Do you Feel MLB uses enough ATTRIBUTES to DEFINE Players?

[El_MaYiMbE]

Re: Do you Feel MLB uses enough ATTRIBUTES to DEFINE Players?

I like the idea of "badges" or personality traits that effect gameplay.

It all boils down to giving an attribute to the intangibles in sports.

These traits should also translate into Franchise and should be earned throughout the life of a player in RTTS and Franchise.

It is really endless the amount of traits that could potentially effect the game and it should all show in different animations and player styles to really drive it home.

An example would be an IF who is a "an on field coach" (made up trait) would be more likely to visit mound in a tough situation and give a confidence boost to pitcher. I think of a Derek Jeter.

You can also have "mentor" trait for some Veterans where anyone who has less than 2 yrs of MLB service time gets a ratings boost in that Vets speciality (power for power hitters, fielding for slick fielder's, contact for good hitters, etc...) But only if that Vet is on the team's 25 man roster and his overall moral is good....You would have to balance out somehow.

This would add tremendous depth to Franchise when deciding who to sign....Would be cool.

Looks like this is being implemented somewhat in MLB 17: http://www.operationsports.com/forum...er-quirks.html

[MetsFan16]

Re: Do you Feel MLB uses enough ATTRIBUTES to DEFINE Players?

The attributes may not define the players, but I'm sure these new Player Quirks do

[jgb3]

Re: Do you Feel MLB uses enough ATTRIBUTES to DEFINE Players?

Once launch angle statistics become more widely available, SCEA guys should be able to program that into the game. Players will have launch angle tendencies. A guy like Yelich, who is top 10 in EV, would have a high exit velo ratjng, but his launch angle rating (GB%) would also be through the roof.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports