All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Real-time FA bidding
10/17/2012 2:24 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/17/2012 2:12:00 PM (view original):
I don't particularly care what it's called(or what you call it).   It solves the problem of "Lots of time" vs "Limited time".

Similar to what damag said earlier, I could sit here and bid on every FA I'm interested in.  Find the high bid, back out and bid on another until I find the "best buy".   How is that not ridiculously more advantageous to me than the current system?
I get that you don't understand that only solving the Too Much Time problem isn't going to make the game better.

Are you really not able to figure out how to solve that?

Here are 2 easy ways to prevent people like you from trying to game the system.

(1) Bids can't be withdrawn.  That's how it works in the rest of the world. Would work fine here.

(2) If you withdraw a 3rd (4th?) bid, total, to all FAs, you are blocked from bidding for 2-4 days.  Pretty close to how it would work in the real world. If a team developed a pattern of submitting & withdrawing bids to players, word would get around quickly. Players & agents talk. It wouldn't take long for players & agents to let a team know we don't trust your bids, so we're not looking at them.  I wouldn't go with a permanent ban on bidding in HBD. A few days would prevent it from happening.

10/17/2012 2:29 PM
>> There is no way of telling or predicting on which 1/2 cycle any particular FA will sign.  I'm not sure why you think that more experienced owners have some sort of advantage over less experienced owners in that respect.  A guy could sign on the first cycle (the 3am cycle 24 hours after FA starts), he could sign on the last cycle (the 7pm cycle on the last day of FA), or he could sign anywhere in-between. <<

First, FAs & coaches do start signing on a particular cycle. And they take the top offer on the table on another.  If you dispute that, you're wrong.

If you don't think that knowledge is a huge advantage, fine.  I think it is an advantage.  We're not going to agree.

Ignore that.  All of the other reasons I've given the current system is bad for HBD stand.  This is a small detail among bigger proven problems.

10/17/2012 2:34 PM

So what's your problem with a max of two bids on any one FA?   You seem fine on blocking owners from bidding from days on end if they try to game your "great idea".  Why not block them from bidding a 3rd time on a FA?

10/17/2012 2:37 PM
Posted by tufft on 10/17/2012 2:16:00 PM (view original):
>> Insisting that the eBay model of proxy bidding would somehow make HBD FA bidding better is ludicrous.  It makes no sense to me how a system in which I can make a bid of, for example,  $20m on a player, and end up signing him for $7.1m, makes the game better.  That REMOVES strategy, not improves strategy.  It takes away risk.  Without risk, there is little to no strategy. <<

I already explained how & why HBD could be better if it saved GMs from spending $13M more for a player than anyone else.  Better for retention. Better not to have to fill screwed up teams whose owner has left them. Real world data proves you get more active auctions and higher bids with that model (more action = more fun. Higher bids not necessarily good.)

The strategies could change, but to say there would be no strategy is just silly.  Can't argue that point.  It's just so far crazy it's beyond reasonable debate.

You seem to disagree with me on the potential benefits. I can't argue that. Difference of opinion.
There's the disconnect.

You seem to think there should be no risk to overbidding on FA's, because proxy bidding and the dynamics of the market will bail you out.  You somehow think that's strategy.  Most everybody else posting here thinks that's a bad idea, that overbidding should come with risk; the risk being that if I bid $20m on a guy whose market value might only be $7m, that I might get stuck paying $20m. 

The strategy in the current bidding model is that one has to estimate the market value for a particular FA and bid accordingly.  If your estimate is wrong, you run the risk of either overpaying for the FA (if you estimated too high), or not signing the FA (if you estimated too low).  Strategy is based partly on a system of risk versus reward.  Those who can find a way to balance risk and reward (or better yet, maximize reward while minimizing risk) should be able to benefit.  Your plan removes the risk.  Without the risk, there is less strategy.  With less strategy, the game is dumbed down.

Many of us don't want to see the game dumbed down.
10/17/2012 2:39 PM
Posted by deathinahole on 10/17/2012 2:22:00 PM (view original):
Can we just cut to "it's a bad idea"?
Somebody used to maintain a "Dumb Idea" thread . . . .
10/17/2012 2:41 PM
Posted by tufft on 10/17/2012 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/17/2012 2:12:00 PM (view original):
I don't particularly care what it's called(or what you call it).   It solves the problem of "Lots of time" vs "Limited time".

Similar to what damag said earlier, I could sit here and bid on every FA I'm interested in.  Find the high bid, back out and bid on another until I find the "best buy".   How is that not ridiculously more advantageous to me than the current system?
I get that you don't understand that only solving the Too Much Time problem isn't going to make the game better.

Are you really not able to figure out how to solve that?

Here are 2 easy ways to prevent people like you from trying to game the system.

(1) Bids can't be withdrawn.  That's how it works in the rest of the world. Would work fine here.

(2) If you withdraw a 3rd (4th?) bid, total, to all FAs, you are blocked from bidding for 2-4 days.  Pretty close to how it would work in the real world. If a team developed a pattern of submitting & withdrawing bids to players, word would get around quickly. Players & agents talk. It wouldn't take long for players & agents to let a team know we don't trust your bids, so we're not looking at them.  I wouldn't go with a permanent ban on bidding in HBD. A few days would prevent it from happening.

You've taken your incredibly bad idea and have now made it worse.

Congratulations.
10/17/2012 2:44 PM
Posted by tufft on 10/17/2012 2:29:00 PM (view original):
>> There is no way of telling or predicting on which 1/2 cycle any particular FA will sign.  I'm not sure why you think that more experienced owners have some sort of advantage over less experienced owners in that respect.  A guy could sign on the first cycle (the 3am cycle 24 hours after FA starts), he could sign on the last cycle (the 7pm cycle on the last day of FA), or he could sign anywhere in-between. <<

First, FAs & coaches do start signing on a particular cycle. And they take the top offer on the table on another.  If you dispute that, you're wrong.

If you don't think that knowledge is a huge advantage, fine.  I think it is an advantage.  We're not going to agree.

Ignore that.  All of the other reasons I've given the current system is bad for HBD stand.  This is a small detail among bigger proven problems.

"First, FAs & coaches do start signing on a particular cycle. And they take the top offer on the table on another.  If you dispute that, you're wrong."

How am I disputing that?  That's exactly what I'm saying in the portion of my post that you quoted.
10/17/2012 2:44 PM
That takes a special skillset.
10/17/2012 2:47 PM
I feel like I've just wandered into Stupidville and have been greeted by Mayor Tufft.
10/17/2012 2:48 PM
10/17/2012 2:49 PM
10/17/2012 5:39 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/17/2012 2:34:00 PM (view original):

So what's your problem with a max of two bids on any one FA?   You seem fine on blocking owners from bidding from days on end if they try to game your "great idea".  Why not block them from bidding a 3rd time on a FA?

The rest of the world has proven over hundreds of years that blind auctions don't work as well for the sellers or participants most of the time.  Less entertainment. Less action. Lower average winning bids. More people bid way too much and then refuse to pay (in HBD terms, that would equal to quitting the team or game.)
10/17/2012 6:07 PM
tecwrg - >> How am I disputing that?  That's exactly what I'm saying in the portion of my post that you quoted.<<

You didn't dispute that. My bad for missing that. There is SO much wrong about what else you're posting, I missed one line of fact.  My bad.

I conceded that's not the biggest problem. You want to keep going over that & ignore all of the other things you're wrong about, fine.

You ignored more relevant questions, so I'll see if I can get you to answer those. You seem to at least be trying to think this through.

(1) HBD is dying. Many people who leave the game leave because it takes too much time.  There would be a benefit in changing FA bidding so it remains strategic, fun, AND takes less time.  More people would stick with the game if it took less time to play.  -- Agree or Disagree?

(2) The current system rewards the ability to check in every 4 hours, 365 days a year, over all else by a LOT.  Not everyone can do that.  For every person who can do that, and would like to play HBD, there are probably 10-100 that can't invest the time to compete 24/7/365. There is of course a strategy to the current system.  But there are other systems that also have strategies, that reward smart play, AND that would take a whole lot less time than the current system.  -- Agree or Disagree?

(3) Real time is the way the internet works.  Batching up instructions and getting feedback hours later (that you have to go get -- it's not even sent to you) is a model that exists, rounding off, nowhere else on the internet.  Many people won't or can't interact with a game that way.  But none of that matters. There is no way HBD FA bidding could ever have real time feedback with more complete information.  Sure, it works on every other website, but it's just not possible in HBD.  --   Agree or Disagree?

(4) The HBD FA bidding system exists, rounding off, nowhere else, online or offline.  Make a blind bid. Never know the current top bid, so you're always bidding blind. Go out of your way a few hours later to find out what little info you can get.  Repeat.  Arbitrarily, at some point, a winner is declared.  No fixed set of rules. As this model is unique, it stands to reason that is it either brilliant and a whole new way to hold an effective & efficient auction, or crap idea that successful businesses of all types have stayed away from . Closer to what end of the scale do you think it sits?

(5) Years of proof that GMs will, in the current system, bid what many experienced GMs would agree is way too much for a player. That player, or a comparable player could have been had for less. The HBD-proven result of this is GMs quit their team or HBD.  Leaving harder to fill teams behind.  You're saying you think this is ether good for HBD, or it's the only way it could ever work. Like gravity, it's just part of the way it is & we have to live with it. Change is not good idea or possible. -- Agree or Disagree.


10/17/2012 7:49 PM
Posted by tufft on 10/17/2012 5:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/17/2012 2:34:00 PM (view original):

So what's your problem with a max of two bids on any one FA?   You seem fine on blocking owners from bidding from days on end if they try to game your "great idea".  Why not block them from bidding a 3rd time on a FA?

The rest of the world has proven over hundreds of years that blind auctions don't work as well for the sellers or participants most of the time.  Less entertainment. Less action. Lower average winning bids. More people bid way too much and then refuse to pay (in HBD terms, that would equal to quitting the team or game.)
Uh, you do realize that just because you're increasing bids by 10k at 10 AM that there's no guarantee that anyone else is doing the same at the same time, right?

You know what would make me quit the game?  Getting shut out of FA because I withdrew a third bid.
10/17/2012 9:14 PM
Congrats on a milestone post:

MikeT23
 
Posts: 20000 (77)
    

Current Favorite (remove)
of 11
All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Real-time FA bidding

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.