9/10/2012 3:55 PM

And yes, CS did once announce that they were going to close a world that had 18 openings (7Jerry7), but it doesn't look like they got around to it.

9/10/2012 4:21 PM
Let's see?  If I read the feedback right you're saying:  Forget it.  You're chasing your tail.  There is no supply/demand imbalance and even if there is there's no practical way to address it.  And,  oh yes,  just because you're in a crummy world and have to wait longer than the aristrocracy in the elite worlds  doesn't give you a right to clutter up our forums with your foolish musings.  We are living in the best of all possible simulated worlds.  Have I got that right?
9/10/2012 4:33 PM
No, but if it helps you to think of it that way, be my guest.
9/10/2012 4:39 PM
What I am saying is that this game has proven over time to have some low periods in demand.  They are frustrating (one of my worlds currently has 8 openings), no doubt.  But I don't believe that they are getting progressively worse, and I believe this one, like the rest, will be temporary.    I'm not at all opposed to discussing ideas to help the game through lulls, but the one currently on the table, merging worlds, I don't like because cutting supply in an irreversible way when you're at the bottom of predictable low cycle isn't smart, especially since you WILL drive away customers in the merged worlds, especially if you're merging together a bunch of worlds with 6-8 openings.
9/10/2012 6:01 PM
Always gets slow to fill when football season starts. This has proven to be a problem for some worlds and not a problem for others. The trend has been that they will fill.

If Kruk can change their name to Schmidt and still fill 8+ spots every rollover, I am sure the other worlds will fill, albeit not as fast as you may like.

I'd suggest either getting in a better world or just suck it up.
9/10/2012 7:05 PM
Posted by tomfool on 9/10/2012 4:21:00 PM (view original):
Let's see?  If I read the feedback right you're saying:  Forget it.  You're chasing your tail.  There is no supply/demand imbalance and even if there is there's no practical way to address it.  And,  oh yes,  just because you're in a crummy world and have to wait longer than the aristrocracy in the elite worlds  doesn't give you a right to clutter up our forums with your foolish musings.  We are living in the best of all possible simulated worlds.  Have I got that right?

Yeah, I was kinda saying that.   I'm kinda picky about where I play and how the worlds play.  Consequently, I'm waiting a day or two to fill the 1-4 openings.   There is no practical way to address supply and demand as I mentioned earlier.   You can't have 120 worlds in the fall, when demand is down, and 170 in the spring, when demand is up, because it's a dynasty game and extends beyond 1-2 seasons.

My suggestion is to pick better worlds.

9/10/2012 8:20 PM
OK.  Time to close this thread down.  We'll mark the "Merge Worlds" idea as a loser.  Although,  in my own defense,  it was not my idea.  WIS did mention,  some months  back, that they were looking at merging worlds.  Since they never did it I suppose it proved to be an impractical idea - probably for the reasons some of you have mentioned above.

So I will fold the flag now and go to Plan B,  which a few of you have kindly suggested  -  I must choose better worlds.  Tell me,  if you know,  how to choose better worlds.  Does "Forbes" run a list of the 400 Best HBD Worlds? 
9/10/2012 8:30 PM

The best worlds are typically the ones that have few vacancies from season to season, so do not wait long to rollover and start the next season.

 

9/10/2012 8:44 PM
More Cowbell isn't a bad world...but I believe owners look for leagues with stated rules on minimum wins, no tanking, minor leagues, etc. So, in order to attract and keep owners it's up to the existing league owners to improve their world and make it more attractive to the more serious owners.
9/11/2012 4:44 AM

More Cowbell does have stated rules regarding minimum wins,  tanking,  minor leagues,  etc.  As do the majority of worlds now cooling their heels on the HBD recruiting page and pleading for new members in the HBD classifieds.  So I'm not so sure private world rules are a big draw.

Also -and I'm not sure about this -  it appears the public worlds fill a bit faster than the private worlds.  If that's correct private world rules could actually be a hinderance to quick turnaround.  Have any of you statsnerds collected any data on this?  Mike?

9/11/2012 7:09 AM

Public worlds = alias breeding ground.    Do they fill quicker than private worlds?  Not necessarily.   Both worlds I commish rolled in less than 24 hours.   That seldom happens with public worlds.

9/11/2012 8:10 AM
The quality worlds are also usually defined by the reputations (good or bad) of their owners and their commissioner, and less by their private world rules.  With a handful of exceptions of worlds that have very unique rules (No Trade Clause, For Life, and probably a few others), the rules neither attract nor deter owners for the most part.
9/11/2012 9:08 AM (edited)
tecwrg, right and you get the positive reputations by enforcing certain rules like minimum wins, specific rules on trades, non-collusion, etc.. If you don't have rules that can enable a league to rid itself of bad owners and make it unattractive to the bad ones in the first place it's very hard to build a strong following.

A league where an owner is allowed to lose 90+ games season after season to build a powerhouse isn't going to be attractive. The same goes for leagues where owners are allowed to neglect their minor leagues would be the same way. So, yes...it's not the rules alone that make a league attractive, but they're the basis for a strong league.

9/11/2012 9:21 AM
Posted by kschoenberg on 9/11/2012 9:08:00 AM (view original):
tecwrg, right and you get the positive reputations by enforcing certain rules like minimum wins, specific rules on trades, non-collusion, etc.. If you don't have rules that can enable a league to rid itself of bad owners and make it unattractive to the bad ones in the first place it's very hard to build a strong following.

A league where an owner is allowed to lose 90+ games season after season to build a powerhouse isn't going to be attractive. The same goes for leagues where owners are allowed to neglect their minor leagues would be the same way. So, yes...it's not the rules alone that make a league attractive, but they're the basis for a strong league.

Agreed. 

But my comment was more of a response to tomfool's contention that maybe private world rules were a hinderance that were preventing some of the private worlds from filling.  If a particular world has a lot of openings that it is having difficulty in filling, it's probably not the rules that are the problem.

Two of the worlds I'm in (Moonlight Graham and Cooperstown) have among the toughest minimum win rules that I've seen in HBD, and unlike a number of other worlds that have minimum win rules, there are no committees to "review" failures to meet the requirements.  You miss it, you're gone, no exceptions .  Yet there is fairly low turnover, and usually a waiting list of owners wanting to join.  And that is due mostly to the reputation of the worlds themelves, the reputation of the owners in those worlds, and the reputation of the commissioner.

I've played in a number of other worlds as a replacement owner, taking over abandonments one season at a time, and there are a lot of messed up worlds out there with weak, innefective commissioners, rules that are not consistently enforced, and are running rampant with tankers and trade-rapists.  These, shockingly, also seem to be the worlds that typically have 7 to 8 openings after every season and take a relatively long time to fill.  It's not the rules that are the problems with those worlds.

9/11/2012 9:34 AM
Right...it's not the rules...it's the enforcement of those rules.

There's another problem, of course, the game is growing (has grown) stale to many causing good owners to leave or cut back the number of leagues they're willing to play in. HBD is greatly in need of a refresh, but that doesn't appear to be in the near-term plans for WIS.
of 9

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.