Public worlds "queue" Topic

I think public worlds would fill faster if only two were available to be joined into at any time.  Any unfilled worlds would have to wait their turn, based on when they rolled, or became public.
10/7/2012 11:29 AM
I don't know why I bother writing suggestions though, it seems like they are asleep at the wheel around here.
10/7/2012 11:30 AM
actually think this is a pretty good idea. 
10/17/2012 8:25 AM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Imagine the pile of crap worlds holding the rest of the decent public worlds hostage for months...
10/17/2012 9:27 AM

Fox isn't doing anything with HBD, so they're not likely to do this. That doesn't make it a bad suggestion.

Anyone who knows anything about marketing and closing a sale would know that shobob is on the right track with this suggestion. Debate the details.

Since most people don't know anything about marketing or closing a sale, most people will disagree.

That's why people who take the time to study marketing & closing sales make shitloads of money. And why most people will spout off opinions about marketing & closing sale and remain relatively poor & ignorant.

10/17/2012 6:18 PM

BTW, I'm a cowboy and an astronaut!!!
10/17/2012 7:47 PM
So if i want to join public world X, I have to wait forever for it to be available because two terrible worlds are the only two available to join and they both have 12 openings?

How is forcing a crap world to fill before allowing good public worlds to start filling akin to closing a sale?

Seems smarter to allow 5-10 worlds to go ahead and roll and fill (closing all of those associated sales), than to hold all of those potential sales hostage trying to force owners to sign up for a tard world.

If I played in public worlds, I'd simply leave the site before I'd let them force me to spend money to join a tard world.

10/18/2012 6:13 AM (edited)
10/18/2012 6:55 AM
tuft's "point", which is putting him in the lead for one of the dumbest members of WifS, is that you market heavily and get people in.  You limit their choices, they sign up, get hooked and add teams.   The problem is that HBD is a bit overwhelming in the beginning.  Couple that with a bad experience in some 'tard world where the n00b is bombarded with crap deals on Day 2 and you have a dissatisfied customer who plays 1 season before moving on.
10/18/2012 6:59 AM
Although, to be fair, from the standpoint of FOX and the worlds with the perennial 13 openings, it's not so bad.   FOX gets their money, **** World fills and plays(making 19 users happy) but it does nothing to make the game "better".     Most of us would prefer a n00b join, find a good world, enjoy the game and add three teams once he gets a feel for the game.     As we well know, n00b after n00b after n00b after n00b doesn't make a world/team better or stronger.  The worst teams are the revolving door teams and the worst worlds have the most of them.
10/18/2012 7:19 AM
It's the Democrats versus the Republicans.

The Democrats: we know what's best for you, and will force you to do it whether you want to or not

The Republicans: you should be able to make your own choices
10/18/2012 7:43 AM
"We will tell you how you should spend your money!!!!!"
10/18/2012 7:56 AM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
What's the chances I could convince you guys to take personal responsibility for your world and your teams records?
10/18/2012 9:22 AM
1234 Next ▸
Public worlds "queue" Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2018, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of, 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.