MLB The Show 16 Twitch Stream - Franchise Mode & Gameplay (Archive Available)

[SFNiners816]

I'm interested to see how the morale is gonna work concern the Stars. They said it was primarily based on batting and the 1,3 and 4 holes are considered the star slots. I'm not sure if I really like that. Honestly everything from 1-5 is a primo spot in the order. Hell my favorite guy ever (Ryno) batted a majority of his career in the 2 hole. This was the case during his young prime years 84-85 and then his second prime time '89-92.

I just don't think a guy is gonna get pissed off if he's batting 2nd or 5th. Maddon last year had a fairly stable rotation where Bryant and Rizzo where batting 2 and 3 because Russell was batting 9. This guaranteed these guys got first inning ABs but for the balance of the game they were essentially 3-4 guys.

Also the GM goals got me worried about getting into a situation where you have to win a WS every 3 years to stay with your team. I really have no interest in being another team and I was forced to keep the goals on because I year to year saved from 14 to 15. I'm in my 6th year and have won 2 WS with the Cubs and I'm just scared that if I don't win another one in the next 3 years I'll get booted because that the owners expectations. A GM especially with the Cubs would not lose his job for wining 2 WS in what would be 9 years. I seriously just wish they would implement a way to turn off the GM goals on a continuing franchise.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by SFNiners816

I'm interested to see how the morale is gonna work concern the Stars. They said it was primarily based on batting and the 1,3 and 4 holes are considered the star slots. I'm not sure if I really like that. Honestly everything from 1-5 is a primo spot in the order. Hell my favorite guy ever (Ryno) batted a majority of his career in the 2 hole. This was the case during his young prime years 84-85 and then his second prime time '89-92. I just don't think a guy is gonna get pissed off if he's batting 2nd or 5th. Maddon last year had a fairly stable rotation where Bryant and Rizzo where batting 2 and 3 because Russell was batting 9. This guaranteed these guys got first inning ABs but for the balance of the game they were essentially 3-4 guys. Also the GM goals got me worried about getting into a situation where you have to win a WS every 3 years to stay with your team. I really have no interest in being another team and I was forced to keep the goals on because I year to year saved from 14 to 15. I'm in my 6th year and have won 2 WS with the Cubs and I'm just scared that if I don't win another one in the next 3 years I'll get booted because that the owners expectations. A GM especially with the Cubs would not lose his job for wining 2 WS in what would be 9 years. I seriously just wish they would implement a way to turn off the GM goals on a continuing franchise.

I agree about the difficulties in basing the "Star" player morale expectation on lineup position. On its face, it's a clever idea and stars expecting to bat 1,3,4 is ok, but the 2 hole and maybe the 5 spot as well should be acceptable to a star player. I mean Trout, Bryant, and Donaldson just off the top of my head as stars that have spent significant time batting in the 2 hole. Hopefully Luis sees this and can sneak this into the game despite "code lock". lol. Not being able to bat Trout #2 without him getting mad would be really annoying.

With the GM goals, they've diversified that a bit. So by adding more of them to accomplish, the hope is that it's not all or nothing based on just 1 or 2 goals. Maybe it'll work such that if you accomplish your minor goals consistently, you will get more leniency on the major ones. Remains to be seen.

[SFNiners816]

Quote: Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear

I agree about the difficulties in basing the "Star" player morale expectation on lineup position. On its face, it's a clever idea and stars expecting to bat 1,3,4 is ok, but the 2 hole and maybe the 5 spot as well should be acceptable to a star player. I mean Trout, Bryant, and Donaldson just off the top of my head as stars that have spent significant time batting in the 2 hole. Hopefully Luis sees this and can sneak this into the game despite "code lock". lol. Not being able to bat Trout #2 without him getting mad would be really annoying. With the GM goals, they've diversified that a bit. So by adding more of them to accomplish, the hope is that it's not all or nothing based on just 1 or 2 goals. Maybe it'll work such that if you accomplish your minor goals consistently, you will get more leniency on the major ones. Remains to be seen.

For the contract goals, that's what I'm hoping. Because so far my seasons have been:

2014: 72-90
2015: 93-69 lost divisionals
2016: 101-61 WS champ
2017: 104-58 WS champ
2018: 99-63 lost divisionals

I'd don't think that failure to win a title in the next 3 years would cost a real GM with this resume. Especially, with the Cubs...those 4 years right there are right up there with the 1906-1909 run.

[redsox4evur]

Quote: Originally Posted by HustlinOwl

the benefit of being only game in town, if a competitor Im willing to bet it would be a different story

Nope it wouldn't...when 2K was making the majority of people were still buying MLB the Show even if they complained about the game.

[zippy2212]

This is my question as well. In the Donaldson example they showed he got angry when he batted 9th. What happens if he is put in the 2 or 5 hole? Will he be satisfied or will they be angry in any spot other than the "star" spots.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by SFNiners816

For the contract goals, that's what I'm hoping. Because so far my seasons have been: 2014: 72-90 2015: 93-69 lost divisionals 2016: 101-61 WS champ 2017: 104-58 WS champ 2018: 99-63 lost divisionals I'd don't think that failure to win a title in the next 3 years would cost a real GM with this resume. Especially, with the Cubs...those 4 years right there are right up there with the 1906-1909 run.

In the stream, they very briefly mentioned something to the effect that it will be possible to build up job security somehow. I don't think this was explained very much, and I could be hallucinating, but perhaps the "owner" will take your past resume into consideration to soften the blow of any future failings. You'd have to watch the stream to catch the spot when they talked about GM goals (I forget the timestamp). There was something about building up job security or momentum, but maybe they were just talking about your GM letter grade (which isn't new) rising higher after accomplishing a bunch of stuff.

[dran1984]

Quote: Originally Posted by zippy2212

This is my question as well. In the Donaldson example they showed he got angry when he batted 9th. What happens if he is put in the 2 or 5 hole? Will he be satisfied or will they be angry in any spot other than the "star" spots. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Thing is a majority of MLB hitters are team players. I assume Tulo is given a star role, so if he is hitting 2nd he wont be happy?

I don't really have a major issues with the system since players have ups and downs throughout the season, it may actually enhance the realism. I do, however, wish we had the option to turn it off if we decide to.

[Lovesports]

Quote: Originally Posted by JTommy67

Linking progression to stats is redundant and creates a circular flow. Player performance is affected by ratings, but now ratings are affected by player performance. In real life, players don't get better because they bat .300, they bat .300 because they get better. Bad idea.

This is where I feel everyone is wrong. Ratings are simply a value placed on a player's attributes. How do you think the devs come up with ratings for these players year in and year out. Based on their performance...that's how. So what you're saying is a guy who hits 40+ homers with a 50 power rating should remain at a 50 power rating??? Or get a 2-3 point bump?? That's ridiculous. This player clearly outperformed his assigned rating and should therefore be given a new rating that more accurately represents his value. What you're suggesting is that "ratings" are an internal engine of the player's abilities where in reality it's just supposed to be a number that represents their skill. Think of ratings in the game as a computer scout and that's it, then it'll make more sense. Most of you anti performance progression guys believe that player potential is the key. The problem with this theory is that not every "high potential" player lives up to their hype. So if an A potential guy keeps batting .230 every year with lackluster performance he should continue going up 5+ points in overall? Of course not. The Show even has real weekly player updates where player ratings change based on player performance. How else to you value a player if not on performance? Ratings need to be dynamic to reflect player contributions and value so that you're not having players on your team with MVP type numbers playing for a league minimum.