Team Sets  

  RSS

alacy52
Day 1 Supporter
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 23
29/01/2017 10:53 pm  

I'd just like to suggest maybe making team sets available for purchase for those of us who didn't buy the complete set. For example, I'm a Rockies fan and would gladly buy a pack containing every Rockies player in the set plus their stadium.


KC liked
ReplyQuote
ClutchJordan
Clutch Creator Admin
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 323
30/01/2017 11:08 am  

I think this would only be feasible if we printed more player cards in the future.  As of now we have 400/30 teams which is ~13 players per team, some more some less.

Business Development/Gameplay & Balance for Clutch Cards


ReplyQuote
MikeTheRed
Day 1 Supporter
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 149
30/01/2017 2:26 pm  

I agree with management on this. There's not enough players to be worth it right now.

Plus this is exactly why it's perfect as a collectible game for those that don't want to be completionists - you can work towards trading away the guys you don't care about for your precious Rockies.


ReplyQuote
KC
 KC
Triple-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 80
13/08/2017 11:32 pm  

While I understand the collectible nature and management decisions behind this, I would not mind fielding complete teams as well. Perhaps a print on demand approach could be considered for such efforts... 🤔

...Forever Royal...


ReplyQuote
ClutchJordan
Clutch Creator Admin
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 323
14/08/2017 9:38 am  

This is unlikely due to the fact that there just aren't enough players on each team to make a complete set.

Business Development/Gameplay & Balance for Clutch Cards


ReplyQuote
KC
 KC
Triple-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 80
14/08/2017 9:52 pm  

Being new to this game, what does it take to make a complete set? Just curious... 🤔

...Forever Royal...


ReplyQuote
billkoff
Single-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 13
02/09/2017 12:29 am  

A number of us on BoardGameGeek have requested that more players be rated.  Unfortunately at this point it appears that the folks who make the game are locked into a limited way to see the game, that is, as  a continuation of MLB Showdown, just a collectible card game.  Those of us without this preconceived view of the game just see Clutch Baseball as a great game - period.  So why constrict how players want to use it - especially if they're willing to pay for the privilege?

Many of us would like to play the game with our favorite team, but with just 400 players rated, that's not possible.  But why not rate more players?  More cards to sell = more money to be made!  I don't see how it wouldn't be cost-effective to do so.

It seems that the very people who are the most interested in the game and its success (i.e. its creators), are the ones who by rigidly limiting the number of players rated may be unwittingly holding it back from a wider audience and more sales.

 


KC liked
ReplyQuote
KC
 KC
Triple-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 80
02/09/2017 1:25 am  

I too am on BGG. This has been a topic of discussion around here as well, including PMs. I'm not a big fan of the CCG business model, but would consider paying a bit more if we could fill out specific teams. Unfortunately, it's not likely to change...

...Forever Royal...


Sittch liked
ReplyQuote
ClutchJordan
Clutch Creator Admin
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 323
02/09/2017 1:28 pm  
Posted by: billkoff

A number of us on BoardGameGeek have requested that more players be rated.  Unfortunately at this point it appears that the folks who make the game are locked into a limited way to see the game, that is, as  a continuation of MLB Showdown, just a collectible card game.  Those of us without this preconceived view of the game just see Clutch Baseball as a great game - period.  So why constrict how players want to use it - especially if they're willing to pay for the privilege?

Many of us would like to play the game with our favorite team, but with just 400 players rated, that's not possible.  But why not rate more players?  More cards to sell = more money to be made!  I don't see how it wouldn't be cost-effective to do so.

It seems that the very people who are the most interested in the game and its success (i.e. its creators), are the ones who by rigidly limiting the number of players rated may be unwittingly holding it back from a wider audience and more sales.

 

Well just to speak on cost effectiveness - let's say we raised the number of players from 400 to 600.  That's 500 per set to 700 per set.  That's a 40% increase in production costs (we'll say 25% just cause of bulk pricing).  There have been people asking for more cards, and we've heard them, but I don't believe it is 25% of our player base (or potential player base).  Most people take this as a fantasy baseball-esque experience, where the fun part is drawing from multiple teams.  I'm a Red Sox fan, and I am content with the amount of Red Sox players offered (admittedly the Red Sox do have a lot of good players).  Also increased storage needs from more cards as a small negative.

Our plan right now is to stay at the 400 players for the 2018 set, but increase the amount of players in the Mid-Season Set that are printed as "didn't get into main set."  This year it was 15, next year we want a lot more.  Plus we're releasing a 3rd set next year which will include more players.  Overall I think we will hit that 600 number when all is said and done by the end of the year.

Business Development/Gameplay & Balance for Clutch Cards


Sittch liked
ReplyQuote
mattinthehat
Day 1 Supporter
Joined:5 months  ago
Posts: 29
02/09/2017 4:02 pm  

I'm fine with the number of cards. As a Padres fan I barely care enough to get a Chacin and he is hardly our worst pitcher at some point there are going to be a lot of useless player cards (ie Corey Patterson with an OB of 8 for 90 points of salary in Showdown 03). You have to draw the line somewhere and with their current status of as a "startup" company they can't really do the same things Showdown was able to do.

I would rather have the ability to influence what players get chosen to be included in the game. Maybe have something similar to the All Star Game Final Vote, where we see what the potential player card would be then we can vote on a handful of guys and the top few get put in.


ReplyQuote
rsm162000
Day 1 Supporter
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 189
05/09/2017 9:00 am  

For those who want the "full rosters," I'm seeing a bit of a logisitical issue.  For one, Clutch is based on the last two years' worth of stats for each individual player.  I see this as a good thing, as it helps balance the game, and it provides stability for some of your favorite players (so you aren't left grumpy because the card of your favorite player is based on his worst season.  Or, his best season card ends up too high in salary to build a team around).  So that's two years' worth of a MLB player pool to weed through.  On top of that, a baseball team never has the same 25 players make it through the entire season...teams are constantly changing because of trades, injuries, performance, etc.  So which 25 players, exactly, are the Clutch designers supposed to chose, from those two years' worth of players?  It sounds like a bit of a logistical pickle.  I know that the pure-baseball-simulation players out there will object because they want their full Strat-o-Matic game experience, but with a shorter play time.  They want that season snapshot of stats to base the game on (as opposed to the Clutch two-year method). I'm not hating on Strat-o-Matic, I've played it a lot, and I like it.  But Strat-o-Matic is not for the casual tabletop gamer, which is the type of gamer Clutch is geared towards.  Diehard and casual baseball fans alike can like, enjoy, and play Clutch, which, ultimately, gives it a greater potential gamer-base than a true sim like Strat-o-Matic ever will.  For the diehard fans though, Clutch simply scratches a different gaming itch than what Strat-o-Matic does.

Were there players in the initial set and midseason set that I was surprised didn't make the cut? Absolutely!  As a Tigers fan, I am surprised Aníbal Sánchez and Nicholas Castellanos (and a few others) didn't get cards.  But overall, I am happy with the amount of cards in the set.  This being a spiritual successor to MLB Showdown, I didn't buy this game expecting to only use Tigers players (or players from only one MLB team) on my team.  Nor am I expecting the Clutch creators to create a card for every player who only played in a handful of games.

With the plans the creators laid out (to have three editions of cards for the year), this will greatly increase the player pool, and should include most of the "everyday" type of players from each MLB team.  I also liked the plan the creators had a few months ago, to collaborate with a Clutch gamer/fan of each MLB team (a team representative, if you will) to help with the player selection process.  This will help ensure that players don't fall through the cracks.

I've seen comments that since MLB Showdown failed, Clutch shouldn't be copying a game that failed.  First of all, Clutch is a far superior of a game than Showdown just with little enhancements like Stadiums and handedness bonuses.  Also, Clutch is actually based on baseball, whereas Showdown was based on Magic the Gathering.  Don't believe me?  Just look at the Showdown strategy cards.  They aren't based on the principles of baseball, they are built on the game mechanics of Magic (card advantage, etc). Showdown failed because Wizards of the Coast didn't know how to market the game correctly, or know how to keep the game balanced, especially in regards to the Strategy cards.  Showdown was marketed and geared towards the Magic crowd, and then they panicked when Magic players weren't buying or playing the game.  And so Wizards made some more poor decisions and it destroyed the game;  the strategy card interactions became a huge mess, and don't get me started about the "big bench" teams that sat the Cooperstown Collection players on the bench at 1/10th the cost...so unrealistic to actual baseball.  
Showdown didn't fail because of the dice-rolling or team-building mechanics/aspects of the game...the heart of the game was great.  It's that heart of that game that a majority of Showdown fans loved and what Clutch focused on and improved.  It's that heart of the game that Showdown fans longed for, until Clutch became a reality.  

Also, not having the player images (yet) doesn't make Clutch any less of a great game either.  It's gameplay is superior than Showdown, and Platinum, and many other games.

Some insight about the death of Showdown:
http://snazel.blogspot.com/2005/08/death-of-mlb-showdown-part-1.html
http://snazel.blogspot.com/2005/08/death-of-mlb-showdown-2001-step-back.html
http://snazel.blogspot.com/2005/08/mlb-showdown-2002-broken-bloated.html


Sittch liked
ReplyQuote
KC
 KC
Triple-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 80
05/09/2017 3:26 pm  

As the game progresses and grows, will cards from previous seasons become obsolete?  Perhaps only in tournament play? Depending on the response,  I can see tons of cards collecting dust in the future...

...Forever Royal...


ReplyQuote
ClutchJordan
Clutch Creator Admin
Joined:9 months  ago
Posts: 323
07/09/2017 9:12 pm  
Posted by: KC

As the game progresses and grows, will cards from previous seasons become obsolete?  Perhaps only in tournament play? Depending on the response,  I can see tons of cards collecting dust in the future...

For tournament play, in order to keep things relevant and competitive, our plan is for player cards to be allowed from the current year + one year back.  But again I will stress, that's just tournament play.  99% of your games will always be up to your own rules.

I see RSM commenting on MLB Showdown.  I'll have to listen to those podcasts when I get a chance but I've never shared my 2 cents on the game...

First off they faced two major issues that we also face ourselves.

1) Split market.  I've called sports card shops and been told "we dont do games."  I've called card/board game shops and been told "we dont do sports."  So it's tough.

2) The realities of baseball.  With a game like Magic, it's your game, you can do whatever you want.  You can't do that with baseball.  I'd love to make a card "Guess Who's Back - After an RBI hit, the batter gets to bat again."  But obviously I can't.  These restrictions can really start to bring you to a halt after you've been doing the game 4, 5 years.

That being said...they weren't really competent.  The game mat is just flat out hilarious to me.  Why would you have someone batting at home and someone batting at...second base?  Their original numbers for Control, On-Base, and Defense were too low and really hampered variety.  The strategy cards were the biggest offender.  They seemed to be made by people who understood card game mechanics but not how they actually relate to real baseball.  But then again this is the company that made Lightning Bolt (Magic card) so who knows.  It's very strange that they got into the game at all, seeing as they made Magic and Pokemon then they come out with a dice-based baseball game.  And then obviously NBA and NFL Showdown were just a cash grab.  Pretty sure someone just walked up to a white board at the conference and wrote "NFL $howdown" (+1 if you get that reference).  It's not that they couldn't have worked, but they barely tried.

But overall it was just a time when you could play fast and loose with your design and mechanics for a few reasons:

1) The card game industry was exploding.  I bought NBA Showdown and Pokemon cards and never played one game.  I just wanted the cards cause I wanted to collect and they looked cool.  You could throw anything on a card that people were interested in and that was it.  The local card shop was the busiest place in town where they had to start staying open on Sundays.

2) Game design and balance wasn't 10% as scrutinized/understood as it was today.  It's hard to explain but around the late 00's/early 2010's people really started to think about this stuff.  Gaming in general had finally gone main stream and so many people were connected via high speed internet to actually start having serious discussions on the topic.  To me this is really the bible of game design/patterns which was written in 2010:  http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=293417

I'm starting to get off topic but I really do love game design/development.  League of Legends really did change everything.  I played games like Socom, CoD4, Yu-Gi-Oh, Warcraft III.  There were no betas, no patches, no way to get in touch with the developers.  The game came out and you either liked it or you didn't.  The fact that I could go on the LoL boards, say hey @gamedesigner I think you should do this, and he would come in and talk to me and I would potentially see those changes in bi-weekly patches just blew me away.

But anyways I guess you can see how I/we came to go about things the way that we do.  100% transparency, 100% open to feedback.  It's time consuming and you have to tell people a lot of what they don't want to hear but it's worth it in the end.

Business Development/Gameplay & Balance for Clutch Cards


rsm162000 and KC liked
ReplyQuote
KC
 KC
Triple-A Customer
Joined:2 months  ago
Posts: 80
07/09/2017 9:46 pm  

Thanks Jordan. Appreciate the effort and well considered response. 👍

...Forever Royal...


ReplyQuote
  
Working

Please Login or Register