All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Default Budget Settings
8/11/2010 5:47 PM
I explained why; if you want to run a strategy where you drop your College and International scouting to 0, you have to cough up up to 8M the previous season and up to 16M the season before that for practically nothing other than the ability of putting yourself into position to go 0. Are a combined 20-24M over 2 seasons not an advantage? It takes commitment and sacrifice to go to 0 -- which could be a very beneficial position for the right team. Being able to start at 0, to me, is a significant advantage.
8/11/2010 5:52 PM
The existing owners did not have the advantage on that initial decision.
They all had to work from 10M across the board. Maybe 15 seasons ago, but still.
Thus, your great idea is still an unfair advantage.

Ok, how about this...a one time, you can pick any budget you want rollover for all worlds, one season, as Mike's "new owner, any budget you want" idea is implemented

Then everyone on the same playing field as you implement Mike's idea. Once every world has been through it once, you know that you either have an owner that has chosen the budget they want to live with, or they are a new owner who is resetting the budget to their own tastes.
8/11/2010 6:03 PM
Posted by deathinahole on 8/11/2010 5:52:00 PM (view original):
The existing owners did not have the advantage on that initial decision.
They all had to work from 10M across the board. Maybe 15 seasons ago, but still.
Thus, your great idea is still an unfair advantage.

Ok, how about this...a one time, you can pick any budget you want rollover for all worlds, one season, as Mike's "new owner, any budget you want" idea is implemented

Then everyone on the same playing field as you implement Mike's idea. Once every world has been through it once, you know that you either have an owner that has chosen the budget they want to live with, or they are a new owner who is resetting the budget to their own tastes.
This would likely be a bit chaotic and quite unfair for some... A team picking in the top 10 who was picking in  the high 20's the previous seasons (or one who decided to punt the previous draft or two by going after type A's) would be at a significant advantage to be able to suddenly go 20/20 if he so chose.

Likewise a declining team with a ton of money coming off the books at once who has been out of the IFA game and is now in a position to get back in could theoretically go 0 to 20 in a single leap.

I guess you can say right place at the right time and it's not that big a deal, but any shake-up where 5 of 32 teams can gain that much through sheer luck seems a bit intense. Especially considering it's coming from the guy who vehemently opposes DitR's on the principle that no one should get something for nothing. ;)
8/11/2010 6:06 PM
Uh, everyone could start at ZERO.  You know, when they sign up for a team.  THEN they have to deal with their decision.
8/11/2010 6:09 PM
There's downside to every scenario, if you want to give specific examples that tear apart the specific scenario presented.

All I care about is even playing field. Giving everyone free reign every year - even playing field. The above hybrid of Mike's idea - even playing field.

Confining either the existing owners or the new owner to a specific band while the other is not...not an even playing field.


8/11/2010 6:10 PM
Well yes, if we were to reset every world to season 1. But as DIAH pointed out, the vets get the short end of the stick and the alias has even more incentive to rear his head.

Edit: Er, that was a response to Mike.

8/11/2010 6:10 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/11/2010 6:06:00 PM (view original):
Uh, everyone could start at ZERO.  You know, when they sign up for a team.  THEN they have to deal with their decision.
This is tacit approval of my brilliant idea.
Thanks Mike.
8/11/2010 6:16 PM
This thread has spun way out of control into a convoluted shake-up that WIS is simply not going to do.

My original suggestion was simply to change the default training budget to 14 or 15 and leave everything else exactly as it is.

Simple, easy, non-convoluted, non-life altering.

Thank you very much.
8/11/2010 6:20 PM
It was a good idea, that I greatly improved on.

Which, frankly, is what great minds do.

You get full credit for starting the brainstorming session.
8/11/2010 7:52 PM

Someone like me had no interest in taking a full, real life year to get to 0.  And that's what 14-15 does.

No thankee.

2/17/2013 9:37 PM
Rather than start a new thread, I figured I'd toss my concerns into this one.

I just inherited a team with a very good future, but not much in the present. I signed a couple FA to help me out (and I'm currently leading my division, albeit with a sub-.500 record). Even after that, I still had $28M left in payroll. I maxed out my prospect payroll and upped everything else by the min. $4M. So the best I can do with that money is transfer it to prospect and have $34M. My IFA scouting was at $14M (as high as I could get it first season), and I didn't see a single IFA all season worth even $5M. And I was ready to spend early if I had to - it wasn't a question of hesitancy on my part. I flat out did not see any IFA I would consider even remotely close to a stud.

So now I'm stuck with $28M of wasted cash, and I realize IFAs aren't guaranteed, but I think when we're forced to swallow default budgets, that we should get a little more flexibility with that money. I would have invested it elsewhere if I could, but none of the high-end FA wanted to come to my team. Not sure what I'm proposing, but there has to be some way to allow a little more flexibility in your first season in a world, with the default ratings.
2/17/2013 10:39 PM
What does that have to do with starting with a default budget?  This could happen in any season in which you decide (at budget time) that you're going to roll the dice on landing a big-ticket IFA and nobody comes along that you deem worthy.
2/17/2013 11:58 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/17/2013 10:39:00 PM (view original):
What does that have to do with starting with a default budget?  This could happen in any season in which you decide (at budget time) that you're going to roll the dice on landing a big-ticket IFA and nobody comes along that you deem worthy.
Two things that would have improved the situation:

A) Being able to max out my IFA scouting would have increased my odds of seeing someone I could actually spend my money on
B) Being able to max out other areas (Training, Medical, etc.) would have left me with less wasted cash.

Again, I don't know what solution would work. Just pointing out that the wasted money in this case is not a result of poor budgeting on my part - I simply had nothing I could use it for. I didn't decide at budget time to roll the dice on an IFA - I was left with that $28M after I did everything the settings would allow me to do with my budget.
2/18/2013 1:34 AM
Isn't such a scenario possible anytime you have a very young team with the majority of players making minimum salary? Isn't such a situation something you'd kind of want... A team performing, improving, and so cost effective that you leave money untouched?
2/18/2013 2:04 AM
Yes but if that "problem" occurs in my second or third season with that team, my medical, training and scouting budgets could be maxed to various degrees and so much wouldn't be wasted. Hence the debate about default settings. After the initial season they no longer apply.
of 5
All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Default Budget Settings

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.