Comments

• After an unbelievable cold streak today, I'm starting to think that there's a necessary but not sufficient condition involved: three or more 3.5*+ players. I had a 4* and 3.5* inactive, made 137 straight picks of 3* or worse, and on the 138th got a 3.5* and the ability to trade for a #1 pick. I've only made seven #1 trades…

  in Trading Inactive Players Comment by robotarozum October 2015
• Pitching might be better for winning, but hitting is better for the part of the game you actually see, so I always favor hitting.

  in What skill would you upgrade with this team? Comment by robotarozum August 2015
• Progress has been slow but I think I'm starting to narrow it down. I have four samples, and if I do... 1.5 star & 2 star = 1 point 2.5 star = 4 points 3 star = 16 points 3.5 star = 64 points 4 star = 96 points ...then I get that a #1 pick requires exactly 390 points. It's tricky because in this methodology (buying 2nd…

  in Trading Inactive Players Comment by robotarozum August 2015
• I respect that advice but I have read many horror stories about the game becoming laggy and unresponsive. Also, I was curious how the trading process works anyway, plus trading in allows one to acquire 5* players with blue dollars only, no gold bars. I don't know how it goes for anyone else, but I found that around the…

  in Trading Inactive Players Comment by robotarozum July 2015
• I tried for a #1 pick, and part of my guess is definitely wrong. If the point distribution is right, then at least 796 (probably 800) points are required, which changes the average price for buying a #1 pick through second rounders from 46 (184k blue dollars) to 73 (292k). If the point distribution is wrong, much more…

  in Trading Inactive Players Comment by robotarozum July 2015