First 91 OVR Upgrade Token

Who else earned their first 91 OVR upgrade token today?  I’m running a hybrid Commanders/Eagles theme team, so I put my token on Brian Dawkins.  With chems and strategy cards, he boosts up to a 92 OVR.  Also put him at Sub LB.

rimbaud76 said:

Who else earned their first 91 OVR upgrade token today?  I’m running a hybrid Commanders/Eagles theme team, so I put my token on Brian Dawkins.  With chems and strategy cards, he boosts up to a 92 OVR.  Also put him at Sub LB.

Pay-to-Win. Not available to NMS players.

And people ask dumb questions like, 'Why do NMS players think they're better?' Because we have to win with at least one hand tied behind our backs, that's why.

We should see the 91 token in store tomorrow, I'll be putting it on Dawkins and martellus for sure.   Probably okoye next and then kirkland

phatalerror said:

Pay-to-Win. Not available to NMS players.

And people ask dumb questions like, 'Why do NMS players think they're better?' Because we have to win with at least one hand tied behind our backs, that's why.

This back and forth with NMS vs MS players needs to stop.  People are free to do with their money as they choose.  Those who opt to spend money on the game should not be vilified for doing so and likewise, those who choose not to shouldn‘t put themselves on a pedestal.

Why shouldn't we put ourselves on a pedestal when our wins were earned through greater adversity? It's EA handing money players a tremendous competitive advantage in a game where winning earns you rewards, and therefore, a better team.

There will always be animosity over this.

As for looking down on NMS users, that's merely a trait among the bourgeois. Spend money however you like. It doesn't change the fact that you're buying wins. There's literally no way around that fact.

phatalerror said:

Why shouldn't we put ourselves on a pedestal when our wins were earned through greater adversity? It's EA handing money players a tremendous competitive advantage in a game where winning earns you rewards, and therefore, a better team.

There will always be animosity over this.

As for looking down on NMS users, that's merely a trait among the bourgeois. Spend money however you like. It doesn't change the fact that you're buying wins. There's literally no way around that fact.

Pedestals seem to be awfully wobbly for anyone to have a vested interest in being on top of one. Of course I’m not including circus performers in that statement as they are true professionals when it comes to balance and I’m being overly literal but that too serves a purpose in this case. Whereas investing your time, energy and brain or Brian power in determining your worth by comparison to others does not. I thought the point was to have fun?

Having fun is indeed the point. But it's hard to have fun because my prodigiously-spending opponent has more versatility and better players, and it's hard to enjoy losing even though I outschemed and outplayed my opponent. It also sucks knowing that my loss contributes directly to his money team progressing in strength.

I could care less what people spend. I probably enjoy better beers when playing this game. But it's hard to play chess when your opponent has a bunch of queens and rooks where competitive balance would have dictated that they should have pawns.

phatalerror said:

Having fun is indeed the point. But it's hard to have fun because my prodigiously-spending opponent has more versatility and better players, and it's hard to enjoy losing even though I outschemed and outplayed my opponent. It also sucks knowing that my loss contributes directly to his money team progressing in strength.

I could care less what people spend. I probably enjoy better beers when playing this game. But it's hard to play chess when your opponent has a bunch of queens and rooks where competitive balance would have dictated that they should have pawns.

sounds like excuses and user error.  There are plenty of budget beasts in the game.  91 ovr dawkins is not why you will lose a game.  There is not a distinguishable difference in player ratings/abilities in the game to create that big of a gap between NMS and Money spent teams.

The only time I noticed a substantial advantage for money spent squads was last year when they added the superbowl tokens for the players in store that could only be bought by money for the prelit xfactors, beyond that its not as big of a gap as you make it out to be.

phatalerror said:

Having fun is indeed the point. But it's hard to have fun because my prodigiously-spending opponent has more versatility and better players, and it's hard to enjoy losing even though I outschemed and outplayed my opponent. It also sucks knowing that my loss contributes directly to his money team progressing in strength.

I could care less what people spend. I probably enjoy better beers when playing this game. But it's hard to play chess when your opponent has a bunch of queens and rooks where competitive balance would have dictated that they should have pawns.

Well said. Though you are probably contributing to that person’s money team even if you win.

phatalerror said:

Having fun is indeed the point. But it's hard to have fun because my prodigiously-spending opponent has more versatility and better players, and it's hard to enjoy losing even though I outschemed and outplayed my opponent. It also sucks knowing that my loss contributes directly to his money team progressing in strength.

I could care less what people spend. I probably enjoy better beers when playing this game. But it's hard to play chess when your opponent has a bunch of queens and rooks where competitive balance would have dictated that they should have pawns.

I am NMS , have been for years . But people with super teams that paid money don’t bother me . The guys that’s use nano blitz cheese plays like mid blitz and whatever other blitz they find on you tube bug  me much more. Not to mention the scum kick doucebags , however I haven’t seen it used as much lately , maybe it was patched.

I dunno, man. It'd be nice as an NMS to have an 89 SPD Bennett instead of an 84 SPD Bennett. Just because you put your 91 OVR token on the wrong guy because you have so many coins you don't know what to do with your lineup.

Your problem here is you can only see this issue in the context of what you would do with fewer coins, or how you would make a weaker player work somewhere in your roster. That's like saying you know what it's like to be poor and famished because you went without dinner one night to see what being poor and famished is like. No comprehension.

The extra Light It Up tokens were indeed a huge advantage, much more significant than the singular 91 OVR token. It doesn't address my argument: I'm always a step behind because I'm driving stock.

phatalerror said:

I dunno, man. It'd be nice as an NMS to have an 89 SPD Bennett instead of an 84 SPD Bennett. Just because you put your 91 OVR token on the wrong guy because you have so many coins you don't know what to do with your lineup.

Your problem here is you can only see this issue in the context of what you would do with fewer coins, or how you would make a weaker player work somewhere in your roster. That's like saying you know what it's like to be poor and famished because you went without dinner one night to see what being poor and famished is like. No comprehension.

The extra Light It Up tokens were indeed a huge advantage, much more significant than the singular 91 OVR token. It doesn't address my argument: I'm always a step behind because I'm driving stock.

go play regs.  

Sounds like you are in the wrong mode unless you are a sadist or are looking for some weird social points for complaining on mut sites lol

Put mine on the LE. 94 acceleration with my tt. My new user. Gonna pry do fb next. He does goof right now. So that 91 token he should play lights out.

nitmatrix said:

go play regs.  

Sounds like you are in the wrong mode unless you are a sadist or are looking for some weird social points for complaining on mut sites lol

I'm just looking to play a strategy game here. I'm playing the mode that delivers the experience I'm fundamentally looking for, but the competitors, of all sorts of skill levels (in Madden, not football knowledge) are not bound by the same constraints. In the NFL, there's a hard salary cap. In MUT, there is not.

It's amazing how difficult it is for some people to identify the underlying issue for what it is. The flaw isn't the NMS players': We paid for the game, we earned the right to be here. More so than in past years, the spenders are getting huge advantages across the board.