Its been mentioned, but it really needs to be done. Something needs to change with regards to HOF voting. There isn't enough participation in many worlds, I think partially because the process is so cumbersome and tedious. The screens take forever to load, and half the time you can't tell if you've actually voted or not.

1- Add a 'Submit Votes' button to the HOF Voting screen

2- Its really aggravating wading through a bunch of players who have no business being nominated for the HOF in the first place (which is part of the reason the screen takes sooo long to load, too many players) just to find the players who might actually be HOF worthy. Putting some kind of nomination minimum or criteria could help this. Maybe a minimum 9 or 10 year career? Or a player must have X number of ML Awards/All Star Appearences (i.e. a min of 2 All Star Appearences in order to be eligible for HOF nomination)?

3- On a totally seperate note, if there isn't going to be a 'Live' option, lets take it off the standings page.

HOF Nominations would be fine if you could only see the guys you could actually nominate, it gets bogged down loading players you can't do anything with.

On coach signing it would be nice if minor league coaches would sign at a lower levels if offered enough money.

Posted by deathinahole on 9/13/2011 11:18:00 AM (view original):
Says Mr. "Live for the playoffs would be great!"

Says Mr. "my nose is lodged up another man's ***"

Posted by orrdc on 9/13/2011 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/13/2011 9:15:00 AM (view original):
I'll summarrize my suggestions from the "Suggestions" forum:

1)  A new roster transaction to toggle between active and inactive, rather than have to do them in separate transaction.  Click here for more info.

2)  Add a line-item in the player's transaction history to note that the player received a DITR bump.  Click here for more info.

3)  During coach hiring, when searching for available coaches for a particular level, I'd like to see everybody who is looking for a position not only at that level but also below that level.  Click here for more info.

4)  Since we can only get Type D picks for unsigned draftees from rounds 1, 2 and 3, we should be able to separate our risk levels for the first three rounds as opposed to rounds 4 and 5.  Click here for more info.

5)  it would be nice to be able to search for particular posts in World Chat, either by filtering on a specific user, or being able to specify a specific start date/time.  Click here for more info.

6)  Get rid of the $4 credits for last place finishes, and replace them with performanced-based credits.  Click here for more info.

Hate all of these ideas

Like all of these ideas

Divisional Championship Series to 7 games

Posted by willsauve on 9/13/2011 12:15:00 PM (view original):
On coach signing it would be nice if minor league coaches would sign at a lower levels if offered enough money.

Won't be necessary if unsigned coaches don't demand levels. 

Posted by hopkinsheel on 9/13/2011 12:39:00 PM (view original):
Divisional Championship Series to 7 games

+1

Three things:

Arent FI watered down because half the teams use them as bench coaches?  If that's the reason, we don't need more FI.

As far as HOF goes, there aren't enough players who are getting voted in, and the main reason is that people don't care to vote.  Maybe limiting the available players to nominate from would help drive interest.  But there needs to be an option on the HOF voting page that states "select none," and in addition to that, HOF voting should go by percentage, not by number of votes.  Maybe with a minimum of 20 teams voting.  There are too many teams who simply don't care to vote, so when 14 of 21 teams voting vote for one player, they don't get in.

If it is possible to play "play-in" games, let's find a way to do it.  I understand if the programming is too complicated, though.

The biggest problem w/ Fielding Instructors is their lack of improvement from development in many cases.  IE, they create a young FI who has a promising future, but he starts out as a 50 in fielding coaching.  No body wants him as their ML fielding coach w/ that rating, so unless somebody picks him up as a minor league manager (and his strategy rating is probably going to suck) he's not going to develop, and actually regress.  I like Mike's idea of getting rid of a coach's requirements for a level, would give you more options to sign the young FI w/ solid loyalty and develop him into a major league worthy FI after 4-5 seasons progressing up the minor league ladder.

Additional ideas:
1) similar to the end of season awards, if a coach doesn't vote in the hall of fame, an Auto Vote is made by the computer based upon some standard (ie Cy Young awards, all star selections, MVPs, Gold Gloves, batting champs, etc...)  If a coach views the field, doesn't like any of the canidates, they get the option to put in a "no vote" which would cancel out the computer's autovote should any canidate qualify under the minimums.

2) during coach rehiring, if I have my ML 1b coach from the previous season want a promotion to the 3b coaching job, its a take it or leave it situation.  I can't offer him the ML bench coach job.  I should be able to offer promotions to my returning coaches like I can with my returning minor league coaches (ie I can promote the AA hitting coach from the prior year to AAA even if all he wants is the AA job again)

3) A note sent to coaches a couple of times a year (after ST, all star break, and start of the playoffs) from each level saying which players perhaps deserve promotion.  Make these notes based upon their current ratings and some sort of baseline ratings for each level in relation to their position.  It would help limit the amount of "hands off" approaches to the low minors that lead to a guy being left in low A for 3 seasons and retiring, when he really should have been moved up to AA along the way.  Even if he's a minor league lifer, this gets him a few more seasons in the minors before retiring.

4) more post season awards.  Batting champ, HR champ, RBI champ etc...  Make notes of them on the player's awards page for eventual hall of fame consideration.

5)  If possible, I'd like to see a "timeline" comparision of a players stats during his prime.  As worlds begin to age, a guy might sit 10th on the all time homer and rbi list, but he was the world's best during the 10 seasons he played during his late 20s and early 30s.

6) a better DiTR system.  There need to be a few Roy Oswalt, Albert Pujols, Mike Piazza types that come out of the middle to late rounds of the draft and turn into regular all stars and hall of famers.  As it is today, if you're not a relief pitcher or a catcher, your odds of becoming a regular contributer in the majors is pretty small for any DiTR.

7) Spread the draft out over a few more days and/or cycles.  Allow us to re-rank our players, if desired at each break.  I'd recommend 3 cycles to do the draft/rerank players.  1st round, rounds 2 & 3, and the rest of the draft.

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/13/2011 1:40:00 PM (view original):
Three things:

Arent FI watered down because half the teams use them as bench coaches?  If that's the reason, we don't need more FI.

As far as HOF goes, there aren't enough players who are getting voted in, and the main reason is that people don't care to vote.  Maybe limiting the available players to nominate from would help drive interest.  But there needs to be an option on the HOF voting page that states "select none," and in addition to that, HOF voting should go by percentage, not by number of votes.  Maybe with a minimum of 20 teams voting.  There are too many teams who simply don't care to vote, so when 14 of 21 teams voting vote for one player, they don't get in.

If it is possible to play "play-in" games, let's find a way to do it.  I understand if the programming is too complicated, though.

+1

+1

-1

Tec hates play-in games?

Posted by taz21 on 9/13/2011 1:41:00 PM (view original):
The biggest problem w/ Fielding Instructors is their lack of improvement from development in many cases.  IE, they create a young FI who has a promising future, but he starts out as a 50 in fielding coaching.  No body wants him as their ML fielding coach w/ that rating, so unless somebody picks him up as a minor league manager (and his strategy rating is probably going to suck) he's not going to develop, and actually regress.  I like Mike's idea of getting rid of a coach's requirements for a level, would give you more options to sign the young FI w/ solid loyalty and develop him into a major league worthy FI after 4-5 seasons progressing up the minor league ladder.

Additional ideas:
1) similar to the end of season awards, if a coach doesn't vote in the hall of fame, an Auto Vote is made by the computer based upon some standard (ie Cy Young awards, all star selections, MVPs, Gold Gloves, batting champs, etc...)  If a coach views the field, doesn't like any of the canidates, they get the option to put in a "no vote" which would cancel out the computer's autovote should any canidate qualify under the minimums.

2) during coach rehiring, if I have my ML 1b coach from the previous season want a promotion to the 3b coaching job, its a take it or leave it situation.  I can't offer him the ML bench coach job.  I should be able to offer promotions to my returning coaches like I can with my returning minor league coaches (ie I can promote the AA hitting coach from the prior year to AAA even if all he wants is the AA job again)

3) A note sent to coaches a couple of times a year (after ST, all star break, and start of the playoffs) from each level saying which players perhaps deserve promotion.  Make these notes based upon their current ratings and some sort of baseline ratings for each level in relation to their position.  It would help limit the amount of "hands off" approaches to the low minors that lead to a guy being left in low A for 3 seasons and retiring, when he really should have been moved up to AA along the way.  Even if he's a minor league lifer, this gets him a few more seasons in the minors before retiring.

4) more post season awards.  Batting champ, HR champ, RBI champ etc...  Make notes of them on the player's awards page for eventual hall of fame consideration.

5)  If possible, I'd like to see a "timeline" comparision of a players stats during his prime.  As worlds begin to age, a guy might sit 10th on the all time homer and rbi list, but he was the world's best during the 10 seasons he played during his late 20s and early 30s.

6) a better DiTR system.  There need to be a few Roy Oswalt, Albert Pujols, Mike Piazza types that come out of the middle to late rounds of the draft and turn into regular all stars and hall of famers.  As it is today, if you're not a relief pitcher or a catcher, your odds of becoming a regular contributer in the majors is pretty small for any DiTR.

7) Spread the draft out over a few more days and/or cycles.  Allow us to re-rank our players, if desired at each break.  I'd recommend 3 cycles to do the draft/rerank players.  1st round, rounds 2 & 3, and the rest of the draft.

1)  +1  - somewhat similar to an idea I proposed back a while ago

2)  +1

3)  0 - Neither for or against.  I never read the minor league evaluation emails I get, I find them useless.  If you know who your true prospects are, you should know how they're doing and if/when to promote them.  But maybe this would be OK for n00bs.

4) +1

5)  0

6)  -1, for the many reasons given during the many times DITR have been debated

7)  +1, with the following amendment - makes the draft lists available earlier, maybe at the beginning of the season.  Then break the draft up into multiple days.

The ability to view career batting leaders by position as well as in the aggregate.  Or is this already possible and I haven't figured it out? 

I'd also love to add home field advantage (small ratings bump for players on the home team), but the one time I did I was almost murdered.