• Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.

New League Discussion

NML

Well-Known Member
Some stuff that I’ve tested that’s worked well:

- Rookie League in September, right after the minor league post season. Set an age limit of 22/23 and basically run ur new draft picks and young guys in A-ball to get some extra reps. Also gives something to do during the post season for non-playoff teams

- Turning off IFA but expanding the draft and the number of teams in college and high school. Still need to test how the league talent level develops over time doe, but the first couple of draft classes were solid

- locking in local and national media contracts for the next 100 seasons. Don’t know if that’s always been there but I don’t remember that feature. But that makes it way easier to stabilize budgets

Good news is all this can be added to either a new or existing league
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
I think some minor (~3M) Fluctuation in Local Media budget is fine, but locking in national media contracts manually should be easy to do. Cool with opt-in Rookie League too
 

NML

Well-Known Member
I think some minor (~3M) Fluctuation in Local Media budget is fine, but locking in national media contracts manually should be easy to do. Cool with opt-in Rookie League too

I think since you can automatically make both the same forever, it’s just two less variables you have to worry about.

For IFA - again it’s all about stabilization to me to me. I’d also be more immersed with better and deeper draft classes that we can see develop over years too, but enough about me
 

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
I think since you can automatically make both the same forever, it’s just two less variables you have to worry about.

For IFA - again it’s all about stabilization to me to me. I’d also be more immersed with better and deeper draft classes that we can see develop over years too, but enough about me

I like the added layer that IFA gives you when trying to figure out how to budget. But if getting rid of it improves drafts and means @TonyGin&Juice and I get to hand out more terrible contracts that we can later dump on the rest of you then I’m all for it.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
I think since you can automatically make both the same forever, it’s just two less variables you have to worry about.

For IFA - again it’s all about stabilization to me to me. I’d also be more immersed with better and deeper draft classes that we can see develop over years too, but enough about me
Is that option in the Finances menu?
 

Soonerfan09

Well-Known Member
So at the end of this, we lost Orlando and potentially added goblue?

In my opinion, one of the problems with the WBL that led to mass amounts of inactivity was allowing inactivity. Owners would go MIA for at least 2-3 seasons without ever exporting, but their teams were never available to anyone else. If we really want to have an active league, there needs to be something in place to either keep owners active or replace them when they aren't. I think we should replace any owner who isn't active for like a real-life month or an in-game season, something similar to that. If we recruit off the OOTP website (after moving to 20), we could probably maintain a pretty full and active league.
 
I’d be pretty sad if you never used that logo I made for you!
The team sucked and we adopted no logo for last season in favor of focusing on actually playing hockey. However, we're actually looking at implementing the logo for this coming season now that we have our shit together. Our summer team is 8-1-1, so we decided we can talk about logos again. :thumbsup:
 

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
So at the end of this, we lost Orlando and potentially added goblue?

In my opinion, one of the problems with the WBL that led to mass amounts of inactivity was allowing inactivity. Owners would go MIA for at least 2-3 seasons without ever exporting, but their teams were never available to anyone else. If we really want to have an active league, there needs to be something in place to either keep owners active or replace them when they aren't. I think we should replace any owner who isn't active for like a real-life month or an in-game season, something similar to that. If we recruit off the OOTP website (after moving to 20), we could probably maintain a pretty full and active league.
Orlando forgot rule Number 1.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
I think some minor (~3M) Fluctuation in Local Media budget is fine, but locking in national media contracts manually should be easy to do. Cool with opt-in Rookie League too
Difference in media money is so negligible. It used to be giant differences in original UBL (SLC had a huge one, Key West got nothing) but now it's a very minor difference. Won't have really any effect.

The big differences are in tickets. I'm selling out every game at the Lando mandated price stop ($42.69) so my budget really can't go up. Limiting ticket prices is the way to go if you want to really limit budgets.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
You can also just force ticket prices to be the same throughout the league. Assuming the formula is mostly linear, that would work. It’d also prevent another hayvis situation on the opposite end of the spectrum
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
That was just the don’t be a dick rule! Which is the real rule #1. I made no such mandate, but congratulate you on not being a bigger dick!
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
You can also just force ticket prices to be the same throughout the league. Assuming the formula is mostly linear, that would work. It’d also prevent another hayvis situation on the opposite end of the spectrum
When I looked at hayvis’ ticket price, attendance and revenue history, I’m not sure it hurt him as much as we thought. His revenue actually went up when he first dropped them. And stayed the same through subsequent drops. I think he should raise them, but it may have helped initially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NML

NML

Well-Known Member
I would think that, long term, it doesn’t really matter- you charge more, less people come and vice versa

The exception being what doh described, where ur selling out and can still raise prices
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
Yeah. Capping ticket prices is really the easiest way to create a ceiling. You could make all the stadiums the same size too, or within a small range. You should be able to sell out and raise them to an extent. I’m guessing people like having their own strategy with tickets.
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
Cap ticket prices somewhere around $35 would be the absolute best way to lower the top end down to the $175M range. I personally think it would be useful for new players to see what others have their ticket prices at as well.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
I'm going to fix stadium capacities when I sim in a couple days, unless Karl has already. I don't want to set everyone's tickets to the same because things might get too even, but a cap might be fine. I don't know how far the top end budget should lower; Right now Doh is at 225M in revenue (200 budget after rev sharing) so definitely want to get that down a bit, but with rev sharing need to make sure the top teams aren't sitting at 160M with the bottom at 120M.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Is there any way that you can control when players retire? I think we could force guys to retire after one year unsigned? That would help with FA being too juiced.
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
I'm going to fix stadium capacities when I sim in a couple days, unless Karl has already. I don't want to set everyone's tickets to the same because things might get too even, but a cap might be fine. I don't know how far the top end budget should lower; Right now Doh is at 225M in revenue (200 budget after rev sharing) so definitely want to get that down a bit, but with rev sharing need to make sure the top teams aren't sitting at 160M with the bottom at 120M.

@doh's season ticket sales were a huge amount higher than the other top teams, which makes me think he was able to boost his ticket prices pretty high in the pre season and take advantage of the HYPE. Probably best to just ask him what his strategies are because he's consistently the top season ticket/gate revenue guy so he's got it figured out better than some of the other top teams (like Seoul who should have similar fan interest). Just knocking them season tickets down to $35 instead of $45 or whatever probably cuts him way down.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Is there any way that you can control when players retire? I think we could force guys to retire after one year unsigned? That would help with FA being too juiced.

We can, though I'm hesitant to do so, feels like playing God too much and who knows if a team will want them a year later. After maybe 3 years, sure

@doh's season ticket sales were a huge amount higher than the other top teams, which makes me think he was able to boost his ticket prices pretty high in the pre season and take advantage of the HYPE. Probably best to just ask him what his strategies are because he's consistently the top season ticket/gate revenue guy so he's got it figured out better than some of the other top teams (like Seoul who should have similar fan interest). Just knocking them season tickets down to $35 instead of $45 or whatever probably cuts him way down.

Yeah season tickets are a good chunk of the money. I think I'll see how $40 works and if that's still not enough then we go to a cap of $35 or $38 or whatever. It really depends what the goal for a ceiling is and I think even 180M would be fine if all the budget floors are brought up to like $105M.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
$105m is still only 58% of $180m. It closer, but that’s still a massive gap
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Do we prefer to have a higher mean or a lower mean? 110 and 175? 115 and 180? 105 and 175? I'm open to whatever

Keep in mind a higher average means less FA as extending guys becomes easier, while a lower average means more fa/less extensions. I don't know which is better for trading (We could obviously change player salaries in tandem but that's just rearranging numbers around for no reason)
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
We're currently at like a 120-200 spread for teams that have actually been intending to play baseball. If you did nothing to the bottom end but brought the top end down to 175 or so, I think you'd be set.

125-175 would be ideal, IMO, but OTTO teams shouldn't be considered as the low end.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
@doh's season ticket sales were a huge amount higher than the other top teams, which makes me think he was able to boost his ticket prices pretty high in the pre season and take advantage of the HYPE. Probably best to just ask him what his strategies are because he's consistently the top season ticket/gate revenue guy so he's got it figured out better than some of the other top teams (like Seoul who should have similar fan interest). Just knocking them season tickets down to $35 instead of $45 or whatever probably cuts him way down.
I don't really have any strategies. Just win games. I know it's based on FI in a lot of ways and @Orlando said it can go OVER 100. So I imagine I have a FI that is well beyond 100 at this point.

I used to try to target popular guys and that works. Re-signing popular guys helps.

Just watch your attendance, lower until you sell out then once you start selling out, up the price. I am curious if there's an effect to selling out games and raising it from there vs. raising it just as attendance goes up.

The other crazy idea to keep budgets more even is to try to win games. That works. Our markets (were?) all even at the start of this sim. So budgets are only based on how well you've played the game.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
You can only get down to $105M by being a complete retard or tanking.

Yeah... It's almost like you don't play the game for 4-5 seasons and your budget goes to hell.

But you have to consider that. If somebody abandons ship and is OTTO’d for five years, it should keep them closer so that the next owner is in a more reasonable situation

It’s either fixed from a budget perspective or changing auto
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
I had one extremely radical idea that would be interesting/get teams out of ruts (I think) AND keep the current league while adding a new one:

Sim ahead 10-20 years. You'll have completely randomized level of teams by that point. It'll be a much more even field (I assume).

Most importantly-- we can see how guys we have grown to follow do.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
That was suggested but a couple people were really against it. Orlando especially, and he did mention the issue of an even more bloated file
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
But you have to consider that. If somebody abandons ship and is OTTO’d for five years, it should keep them closer so that the next owner is in a more reasonable situation

It’s either fixed from a budget perspective or changing auto

Just manually change the Otto teams budget one time
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
We could always do a "Soft" and "Hard" Floor, where we expect Otto to be a little lower at that hard floor, but if a new owner comes in to take over, we bump them back up to the soft floor? Would save us from manually editing the budget every year and rather just when a new owner comes in to keep them competitive.
 

Mr. Radpants

Trog Five Standing By
I had one extremely radical idea that would be interesting/get teams out of ruts (I think) AND keep the current league while adding a new one:

Sim ahead 10-20 years. You'll have completely randomized level of teams by that point. It'll be a much more even field (I assume).

Most importantly-- we can see how guys we have grown to follow do.

Is this a joke

Are you trying to make Qual quit twice
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
We can, though I'm hesitant to do so, feels like playing God too much and who knows if a team will want them a year later. After maybe 3 years, sure
Yeah I see that but I think there are too many FAs in the game. Without teams trying to win, you end up with so many good players available into the season that it kills trading.
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
We could always do a "Soft" and "Hard" Floor, where we expect Otto to be a little lower at that hard floor, but if a new owner comes in to take over, we bump them back up to the soft floor? Would save us from manually editing the budget every year and rather just when a new owner comes in to keep them competitive.

I would just edit it if/when a new owner takes over. Give them a couple years of HELICOPTER PAYMENTS if they are under 120 so that they can splash some cash on FA!

I also think us HAVES should voluntarily donate AA and AAA players to new owners, because that's often the worst part of the OTTO RAPE... having a depleted system somehow because OTTO is drafting fucking 30 control idiot SP with the 2nd OVR. I will legit donate like 5 decent prospects to a new owner and if others do the same it'd help them build a system. A ball could be handled with compensatory picks in rounds 2-10 would probably help a new player build their own system as well.
 
Top