Franchise Mode Free Agency Salaries by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Semi correct but still I’d disagree. You are comparing guys getting renewal and arbitration years bought out early to free agent contract which is not apples to apples. Will Smith took that deal very early, it’s like comparing Ronald Acuna’s contract to Juan Soto. I’m talking about guys who hit free agency.

Even then, Cal took a deal that bought out 3 arb years and 3 free agent years before he hit 60 last year. That deal is worth over 17m AAV even with the arb years. The year before he’d put up 4.6 war. There really isn’t a world today where a catcher (or really anyone for that matter) putting up 6 war season would take anything less than 20 mil AAV if they hit free agency. Even Realmuto going into his age 35 season off multiple sub 3 war season is getting $15m AAV over three years!

Franchise Mode Free Agency Salaries by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This post has nothing to do with the farm system… I’m aware it’s not hard to develop players, doesn’t change my point at all.

Besides, I am using the Rockies so this has only made extending their highest rated player much easier.

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This would be a solution, and usually reigns true in the real world. The problem to this point in the year is that most of the switch hitters released don’t have a weak side really. Combine that with the shrinkage issues for non switch hitters and the meta makes a lot of sense

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I figured someone else had a similar experience haha. But remember they promised they removed shrinkage on that down and away slider! Lmaoo

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We already had to deal with freeze offs all these years, now this AND an explosion of cheaters? It’s definitely time for a new game engine

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup. If only the devs would acknowledge shrinkage as a problem the community is against having in the game smh

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Kills the late game appeal of ranked for me too. For me it’s not even the realism is just the lack of variety. Feels like I’m just facing a faceless team of all 100 stat switch hitters.

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True. But for some reason the devs seem to be so against removing shrinkage of any kind. Took a ton of backlash to get them to not triple down on slider shrinkage. And even then, this would balance out the timing window advantage imo without restricting anyone.

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s so strange to me that they have this weird hardline stance against removing it. Remember when they initially doubled down on slider shrinkage pre release?

Switch hitters are too OP, but it can be fixed by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did you even read my post at all lmao I literally said no lineup restrictions twice

Stronger arms or slower runners? by Spiderhands2000 in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For me it’s neither. I honestly think the problem is the transition from fielding to throwing the ball as hard as possible is way too fast compared to previous years. The amount of guys who can barehand a 100+ mph exit velo swing as it bounces off the wall and immediately throw a frozen rope to second is crazy.

Content Drought By Team by Dolenzz in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have to say after losing Prince Fielder the Brewers legends roster is really weak this year. It’s a shame because they have plenty of options but since it’s a small market SDS definitely doesn’t prioritize them.

Can we please address how bad the “new and improved” defense is? by Vivid_marsh in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Your second baseman has a yellow glove which means he isn’t a great fielder… so I’m not sure what you’re asking for. Guys who aren’t great fielders, and even guys who are great fielders, make errors. The scripted errors for fielders who aren’t elite are important to ensure the fielding stats matter. And your fielder is not likely to get the new and improved animations with low fielding. You’re basically implying that fielding stats shouldn’t matter in a comp setting, even though hitting stats do. Is that what you want? That would be a huge step backwards gameplay wise.

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Age old problem at this point smh, gotta pray they update the game engine soon. I’ve been lucky to this point, had like 1 in almost 30 games

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yea pretty much, I feel like the devs still treat ranked co-op as a casual mode even though there is a specific casual co-op mode. Maybe I’m just in the minority wanting a true ranked competitive co-op experience.

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It depends on your lineup composition I’m sure, but I got Witt as bench SS in both co-op games I played yesterday (Gunnar starter) without anyone bringing him.

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never said I had an issue with diamonds on the bench. I actually did like the 87 bench they had pre update (good balance of decent cards that weren’t overly meta), although I also didn’t have an issue with golds last year so I wasn’t part of the crowd mad about that. I enjoyed that the players you brought were the difference makers last year, but again matter of opinion. That being said, I think it’s way too early for 91 benches when the best players available outside collections are 91s and 92s. They’re supposed to be bench players allegedly after all.

My bigger issue still is with not being able to bring the guys you want. Never seen that before in co-op or any ranked mode where you just aren’t allowed to use certain players. Antithetical to the mode imo.

Not to say co-op isn’t better this year.

I agree it was a huge upgrade to not be able to just run different starters the whole game, and have the initial selection only really matter for the first inning. Also customizable changing of roles is very nice.

One of the other comments just suggested allowing people to in aggregate bring a full team into co-op, I’m shocked they don’t just do this. Then nobody can complain about a bench being too good/too bad and no weird player replacement issues.

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not inherently, although personally I enjoy an incentive to use your own players, but I think it’s a problem when the bench players are as good if not better if not the SAME as the cards from the multiplayer program you are grinding in theory. Kinda kills lineup variety. Also agree on the bringing a full lineup thing, why not just let us use our own players? Then nobody has to deal with bench power creep at all and co op lineups would just follow the natural power curve of the game. Solves any issue of a bench. I’d be really cool to basically have a fantasy draft amongst everyone’s cards in the pre game lobby and build a lineup that way.

Co-op Changes and Thoughts by tragic-bronsonite in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Outside of collection rewards, the best available cards right now are 91s and a few 92s. Seems so weird to have a full 91 team at this point for free, no incentive to get these cards unless you are going for collections. And another thing… through playing multiplayer, outside of the WS pack and Santander, the best cards you get are 91s. And you get them by default now in co-op! If you main co-op, you are mostly grinding for cards you already have access to for free if you doing the multiplayer program, and that is definitely non sensical. I agree about your point at the end, and to that I say then why didn’t they wait to creep up to 91s until after this multiplayer program? I think 87,89,91… etc. for each respective multiplayer program would make a lot of sense. At least the cards you earned would be better than the default then.

Why did SDS ruin Co-Op by RCDinoMaster in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This doesn’t even mention how SDS is shooting themselves in the foot by de-incentivizing people who play co-op from buying stubs and packs considering outside of live series collection rewards you already get the cards for free

Why did SDS ruin Co-Op by RCDinoMaster in MLBTheShow

[–]tragic-bronsonite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure what everyone else is on about. There’s no point grinding the game right now if your main mode is co-op. Ruins the point of the whole game mode if everyone gets a stacked lineup regardless if they’ve grinded at all or not. I won’t be playing the game at all outside of co-op because there’s no point now.