their thinking. That's why they've given us this forum in the first place.

I would like to see CM evolve over several versions, just like the game has in general over many years. I'm still enjoying it, as is. And I just started a game with my beloved Royals, using the 2017 season as my starting point. It's heartbreaking to have to break up the band to go younger, cheaper, and in a different direction than Dayton Moore, but I enjoy the challenge and immersion into the game. I would encourage each of you to enjoy the game, regardless of the mode you play on, to enjoy the gameplay and process. I couldn't care less if I'm the lowest ranked player on the CM leaderboards when all is said and done. I want to enjoy my game with my team and live out my fantasy of being in charge of the team I have rooted for since I was 3 years old. That is what this game means to me.

[Airdrop01]

Originally Posted by seanstephans

A lot of anger in this thread. I enjoy CM. But I also get that it's a work-in-progress. Give it a couple of years to let the developers see how it's being used so they can think of scenarios for improving it.

Some of the people on here are better players of this series than others. I caution folks to not make the mistake of thinking that makes someone a better or worse person. Let's be constructive in how we provide feedback to the developers to help shape their thinking. That's why they've given us this forum in the first place.

I would like to see CM evolve over several versions, just like the game has in general over many years. I'm still enjoying it, as is. And I just started a game with my beloved Royals, using the 2017 season as my starting point. It's heartbreaking to have to break up the band to go younger, cheaper, and in a different direction than Dayton Moore, but I enjoy the challenge and immersion into the game. I would encourage each of you to enjoy the game, regardless of the mode you play on, to enjoy the gameplay and process. I couldn't care less if I'm the lowest ranked player on the CM leaderboards when all is said and done. I want to enjoy my game with my team and live out my fantasy of being in charge of the team I have rooted for since I was 3 years old. That is what this game means to me.

Yeah!!

Let me know how it goes. I just did a year one (again) where instead of simming I played out every game. I used Gore constantly as a PR and basically manipulated my way to a lot of small margin victories. I got crushed a lot. I won something like 84. I traded no one. Of course for some reason, it won't record the season online anymore. Maybe they did something to stop people from relplaying stud teams seasons over and over. I don't care about that. Maybe it's because I've tried so many times.

Now the budget is killing me. It looks like I literally can't sign anyone. So Ryan O'Hearn and Hunter Dozier are it. Until Ian Kennedy and Alex Gordon (game versions) get storyline murdered, I'm screwed. I don't think I'm gonna keep it up because I don't have the time to play every game out.

I'll just watch the actual Royals, baby!

[christophermichaels]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

Yeah!!

Let me know how it goes. I just did a year one (again) where instead of simming I played out every game. I used Gore constantly as a PR and basically manipulated my way to a lot of small margin victories. I got crushed a lot. I won something like 84. I traded no one. Of course for some reason, it won't record the season online anymore. Maybe they did something to stop people from relplaying stud teams seasons over and over. I don't care about that. Maybe it's because I've tried so many times.

Now the budget is killing me. It looks like I literally can't sign anyone. So Ryan O'Hearn and Hunter Dozier are it. Until Ian Kennedy and Alex Gordon (game versions) get storyline murdered, I'm screwed. I don't think I'm gonna keep it up because I don't have the time to play every game out.

I'll just watch the actual Royals, baby!

I'm just into June on the season. I play about half and sim the rest. I'm doing a GM only challenge so I set computer Ned Yost loose to make his hair-brained decisions. I control as much as I can through the team and player strategy screens. Right now, we're 2 games under .500, which is both a miracle and fairly accurate for what the Royals are IRL.

I made significant roster changes, keeping who I had to (cough, Gordon and Kennedy). Interestingly, Gordon has 13 jacks through the first two months. Very un-Gordon-like. I off-loaded Moss, Cain, Esky and anybody else that was all salary and no game. I extended Hos and Moose. Yay me. I also brought in some talent to move the farm team from the bottom to the mid-20s with young, controllable players. And a couple of those players are already at the ML level, albeit taking their lumps.

It's really fun to reinvent the Royals, according to me. That's what I love about this game. I'll keep you posted. You do the same as I would enjoy hearing about your team too.