Posted by yumen442 on 10/25/2018 3:26:00 PM (view original):
I am certainly a relative newcomer to Hardball Dynasty but I think if we could get more new players engaged it would be an important element in improving the game. It would first off show interest in the game which I hope would encourage more investment from the developers. If we can increase interest via social media I think that it would be a low cost way of increasing traffic. Other things to help new owners would be the ability to manipulate the budgets a little more. Sometimes starting with default or past owner budgets handcuffs a new owner into poor allocation of resources and lowering overall satisfaction in game play. More granularity in what the ratings mean and how they impact performance could help lower barriers to entry of people who may not understand how ratings in their first couple seasons hopefully resulting in fewer bad trades or ill-advised contracts. Bad contracts and trades hurt worlds in general and this could mitigate the likelihood. I may be off base here being new but I wanted to at least try to improve the game. I only found out about it from listening to a fangraphs podcast that talked about the BBWAA league.

I agree with the budget and ratings help a ton.

Posted by yumen442 on 10/25/2018 3:26:00 PM (view original):
I am certainly a relative newcomer to Hardball Dynasty but I think if we could get more new players engaged it would be an important element in improving the game. It would first off show interest in the game which I hope would encourage more investment from the developers. If we can increase interest via social media I think that it would be a low cost way of increasing traffic. Other things to help new owners would be the ability to manipulate the budgets a little more. Sometimes starting with default or past owner budgets handcuffs a new owner into poor allocation of resources and lowering overall satisfaction in game play. More granularity in what the ratings mean and how they impact performance could help lower barriers to entry of people who may not understand how ratings in their first couple seasons hopefully resulting in fewer bad trades or ill-advised contracts. Bad contracts and trades hurt worlds in general and this could mitigate the likelihood. I may be off base here being new but I wanted to at least try to improve the game. I only found out about it from listening to a fangraphs podcast that talked about the BBWAA league.

A social media strategy is something we can build and manage ourselves. I just hate to see that we the players drive the league growth and never get compensated. I'm not being selfish, but this format has huge potential worldwide across multiple sports. Look at the growth of DFS and E Sports.

WIS should at least provide referral codes so that those driving successful marketing efforts receive season credits, assuming WIS does due diligence on their end (e.g. IP logging, etc.) to prevent shenanigans.

Posted by opie100 on 10/24/2018 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/24/2018 5:16:00 PM (view original):
This might be an impossible question to answer, but how many active owners are there currently in HBD? I believe that solving the imbalance of owners/worlds is certainly the biggest problem...if we knew how many owners there are, it could help in figuring out an "ideal" number of worlds. Once that is established, answering these questions would likely be a lot easier.

I'd guess around 1950 active logins.

If increasing demand is a near-term goal, then game updates (CBA, ballparks, social interface) would likely freshen the game up to the degree that you'd get past users returning. That would also require someone dumping money into development without guaranteed return. In the meantime, commissioner recruiting and users pushing for world merges are the near term "solutions."

1950 logins means that the "ideal" number of worlds would be 61 (1950 logins divided by 32 owners per world means that there are currently enough active logins to fill 60.9375 worlds.) However, for variety I would say that the idea number would be somewhere around 65 or 70...according to the World Rankings, there are 141. That number obviously needs to be a little lower...if the argument against merging is loss of data, I'd be willing to contribute to an effort to record the data prior to any potential merges.

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/25/2018 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by opie100 on 10/24/2018 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/24/2018 5:16:00 PM (view original):
This might be an impossible question to answer, but how many active owners are there currently in HBD? I believe that solving the imbalance of owners/worlds is certainly the biggest problem...if we knew how many owners there are, it could help in figuring out an "ideal" number of worlds. Once that is established, answering these questions would likely be a lot easier.

I'd guess around 1950 active logins.

If increasing demand is a near-term goal, then game updates (CBA, ballparks, social interface) would likely freshen the game up to the degree that you'd get past users returning. That would also require someone dumping money into development without guaranteed return. In the meantime, commissioner recruiting and users pushing for world merges are the near term "solutions."

1950 logins means that the "ideal" number of worlds would be 61 (1950 logins divided by 32 owners per world means that there are currently enough active logins to fill 60.9375 worlds.) However, for variety I would say that the idea number would be somewhere around 65 or 70...according to the World Rankings, there are 141. That number obviously needs to be a little lower...if the argument against merging is loss of data, I'd be willing to contribute to an effort to record the data prior to any potential merges.

I agree that the number should be a lot lower, I mean, I am Mr. Merge, but your forgetting that some people are in multiple worlds. When he says, log-ins he counts the amount off people that play, but not how many worlds there in.

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/25/2018 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by opie100 on 10/24/2018 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/24/2018 5:16:00 PM (view original):
This might be an impossible question to answer, but how many active owners are there currently in HBD? I believe that solving the imbalance of owners/worlds is certainly the biggest problem...if we knew how many owners there are, it could help in figuring out an "ideal" number of worlds. Once that is established, answering these questions would likely be a lot easier.

I'd guess around 1950 active logins.

If increasing demand is a near-term goal, then game updates (CBA, ballparks, social interface) would likely freshen the game up to the degree that you'd get past users returning. That would also require someone dumping money into development without guaranteed return. In the meantime, commissioner recruiting and users pushing for world merges are the near term "solutions."

1950 logins means that the "ideal" number of worlds would be 61 (1950 logins divided by 32 owners per world means that there are currently enough active logins to fill 60.9375 worlds.) However, for variety I would say that the idea number would be somewhere around 65 or 70...according to the World Rankings, there are 141. That number obviously needs to be a little lower...if the argument against merging is loss of data, I'd be willing to contribute to an effort to record the data prior to any potential merges.

Owners average two worlds each. Many have quite a few more. Rather than wait for WIS to merge worlds, it would be faster for owners in problem leagues to move to/pick up more stable, engaged worlds.

Posted by opie100 on 10/25/2018 7:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/25/2018 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by opie100 on 10/24/2018 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bruinsfan911 on 10/24/2018 5:16:00 PM (view original):
This might be an impossible question to answer, but how many active owners are there currently in HBD? I believe that solving the imbalance of owners/worlds is certainly the biggest problem...if we knew how many owners there are, it could help in figuring out an "ideal" number of worlds. Once that is established, answering these questions would likely be a lot easier.

I'd guess around 1950 active logins.

If increasing demand is a near-term goal, then game updates (CBA, ballparks, social interface) would likely freshen the game up to the degree that you'd get past users returning. That would also require someone dumping money into development without guaranteed return. In the meantime, commissioner recruiting and users pushing for world merges are the near term "solutions."

1950 logins means that the "ideal" number of worlds would be 61 (1950 logins divided by 32 owners per world means that there are currently enough active logins to fill 60.9375 worlds.) However, for variety I would say that the idea number would be somewhere around 65 or 70...according to the World Rankings, there are 141. That number obviously needs to be a little lower...if the argument against merging is loss of data, I'd be willing to contribute to an effort to record the data prior to any potential merges.

Owners average two worlds each. Many have quite a few more. Rather than wait for WIS to merge worlds, it would be faster for owners in problem leagues to move to/pick up more stable, engaged worlds.

I agree. Ultimately, my suggestion was going to be to begin a "migration" of sorts to the top 65-70ish worlds in the World Rankings going from the bottom up. This is something that we as owners could do to speed up pace of play/turnover...I was just curious where we should set the target cutoff based on the number of people we've got on here.

In an ideal world, it would work like this: Owners from the lowest ranked inactive world (currently Draft Theme World) would vacate it and fill in openings from the top down. Currently, the top rated world that has openings is NCAA II, with 3 slots available. So, 3 people from DTW would join NCAA II, making Canseco the top rated world with openings. Three more DTW members would join there, making Clarkson the top rated world with openings etc. This process would continue until everyone was out of DTW. Then the members of the lowest rated remaining world (which would currently be either Aaron, with no rating, or Pedro Martinez) would begin to do the same and so on until only the top 65-70 or so worlds were active. This would take a lot of coordination etc. but I think it fits the bill for an "outside the box but achievable" strategy for recruitment. If/when HBD becomes more popular again, the new owners could begin populating the lower ranked and now empty worlds. Thoughts?

On second thought, it would make more sense to use the same process but instead prioritize by number of openings rather than World Ranking.

Posted by opie100 on 10/25/2018 12:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crickett13 on 10/25/2018 12:07:00 AM (view original):
Just speaking for myself but I have simply lost interest in the game. I regularly was in 3 to 6 worlds and right now I am going down to 1. My main reason is wins floors that don't get enforced. I'm a play by the rules kind of guy so leagues give exceptions or say "well they almost made it so we will just shake our finger at them" just ruined the game for me because it puts me at a competitive disadvantage. That's not something that can be laid at the doorstep of WIS but lands squarely on the people playing the game.

I agree. Since replacing owners can be a drag, some worlds get lazy. I can say that MWRs are strictly enforced in Cooperstown and Moonlight Graham. Owners that miss MWR move on peacefully.

That's another idea for WIS, Sermonauthor: MWR Support. Built-in functionality where MWRs are entered by Commissioners. MWRs would then appear (and be sortable) in World listings. And the system could prevent MWR misses from renewing the following season. Alternatively, financial/budget penalties could be entered and automatically deployed should worlds prefer that route.

This would have kept me playing

Problem with loss floor, is that bad owners sell off young players to meet the floor. I would love a promotion/relegation system. Problem is that you dont get to carry your team over when promoted. Maybe instead of hard win floors, there is a vote taken at end of each season on the lowest loss teams can get voted out with say 60% vote.

The problem with that is now you run into the "he's a nice guy, so let's keep him." while at the same time Mr. Nice Guy is tanking.

Show me a world where a tough MWR is actually enforced that has trouble filling. I'm not sure many of those exist.

Posted by McGirkTheJer on 10/25/2018 11:08:00 PM (view original):
Problem with loss floor, is that bad owners sell off young players to meet the floor. I would love a promotion/relegation system. Problem is that you dont get to carry your team over when promoted. Maybe instead of hard win floors, there is a vote taken at end of each season on the lowest loss teams can get voted out with say 60% vote.

Bad owners do lots of stupid ****. Every world I have ever been in has tons of 30+ year old players in FA when spring training starts willing to take a cheap 1 year contract. Rules like you propose are exactly why I'm down to 1 team and may soon be completely done with the game

If a MWR is not cast in stone, it is not a rule, it's a guideline, therefore useless. Whatever the penalty it should be automatic.

From what I have seen advertisement for HBD was almost nil under Fox, and now is. I came to HBD 9 years ago because I was given a free season for winning a Fox Sports Fantasy Baseball League. I have been here ever since. I thought this was a great promotion and as far as I know I am the only recipient, ever. I realize it would be much more work now, but seems to me an arrangement could be made with a large fantasy provider. I'm no longer familiar with what is out there since I never went back to fantasy after coming to HBD but the number of players still is probably huge and the potential seems obvious.

Isn't Sports Hub a fantasy site?