Posted by MikeT23 on 2/23/2016 3:15:00 PM (view original):
Fair enough. Let's assume you're talking about taking 3 tough to fill worlds and using escalation/relegation.

Fill in the details from there.

HBD would allow every world to be in 1 of 2 categories. Traditional or Escalation. (Make upyour own names. They don't matter.) Traditional Worlds work as they do now. Worlds set rules. Teams live on. GMs come and go. They rollover when the world is full.

Escalation Worlds (EW) have the same teams for just one season. After that season, the best teams move up to better EWs. Worst teams move down to lesser EWs.

EW are ranked 1 - 5 (or 1 - 4 or 1-10). 1s will be filled with people who have proven they can win. 5s are for those who have not.

Doesn't really matter how current worlds are ranked at first. Could be based on something. Could be random. It will all work out after a few seasons either way.

At the end of the season, the teams with the 4 (or 2 or 6) best records in each league (AL & NL) move up to a better EW. Same number of teams move down.

Everyone new to HBD (or who creates a new user account) starts with a EW5 team.

Player history and awards could move with the teams. Every current season could be 100 and the history of the player would show 99, 98, etc for past seasons.

World History would go away in EWs. HoF = Gone. Doesn't really work anyway.

There are details that would need to be ironed out. So feel free to pick at those.

The biggest benefit of this model is people would be playing the game more days a year. Which is probably what they want. And it makes WIS more money, which should be one of the things they want.

I only have one question.

How does this help fill worlds?

EW5 needs 6 owners, EW4 needs 4 and so on.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/11/2016 3:49:00 PM (view original):
I only have one question.

How does this help fill worlds?

EW5 needs 6 owners, EW4 needs 4 and so on.

Worlds last just one season. Take all the teams w GMs that are ready to play. Put them in groups of 32 with others of the same rank (1-5). Almost all of them are playing tomorrow. The rest will be playing as soon as other worlds end.

That is a very interesting idea, it goes kind of hand in hand with how GD and HD work to an extent. The tanking would go to an all time high though, with teams tanking down to EW5 then building a powerhouse and demolishing their way back up to EW1. I have been waiting almost 3 months to get a world filled with no end in sight, and I just hope to see something done soon.

I don't see it having much impact on tanking. Under the current system, you tank, you get a better draft pick. Being demoted wouldn't change that.

Or this could be the solution to extreme tanking.

What if teams that drop a level get slotted in from the 32nd pick? Or can't pick higher than 15th? Or the draft order was set by a weighed lottery?

The issue with the tanking would be there would be good teams would load their teams while losing then beat up on lower level owners in lower leagues.

However, a weighted lottery would be a deterrent to that and a slight fix to tanking currently. If you just flat out punished teams for getting demoted then owners would just quit.

The number of worlds would vary based on the number of owners, and I'm sure there are plenty of owners who wouldn't like this system, so you keep the private leagues how they are they can sink or swim based on their ability to recruit players, and public leagues are set up this way.

The bigger issue would be winning just enough to stay at the same level while stockpiling high draft picks. It would be simple enough to do. And, of course, late season losing streaks are far worse than consistent losing throughout the year. I'm 62-62 and relatively comfortable knowing I can win 5-6 more games and stay at the same level. Hello, 5-33 to finish out the year. Sorry if I affected that playoff race.

I agree that being demoted should not come with a penalty, for the exact reason you say. Demoting and promoting should be about getting people into the pool with similar HBD GMs.

I wasn't proposing this as a solution to tanking. It is a way to have more people playing HDB instead of waiting to pay HBD.

If you want to talk about suggestions to eliminate tanking, probably best to start a different thread.

When a "solution" doesn't address the big picture, or creates new problems, it's not really a solution.

Say "Take that somewhere else" means it's definitely not a solution.

He's just saying it doesn't resolve the tanking issue, which to my knowledge nothing really does, it's even a method for professional teams to get better.

But I think this does address the big picture, idk if it adds more players but possibly, but it keeps owners who want to play playing with much much lower rollover times, more money made for WIS due to no teams in public leagues waiting for weeks/months to rollover again, plus it helps make leagues more competitive and it lets owners build their teams without worrying their league may fall apart, which is what my league has done and honestly this discouarages me greatly from trying to build another franchise.

My point is it gives owners a "floor" for wins. And that encourages tanking. Tanking is one of the biggest HBD issues. If you're doing a massive overhaul, address the problems of HBD.

WIS could fix tanking if they wanted to.

List of things you must do and things you can't do. Traditional worlds can make their own rules or set their own minimums and maximums.

No room for debate. Hard cutoffs.

Min number of wins. Min/max budgets. If any of your teams at any level start a P with 0(0) more than 10(?) games you're out. If you start a player with D ratings lower than A, B, C, D, you're out.

If you fail any of those, you are welcome to keep playing HBD, but you can't keep playing with that team. If you can't get the benefit of tanking down the road, no reason to lose on purpose.

Can either dissolve the team, or it goes to someone else.

Good luck getting a solid majority, much less WIS, to agree on how to define tanking vs. rebuilding. As I said above, that's really not the topic of this thread. Tanking is not the biggest problem with HBD. The biggest problem is that people who want to play can't play.

That's not really my point. When you're dealing with relegation, you're creating a "floor" to avoid it while giving that team a top pick. So relegation creates a tanking problem.