• Hello Guest. We are upgrading the server's XenForo versions. This has to be done in stages. 1.5.18 ---> 1.5.23 ---> 2.0.0 ---> 2.0.12 ---> 2.1.0. I will likely upgrade each one and leave it for a day or so to see if there's any kinks. When moving from 1.x to 2.x, our add-ons will cease to work. Much of the functionality of said add-ons is now native within XenForo 2.x, so I don't think we'll miss much if anything. IF we are, we can try out new 2.x XF add-ons.

New League Discussion

NML

Well-Known Member
#1
I want to start by saying I hope everyone remains open-minded about the possibility of the new league. I feel like the response has been overwhelming positive so far, and I do think this can work to keep everyone happy, add some new players in a way that they'll enjoy the league and stick around, and push our OOTP forum closer to its heyday.

I'll also invite all the possible new owners into the discussion - don't feel as though you have to contribute if it feels over ur head, but also want to bring them into the fold.

Finally, while most of them gave me a hard 'yes' I won't hold anyone to anything or label them as they come in, in case they get here and feel like it's not a good fit for them (or, for whatever reason, it falls through).

@whiteyc_77 @Reel @goblue96 @kingssc @Schauwn @nowitsourtime @GatorTD

-----

I'm hoping to operate this league using the structure and the success of the WBL, but with some necessary changes to re-engage owners and add new blood. I've built it on three pillars to hopefully accomplish this. This is also a somewhat srs post that I fully expect to not have srs follow ups, but we can at least start from here and spiral into sarcasm

Here we go...

-----

An emphasis on properly educating, introducing, and supporting new owners.

The reality is that the league has not successfully introduced and maintained a new owner since Tony, which was four years ago. Clearly, as a league, we can do better here.

The first part is the introduction of the game, the league, and in some cases, the sport. I will personally be putting together some videos, forum posts, and as much other helpful information as possible to help newcomers get their feet wet. It’s something various members of the league have attempted at different points, but I would encourage others to participate here if they feel they have useful information to share. It can be as simple as “what is the waiver wire?” to more complicated topics like “how should I evaluate players?” There can also be a learning curve to the league, and while I think the FAQ mostly covers these things, it could also be expanded as the league is constantly evolving and changing.

Secondly, we want to set them up in a way that they can find enjoyment out of whatever it is they want from the league. To start, we will begin the league in a similar fashion to the WBL, which solved a lot of long-term, financial and market instability. All teams will begin with the same market size, fan interest, and budget, which should/will only marginally change during an initial 10-year sim to build a database of players and history.

From there, I fully expect the budgets to begin to adjust as seasons progress. This is the nature of baseball, and part of what attracts some of us to the uniqueness of the sport. However, while we want to reward success and, to a point, punish those who tank, we also want there to be a reasonable path to success as people want it. What we especially want to avoid is how the current WBL sits, with some owners have budgets twice the size of others. I’ll discuss this is more later in the adjusted rules section.

We also want to have the possibility of expansion to new owners without starting them so far behind the rest of the league – I believe this is a path to do so, if we need to cross the bridge. First, there will be an expansion draft – albeit a limited one. All non-40-man players are automatically protected, and we will allow a percentage of professionals to be kept safe as well. We will use a percentage versus a flat number, as some people carry a full 40-man group, while others try to save cost/major league seasons and limit this group. This will not be the primary path for a new team to construct their roster, but it will allow them to add some pieces. Most importantly, we will provide them a $20m injection of cash, in addition to their budget (which will be equal to the 10th percentile of current clubs). With this, I believe new owners will find a lot of freedom in how they want to proceed. They could easily invest in free agents or use it to acquire high salaried players. They could also use it to buy prospects or picks, or invest heavily in their development and scouting. In addition, expansion teams will be given end-of-round ‘compensation’ picks in the draft to quickly build a farm system of us.

At the end of the day, we want new players to have flexibility in building their roster. Whether expansion or simply new to the league, it’s important that we support their idea of how the game can be ‘fun’ while maintaining a level of competitiveness that will ultimately drive the league.

An adjustment of current baseball rules

A few changes I want to run through

  • Removing IFA. I discussed this with a few different owners, but the reality is that IFA is too volatile and too difficult to control to help a league built on consistency. As we’ve seen over the course of the WBL, some versions of OOTP produce elite IFA players, to the point that drafts become almost worthless, and some versions where IFA is simply a way to blow cash on prospects that won’t develop. Further, because they instantly appear as 16-year old’s, IFAs have no history and no development. I think this ultimately hurts immersion, as well as bust frequency, but most importantly it becomes a long turn around on investments. Funneling all players through the draft allows us to better control financial irregularities, provides a more typical balancing system, and prevents high budget teams from (occasionally) also acquiring the best prospects
  • Higher revenue sharing – it is my belief that this is a further step to controlling budgets and balance. In reality, teams who vastly overperform with huge seasons won’t see this drastically change anything, as most of what they will ‘revenue share’ is playoff income which doesn’t affect budget anyways. It will hit our high budget, under-performing teams who our living close to the budget line hardest, which ultimately is the group we want to affect to level the playing field. In addition, it’s a great source of income for small market teams to close the gap
  • A revamped playoff system. While we want to allow budgets to stay closer to keep owners engaged, we also want to reward successful owners in other ways. We will do that by change the playoff system to reward teams that have great regular seasons. I’ll wait until we have final owner numbers to completely decide this, but, as an example – if we had 16 teams, split into two leagues, league winner gets a bye into the semi’s, with two ‘wild card’ teams playing in a five-game series to decide who else makes it. This makes not only making the post-season harder but puts an emphasis on each spot – first is obviously vital, but even getting second instead of third is important as you now host 60% of the opening round. This is my attempt to balance all the previous talk to keep budgets closer with rewarding success. This should also make World Series winners, more often, the ‘best’ team over the year, versus the randomness we’ve seen before – which, in my opinion, diminishes the value of a World Series.
A new approach to forum interaction

While the previous points are all basically getting to the same point (keep owners, and keep them active), this is the final point to that. I’m not sure exactly what this would look like, but I’ve got ideas and would certainly like to hear from others. It works best when everyone is engaged and involved, but I also don’t want people to feel like they’ve got homework. Just a few ideas

  • Power Rankings
  • Forum prospect rankings
  • Bring back team thread logs
  • Data/’moneyball’ discussion and findings
  • A ‘I’ve got a dumb question’ thread for our influx of new owners
  • Betting thread
Maybe creating ‘committees’ to head different projects would be a good approach, that way no one person would be responsible for certain content being produced.

-----

All of these would need thorough testing that I'd need to do to be sure that it works as we want. Ultimately, we are at the mercy of the indy devs as to the changes they make in subsequent versions, but I think this is a good starting point.

I'll open it to the floor...
 

Yankee151

TWINK Stadium
#2
As I've said, I'm cool with the NMLBL. Cooler still if everyone on that list joins/rejoins; 7 new owners is pretty cool and assuming enough people switch over from the WBL there'd be enough for an active league. However, I think the crutch of the problem is simply GM Skill not matching up well; It's little surprise that the dynasties of the WBL are ran by some of the most experienced players in the game, or absolute statistical savants like Tony and Travis. As I allude below, I am pretty confident I can rebuild any team within, say, 6 seasons, simply due to my knowledge of how OOTP works, and barring said inherited team having odd contracts, the budget won't be an issue.

As such, I think the bullet points on this list: New player guides, Rule Changes (wouldn't remove IFA, but just weaken it), and Forum Interaction; are all things that can also be applied to the WBL. The fact of the matter is Rad, Travis, Orlando etc. who may not want to switch and could even leave the WBL upon the spawning of the NMLBL have been, for the most part, active owners for 3-5 years (or however long its been, lawd time flies when you're riding greyhounds) through ups and downs of their teams, and I'd hate to lose them permanently only for half the new owners to quit the NMLBL after 3 seasons because their team (naturally, or through their own fault) isn't performing so hot. With a new league, some owners are going to get the short end of the stick by default (barring a Fantasy Draft), and if they aren't willing to wait and build out their prospects, it'll be the same inactivity that plagues the WBL now.

I'd much rather apply expansion rules to new WBL owners (maybe minus a draft, unless we actually go past 16) and then adapt the changes and go from there. It's not that I wouldn't play in two leagues, but if I have to choose between the NMLBL and WBL I'm going with the latter.

I just look at it like this: If the consensus is a 'merger' is the best option, and we're going to have the ghost of WBL GMs past come back to the game, then just have them all do so, we can even do a big expansion draft to cut away at Vegas and Seoul if we're really going to suddenly fill the 3 remaining AI spots + Add 2 more (from the names I've heard, certainly possible?) Realign the divisions again, Expansion Draft with like, 3 protected players, Nerf IFA into the ground, then boom, all the new teams and owners have the benefit of a 'new league' and the old owners get to keep their teams and history.

If you're going to start a new league from scratch it's gonna require more work (and I'll help, but kinda swamped with work right now) to not just end up in the same situation. I mean what if two of the returning owners get rolled a bad hand and end up with a tanking team again? Think they'll stick around because it's a new league? That's the pertinent question to answer, because every time you gen a new league in OOTP (unless we Fantasy Draft it, which, sure why not) some teams are going to end up bad. Then GM skill comes into account.

I'd much rather work (assuming the other option is WBL dissolving and not two leagues) with Travis and Orlando and Doh and NML and whoever else to write a definitive "new player" guide to managing a team at various levels (full tank, rising team, maintaining dynasty, tearing it down wisely) and let the WBL (with minor changes) continue to play out. Hell, I'll happily give Fortaleza to someone, I think I fixed them pretty well in just two seasons, I can do it again with AI disaster #45 in Lisbon/Kabul/Dam etc.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#3
The postseason you suggested is how we ran it originally. Maybe I’m misremembering, but people did not like 5 game series or the bye week and people liked more playoff teams. Are you making the path to success easier if you eliminate a playoff spot?
 

goblue96

Disney and Curling Expert
#4
I like the logic of removing the IFAs. Throw erryone into the draft and let the owners sort it out that way.

Let me if I understand the playoff system: League Champion - bye. 2nd and 3rd place - Best of 5 with the winner playing the league champion. LCS: Best of 5 or 7. I assume the WS is a Best of 7.

Revenue sharing should help add some parity to the league by keeping the budgets the same and creating a defacto salary cap.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#5
As I've said, I'm cool with the NMLBL. Cooler still if everyone on that list joins/rejoins; 7 new owners is pretty cool and assuming enough people switch over from the WBL there'd be enough for an active league. However, I think the crutch of the problem is simply GM Skill not matching up well; It's little surprise that the dynasties of the WBL are ran by some of the most experienced players in the game, or absolute statistical savants like Tony and Travis. As I allude below, I am pretty confident I can rebuild any team within, say, 6 seasons, simply due to my knowledge of how OOTP works, and barring said inherited team having odd contracts, the budget won't be an issue.

As such, I think the bullet points on this list: New player guides, Rule Changes (wouldn't remove IFA, but just weaken it), and Forum Interaction; are all things that can also be applied to the WBL. The fact of the matter is Rad, Travis, Orlando etc. who may not want to switch and could even leave the WBL upon the spawning of the NMLBL have been, for the most part, active owners for 3-5 years (or however long its been, lawd time flies when you're riding greyhounds) through ups and downs of their teams, and I'd hate to lose them permanently only for half the new owners to quit the NMLBL after 3 seasons because their team (naturally, or through their own fault) isn't performing so hot. With a new league, some owners are going to get the short end of the stick by default (barring a Fantasy Draft), and if they aren't willing to wait and build out their prospects, it'll be the same inactivity that plagues the WBL now.

I'd much rather apply expansion rules to new WBL owners (maybe minus a draft, unless we actually go past 16) and then adapt the changes and go from there. It's not that I wouldn't play in two leagues, but if I have to choose between the NMLBL and WBL I'm going with the latter.
That’s why there’s a huge emphasis on supporting new owners. I agree with most of those points

But the issue with expanding or bringing in new owners is their massive disadvantage when they join. I think you are exception, not the rule, for taking over a shitty team
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#6
The postseason you suggested is how we ran it originally. Maybe I’m misremembering, but people did not like 5 game series or the bye week and people liked more playoff teams. Are you making the path to success easier if you eliminate a playoff spot?
I believe you are right to the former. I’m open to this but I think 5 is fine, but 7 doesn’t change much. I don’t think the bye is a big deal for revenue since it doesn’t change ur budget (only cash)

For the latter, I think people need hope more than just actual reward of the playoffs
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#8
I believe you are right to the former. I’m open to this but I think 5 is fine, but 7 doesn’t change much. I don’t think the bye is a big deal for revenue since it doesn’t change ur budget (only cash)

For the latter, I think people need hope more than just actual reward of the playoffs
But getting to the playoffs and financial benefits of that is easier with a spot. I’m just providing the rational behind our change, which is in line with your overall mission. Taking that away seems like a step backwards, but I know you and doh have always felt the league champion doesn’t get enough of a reward.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#9
I think it’s also about balancing things out. If we push things much more towards the middle, we need something on the other side.

I also don’t think there’s much of a financial benefit to the playoffs anymore, since it’s all based on regular season revenue. Some fan interest and cash (but only to a point) is really it
 

Yankee151

TWINK Stadium
#10
I believe there may be a small push one way or another with Owner goals? Dunno for sure.

I'll wait for all the new/returning owners to way in and to see who from the WBL who would join this league in tandem before debating specifics. I do think IFA should simply be reduced and not removed, though. Otherwise tanking becomes a little bit too incentivized (the only other way to hope for talent would be maxing international scouting in hopes of finding the once a year 3+star prospect leaguewide)
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#12
I believe there may be a small push one way or another with Owner goals? Dunno for sure.

I'll wait for all the new/returning owners to way in and to see who from the WBL who would join this league in tandem before debating specifics. I do think IFA should simply be reduced and not removed, though. Otherwise tanking becomes a little bit too incentivized (the only other way to hope for talent would be maxing international scouting in hopes of finding the once a year 3+star prospect leaguewide)
Disagree with this. The advantage teams get when they have success is a bigger budget, which they can use to buy picks, invest in player development, or bypass prospects altogether and just invest in ML talent
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#13
I think it’s also about balancing things out. If we push things much more towards the middle, we need something on the other side.

I also don’t think there’s much of a financial benefit to the playoffs anymore, since it’s all based on regular season revenue. Some fan interest and cash (but only to a point) is really it
Fan interest and cash are great financial benefits, especially for a team that is building. Also the benefit of enjoying the game in general.
 

OU11

Pleighboi
Utopia Moderator
#14
I know it makes the regular season less meaningful but more playoff teams always seemed more enjoyable. There’s a line somewhere obviously but immersion tends to go up when you make the playoffs even if it’s relatively easy
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
#16
The only thing that made tanking prohibitive was the budget hit you’d take for doing so. I found tanking to be the most frustrating part of the WBL. What sort of anti tanking measures would exist if budgets were normalized?
 

OU11

Pleighboi
Utopia Moderator
#18
The only thing that made tanking prohibitive was the budget hit you’d take for doing so. I found tanking to be the most frustrating part of the WBL. What sort of anti tanking measures would exist if budgets were normalized?
You can’t have Sam as your first name. That covers the most prolific tankers
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#20
The only thing that made tanking prohibitive was the budget hit you’d take for doing so. I found tanking to be the most frustrating part of the WBL. What sort of anti tanking measures would exist if budgets were normalized?
Two questions -

1) why does there need to be anti tanking measures? If people want to tank for an extended period of time, why can’t they?

2) this would certainly give more incentive to tank, but at the same time, with a smaller gap between top and bottom, people may not find it necessary for a long time
 
#21
The only thing that made tanking prohibitive was the budget hit you’d take for doing so. I found tanking to be the most frustrating part of the WBL. What sort of anti tanking measures would exist if budgets were normalized?
Reverse Draft Order or whatever Bill Simmons is always talking out of his anus about.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#25
As Travis suggested but I didn’t realize was actually possible, is just to add in our new owners, allow them to change teams, reset budgets and market sizes, alter the rules as described above, and sim ahead 20+ years and start again.

I think this covers a lot of the issues on both sides, and I could still take the lead on it if needed
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#26
Alright so just my 2 cents and things I'd change if we could thatwould help...

First of all, I do not think a whole new league changes much. The financials and everything of this league are good vs. the last league when everything was screwed. I would join a new league but it wouldn't change my immersion and maybe make it a little less.

New Playoff Format

I agree 100% the playoff system is not good. There is no difference between being 1st and 4th at this point. This sucks for immersion because at this point 80 wins gets you into the playoffs. I remember when it was 90 wins. Less teams feel the need to get better too because the difference between 1st and 3rd is basically nothing. The other factor is less COCK busters because there's no real big reward for finishing 1st. Here is what I'd do:

4 at 3 wild card game. 1 game playoff = much more strategy in how you set up your rotation and automatic winner take all game. Also would encourage teams to get better to avoid this game. The other factor is you'd keep it at 4 teams in the playoffs.

Winner plays the 2 seed in a best of 5. Winner of that series plays the 1 seed in a best of 7.

You reward teams for finishing 1st, 2nd and then 3rd/4th. The battle for first means something again. And mediocre teams have a chance to get into that 4 seed and roll the dice. Playoffs would be quicker too which is the most boring part of the year for lots of teams.

Hell-- if we wanted to do a ladder where 7v6 leads to 5 leads to 4 leads to 3 leads to 2 in the best-of 5... I'd be for that.

New Owners

Quite honestly, my life is quite different than it was 5-6 years ago when I joined (and I think it's the same for many others). I went from 7-day lineups to exporting every day to now probably 50% of exporting. We need some teenage nerds/recruiting of OOTP forums/existing members of Nutopia who might want to play. And maybe we could re-recruit some old owners like @osick87.

More Competitive Teams

I'm not sure how we can do this, but we just need more teams trying to win. I don't think tanking is good for the league when it's a lot of owners. The only punishment to tanking is your budget. If we make everyones budget the same, that'll make it worse.

Fix FA/Increase Trading

I'm not sure how to do this either -- But the way it is set up it allows guys like my LF Nuenylov (3.5 WAR in 95 games last year) to stay in FA until May and then sign for under $4m. Part of this deals with teams aren't really trying to win. Part of this is the new economics of the game where guys won't sign cheap extensions with your team.

The main problem is with so many good players in FA, trading is becoming less prevalent. Trading is the BEST part of the game to me. And I think the lack of trading has led to a lack of immersion (and the other way around too). Again -- I don't know how to fix trading, I just think if we can figure out a way to correct FA it would help trades which would in turn help immersion.

Kill IFA?

If people are for it, I'm fine with it. It's not a part of a game I really care about much anymore. I have my formula (as I'm sure others do) and I just go by it. But if people think that'll help the league, get rid of it.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#27
Why does it need balancing though was it was so out of balance before?
Because I think you want to reward people who are successful, but not by making it impossible for them to ever struggle again.

Doh is a great owner - he deserves credit for that. But he also hasn’t missed the playoffs in 22 seasons. During that time, he’s finished with less than 92 wins once, finished lower than second once, over 100 wins 13 times, and has five World Series. Last year, he finished with a profit of $66m.

I can give plenty of examples of the other side of that coin too
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#28
I also don’t think there’s much of a financial benefit to the playoffs anymore, since it’s all based on regular season revenue. Some fan interest and cash (but only to a point) is really it
Original budgets are based off regular season revenues, the updated ones are upped by playoff revenues I believe.

And yeah -- a lot of years that playoff money is the difference between me having full $10m and not. So there are financial advantages.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#29
Alright so just my 2 cents and things I'd change if we could thatwould help...

First of all, I do not think a whole new league changes much. The financials and everything of this league are good vs. the last league when everything was screwed. I would join a new league but it wouldn't change my immersion and maybe make it a little less.

New Playoff Format

I agree 100% the playoff system is not good. There is no difference between being 1st and 4th at this point. This sucks for immersion because at this point 80 wins gets you into the playoffs. I remember when it was 90 wins. Less teams feel the need to get better too because the difference between 1st and 3rd is basically nothing. The other factor is less COCK busters because there's no real big reward for finishing 1st. Here is what I'd do:

4 at 3 wild card game. 1 game playoff = much more strategy in how you set up your rotation and automatic winner take all game. Also would encourage teams to get better to avoid this game. The other factor is you'd keep it at 4 teams in the playoffs.

Winner plays the 2 seed in a best of 5. Winner of that series plays the 1 seed in a best of 7.

You reward teams for finishing 1st, 2nd and then 3rd/4th. The battle for first means something again. And mediocre teams have a chance to get into that 4 seed and roll the dice. Playoffs would be quicker too which is the most boring part of the year for lots of teams.

Hell-- if we wanted to do a ladder where 7v6 leads to 5 leads to 4 leads to 3 leads to 2 in the best-of 5... I'd be for that.

New Owners

Quite honestly, my life is quite different than it was 5-6 years ago when I joined (and I think it's the same for many others). I went from 7-day lineups to exporting every day to now probably 50% of exporting. We need some teenage nerds/recruiting of OOTP forums/existing members of Nutopia who might want to play. And maybe we could re-recruit some old owners like @osick87.

More Competitive Teams

I'm not sure how we can do this, but we just need more teams trying to win. I don't think tanking is good for the league when it's a lot of owners. The only punishment to tanking is your budget. If we make everyones budget the same, that'll make it worse.

Fix FA/Increase Trading

I'm not sure how to do this either -- But the way it is set up it allows guys like my LF Nuenylov (3.5 WAR in 95 games last year) to stay in FA until May and then sign for under $4m. Part of this deals with teams aren't really trying to win. Part of this is the new economics of the game where guys won't sign cheap extensions with your team.

The main problem is with so many good players in FA, trading is becoming less prevalent. Trading is the BEST part of the game to me. And I think the lack of trading has led to a lack of immersion (and the other way around too). Again -- I don't know how to fix trading, I just think if we can figure out a way to correct FA it would help trades which would in turn help immersion.

Kill IFA?

If people are for it, I'm fine with it. It's not a part of a game I really care about much anymore. I have my formula (as I'm sure others do) and I just go by it. But if people think that'll help the league, get rid of it.
I think most of these issues are fixed with more owners

More owners -> less FAs available -> less availability to plug holes/replace injuries -> more trading

If giving a clean slate helps owners join to accomplish those things, I’m for it
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#30
Not sure what I think really matters and I don’t disagree with that, but there are plenty of rewards for being the best team and winning ships that don’t eliminate a playoff team. The more owners in the playoffs, the better (within reason).
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#31
Original budgets are based off regular season revenues, the updated ones are upped by playoff revenues I believe.

And yeah -- a lot of years that playoff money is the difference between me having full $10m and not. So there are financial advantages.
Updated budgets are based of projected revenue.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#32
Doesn't matter how many owners we have. We need owners who want to win. I don't know how much of the league actively cares about winning.

Here is another angle that I haven't thought of until now: CPU owners never tank. They just want to win. They'd fix the gr8 FAs available until May/June situation.
 

Mr. Radpants

Friendship Drive Charging
#33
Two questions -

1) why does there need to be anti tanking measures? If people want to tank for an extended period of time, why can’t they?

2) this would certainly give more incentive to tank, but at the same time, with a smaller gap between top and bottom, people may not find it necessary for a long time
1) Because Yankee started pitching position players in an attempt to out tank @jdlikewhoa
 

Yankee151

TWINK Stadium
#34
I don't think OTTO signs FA very much, otherwise there wouldn't be so many good FA avaialble. Although who knows where the chicken and egg lies there.

To me it just depends how many current owners we'd lose, not necessarily how many we'd gain. If we lose Travis, Rad, and Orlando then it just isn't worth it to build a new league, but if they're more likely to stay if we make smaller tweaks to the WBL as it stands, then hopefully at least a few of the potential owners are still interested enough to join (give them 20M cash to fix Otto's mess, yolo)
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#35
Here is another angle that I haven't thought of until now: CPU owners never tank. They just want to win. They'd fix the gr8 FAs available until May/June situation.
The only downside to this is sim length. The cpu can counter instantly. Even in our short preseason sims they can beat you.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#36
I don't think OTTO signs FA very much, otherwise there wouldn't be so many good FA avaialble. Although who knows where the chicken and egg lies there.

To me it just depends how many current owners we'd lose, not necessarily how many we'd gain. If we lose Travis, Rad, and Orlando then it just isn't worth it to build a new league, but if they're more likely to stay if we make smaller tweaks to the WBL as it stands, then hopefully at least a few of the potential owners are still interested enough to join (give them 20M cash to fix Otto's mess, yolo)
Otto is org changes only. No FA.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#38
The only downside to this is sim length. The cpu can counter instantly. Even in our short preseason sims they can beat you.
Can you turn off their FA until we get to ST when salary demands get to the desperate, really low steal level?

I think the amount of good FAs that go into the season is a problem. Kills trading/unfair advantage for teams like mine who have budget room.

I also think the playoff format is a huge issue we can fix easily. When it doesn't matter if you finish 1st or 4th, people lose interest during the season. If we make it worth more to finish 1st than 2nd than 3rd/4th, there's more of a reason to care.
 

goblue96

Disney and Curling Expert
#39
I don't think OTTO signs FA very much, otherwise there wouldn't be so many good FA avaialble. Although who knows where the chicken and egg lies there.

To me it just depends how many current owners we'd lose, not necessarily how many we'd gain. If we lose Travis, Rad, and Orlando then it just isn't worth it to build a new league, but if they're more likely to stay if we make smaller tweaks to the WBL as it stands, then hopefully at least a few of the potential owners are still interested enough to join (give them 20M cash to fix Otto's mess, yolo)
OTTO is busy flying the plane.
 

Yankee151

TWINK Stadium
#40
Shows how much I know. That's an option though, right? I wouldn't even mind going back to it, the AI drafts terrible prospects and can't sustain itself through its system, minors prospects have no leaders to guide them because no mlfa signings, etc. And it leads to a disaster. I had to fix a ton on Fortaleza when I got them and it'd be the same if I tried to dive into Lisbon/Kabul/Dam
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#42
Can you turn off their FA until we get to ST when salary demands get to the desperate, really low steal level?

I think the amount of good FAs that go into the season is a problem. Kills trading/unfair advantage for teams like mine who have budget room.

I also think the playoff format is a huge issue we can fix easily. When it doesn't matter if you finish 1st or 4th, people lose interest during the season. If we make it worth more to finish 1st than 2nd than 3rd/4th, there's more of a reason to care.
I agree, it’s just super manual. When you have a bunch of teams you have to change all the settings individually I believe.

Disagree that there is even a playoff issues.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#43
Yeah CPU doesn’t sign anyone... which is why a 6 WARS WON, 28 year old, who is very popular just signed for $4.5m
That + way too many good OFs in the game. Not that we can do anything about that but it seems out of whack.
 

Yankee151

TWINK Stadium
#44
Yeah CPU doesn’t sign anyone... which is why a 6 WARS WON, 28 year old, who is very popular just signed for $4.5m
Yeah I was surprised he was still there, I was sitting on some extra cash and just signed like 4 all-star caliber guys for (pro rated for half the season) like 4M total
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
#45
Yeah CPU doesn’t sign anyone... which is why a 6 WARS WON, 28 year old, who is very popular just signed for $4.5m
Was it me?

I used to put out offers for CPU teams back in the day. No one noticed. Secrets out now.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#46
I agree, it’s just super manual. When you have a bunch of teams you have to change all the settings individually I believe.

Disagree that there is even a playoff issues.
I think the playoff issue is related to regular season. For instance, for us and Moscow (the last few years) once we hit August, no real reason to be interested or make any big moves. No reason for teams 3rd or 4th to make a push if they're comfortably in.

The one-game playoff would be fun as hell to watch too. We lose momentum during the playoffs due to it being a dead part of the season for most. Even the teams that win there really isn't much to do. So making it quicker would be good.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
#49
One other idea: I hate salary caps (and in a way we have one in place with budgets) but I'd be fine with a luxury tax.

I think that'd narrow the gap a little and add some more strategy to the game.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
#50
My quick research said there’s not a ton of difference between revenue sharing and luxury tax, except where the money goes