2/2/2013 5:22 PM
The 20 still there would.

I'd like some owners in those types of worlds to call for contraction.   Maybe say "If my world is contracted, I'll just take another team in a better world."   Because I don't think that's the case.
2/2/2013 5:24 PM
Well the problem is WIS would notice, because in many of those instances it is the few owners who have built super teams that will pay their money every season and many may just quit HBD altogether if their tard world wasn't allowed to continue on as is.

IMO those worlds are detrimental to HBD in that those are the types of private worlds that allow "real" new owners (as opposed to one of the tards aliases) to join because they will take anyone willing to allow their tarded up world to continue. So an actual newb,'s first experience is in a tard world and they grow to dislike the game right away.

No easy answers. But I think the guys who'd quit over a contraction/merger are not good for the game anyway.
2/2/2013 5:27 PM
Ought to be a mandatory 8 or more openings for 2 or 3 consecutive rollovers gets the world shut down or merged. Owners' choice.
2/2/2013 5:27 PM

I disagree. 

Say you stumble upon HBD and join a world.   Unknown to you, it is a crap world.   Nonetheless, you stick with your first team, learn the game, take some beatings but have been drafting well while signing decent IFA.   It's your 8th season, some of those draftees/signings are in the bigs and more are on the way.    Then your world is dissolved.   Do you just grab another team?

2/2/2013 5:29 PM
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
2/2/2013 11:38 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2013 5:29:00 PM (view original):
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
Every day it takes a world to fill is a day longer until Fox can collect money from everyone in that world again.  They might make more money if fewer worlds filled faster. The numbers aren't as dramatic as 80 of 180 worlds would shut.
2/2/2013 11:57 PM
I'm sure I don't speak for everyone, but I'm sure I speak for many saying if my world(s) were folded, I'd leave HBD. At least for a while. And I'd think hard before I came back, because I'd figure WIS would probably do it again.

I like my worlds. But I like my teams more. I wouldn't like it if one of my worlds folded, but I'd go on if my team moved into an existing world. Ideally they'd let me pick among worlds that agreed to take in teams.

History would be screwed up, but that's a lesser issue than taking teams away from people who invested 1-2 years, a lot of hours, and $100+ in to them.  So what if I look at a player card and it shows he was MVP two times in another world? I'd rather that than wipe that players history. NBA history survived taking in the ABA. NFL history survived taking in the AFL. WIS could figure out a way to bring in teams and keep player history.

If you've never played HBD and somehow you landed on the HBD Join A World page and you see 100+ openings, you're going to think the game is no good. If you walk into a restaurant that could seat 100 you've never been to on Sat night at 8 and there are just 6 people in there, you''re probably going to turn around. Same effect in HBD. Moving teams into existing worlds would solve a lot of problems.
2/3/2013 12:50 AM
I like the idea of moving one of the teams from the 10+ opening  worlds and sending them to one world and team 2 could go to another world rather than a complete merger of two worlds.

Perhaps all the players on the replaced team could go to the FA market. Or I guess more likely they would just be gone.

I don't know how happy I'd be to take a super team into a fairly competitive world, but maybe some worlds wouldn't mind. 

It's probably a bit of a PITA for the programmers to merge worlds, I imagine adding a team from World A into World B and removing the team it would replace fairly often would be more labor intensive than they would want to take on.

I think it is essentially a non issue for the most part. Even tard worlds fill eventually. Some even change their name and go on to be even more tarded up. Ultimately most decent worlds fill relatively fast.

I agree that a new owner could be turned off by it, but IDK an easy fix for that.

That should be the real focus here. Not how long worlds take to fill, because it is a non issue for most good worlds, but rather what could WIS do to help steer newer owners into better leagues. I'd like to see an "Average openings" over the last 4 seasons & "Average rollover time" over that same period columns added to the World list, but at the end of the day that just makes the tarded worlds even harder to fill and WIS probably wants to stay away from any kind of stats that would cast aspersion on some worlds for fear of losing those owners. Not to mention most decent worlds screen new owners and are rightfully leery that a "new owner" is simply some alias. Too bad a person must spend 50 bucks or more in a tard world to have a chance at getting into a good world. 
2/3/2013 8:32 AM
Posted by tufft on 2/2/2013 11:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2013 5:29:00 PM (view original):
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
Every day it takes a world to fill is a day longer until Fox can collect money from everyone in that world again.  They might make more money if fewer worlds filled faster. The numbers aren't as dramatic as 80 of 180 worlds would shut.
This has been said more than once and I tend to disagree.

I buy my 4 pack today.  I use one of my credits in a world that doesn't fill until August.   Pretty sure my credit card is billed before August. 
2/3/2013 8:38 AM
Posted by tufft on 2/2/2013 11:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2013 5:29:00 PM (view original):
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
Every day it takes a world to fill is a day longer until Fox can collect money from everyone in that world again.  They might make more money if fewer worlds filled faster. The numbers aren't as dramatic as 80 of 180 worlds would shut.
Exactly.  The best economic model with respect to HBD would be the one that brings in the most amount of money in "x" amount of time.  Fewer would that fill faster might generate more revenue that what they've got now.

It's clear that this problem isn't going away.  Free teams, credits, discounted prices, etc., are just temporary solutions that doesn't address the root cause of the problem, which is that supply exceeds demand, and has for some time now.
2/3/2013 8:42 AM
You seem to be making the assumption that people would just take a team in whatever world is available because their options would be limited. I don't think that's true.
2/3/2013 8:43 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/3/2013 8:32:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tufft on 2/2/2013 11:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2013 5:29:00 PM (view original):
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
Every day it takes a world to fill is a day longer until Fox can collect money from everyone in that world again.  They might make more money if fewer worlds filled faster. The numbers aren't as dramatic as 80 of 180 worlds would shut.
This has been said more than once and I tend to disagree.

I buy my 4 pack today.  I use one of my credits in a world that doesn't fill until August.   Pretty sure my credit card is billed before August. 
You buy your 4 pack today for the one world you play in.  But that world that takes a month and a half to fill after every rollover.  You're patient, and learn to live with that.

You're not buying your next 4 pack until a year and a half from now.

Your buddy, who also plays in only one world, but it fills quickly, buys his 4 pack today.  He's buying his next one a year from now.

It's not when WIS gets your money.  It's how often WIS gets your money.
2/3/2013 8:45 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/3/2013 8:42:00 AM (view original):
You seem to be making the assumption that people would just take a team in whatever world is available because their options would be limited. I don't think that's true.
I'm assuming that the closer supply is to demand, the more economically efficient the system would be for WIS.
2/3/2013 9:44 AM

Then you have to weigh the perceived value of revamping the system to improve cash flow, versus the estimated cost of reprogramming.  Considering how much everyone complains about customer support issues, in this game and others, I would guess WIS might not see the investment as necessary.
 

2/3/2013 9:52 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/3/2013 8:38:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tufft on 2/2/2013 11:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2013 5:29:00 PM (view original):
There's also a financial aspect.   FOX can have 100 good worlds and 80 crap worlds.    Or 100 good worlds.   Why on earth would they want to take 50k out of their pockets three-four times a year?
Every day it takes a world to fill is a day longer until Fox can collect money from everyone in that world again.  They might make more money if fewer worlds filled faster. The numbers aren't as dramatic as 80 of 180 worlds would shut.
Exactly.  The best economic model with respect to HBD would be the one that brings in the most amount of money in "x" amount of time.  Fewer would that fill faster might generate more revenue that what they've got now.

It's clear that this problem isn't going away.  Free teams, credits, discounted prices, etc., are just temporary solutions that doesn't address the root cause of the problem, which is that supply exceeds demand, and has for some time now.
never understood why they kept creating new worlds, other than people whining about wanting "their own team"

run a team for a few seasons, and they'll basically be all your "own" players anyway
of 23

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.