Increase the Player Pool Topic

It really looks to me as though there is little to no growth in the Hardball Dynasty worlds population. Is anything being done to try to get more people playing? I get lots of requests for taking on another team and see worlds merging. I think less turnover/merging would increase the player satisfaction.
4/7/2018 1:33 PM
>> Is anything being done to try to get more people playing? <<
If there is, whoever is doing it is good at keeping their efforts a secret.

One of the main reasons I hang around it to see how what happens next to the slow train wreck that HBD.

Once upon a time, HBD was a leading edge online strategy game.

Since then, strategy gaming has EXPLODED in popularity. MLB attendance, TV ratings, and the number of people playing fantasy baseball have, overall, all gone up and up and up.

Yet, through a fascinating combination of inaction and poor decision making by the revolving door of business ownership, HBD continues to fade and fade and fade.

Anyone who has paid attention the past 10 years has seen what it takes to make a successful online strategy game and surrounding community. I can't blame the original creators of HBD for not knowing all of that years ago. Nobody did.

Yet, year after year, HBD adapts no proven best practices.

What other game do you know of that, if you want to sign up and start playing, most of the time tells you, "Thanks for signing up (and paying). Please wait weeks before you can play."

You can wait for weeks for a world to start, be on vacation for a few days, and miss critical actions that could have been performed during the weeks you did nothing.

HBD's design, from the ground up, puts primary focus is on the worlds and the fake players. The actual humans who play the game are given the least consideration.

There is no simple way for better human GMs to escalate and play with and against others who play at their level. And for more casual players to do the same.

Success requires an investment of a disproportionate amount of time in the least fun aspects of the game.

Coach hiring sucks. Ridiculous amount of time and no idea how it pays off helping your players get better.

FA bidding is needlessly time consuming during certain days and needlessly time boxed. It's designed to maximize the fake player's contracts, not the time or budgets of the humans.

The amateur draft is needlessly time boxed.

Player development is so flawed that a solution was implemented to just hide the data that exposes the flaws from the humans, instead of improving the algorithm.

If you want to rebuild a current team, budget restrictions make it a wiser economical and entertainment choice to abandon the team and pick up a different one.

Moneyball became a common household term. Yet, HBD ownership never did ANYTHING to capitalize on that platinum mine of a marketing opportunity.

Advanced baseball statistics have brought in millions of a new generation of baseball fans. The vast majority of which play online strategy games. HBD was waiting to offer them a compelling product. I've never seen an ad on any of the websites that attract millions of these folks every year.

Until they prove otherwise, I don't think there's any reason to expect better from SportsHub. So far, the only change I think we've all seen is drop off in customer support. As little as Fox Sports did, someone there seems to at least care a little their was on the site.

I used to post questions like this a few times year. Then maybe once a year. I think it's been over 2 years since the last one. I don't expect anything to change with HBD. More likely I'll see a refund on my credit card for my last purchase than anything done to bring HBD into the realities of 2010s online gaming.
4/9/2018 2:53 PM
There are 127 worlds with 32 teams per world 4 seasons per year and if you assume that average pay per season is $15 to $20. Total revenue is about $250,000 to $300,000 a year. Need I say more. HBD is a quirky game that could use an overhaul, but how much can you really expect?
5/7/2018 5:09 PM
What needs to be overhauled with it? It's a good game. It needs some minor adjustments, but an overhaul is a terrible idea.
5/8/2018 10:41 AM
Tweaks in IFA, budget, hiring coaches, and better manuals that would give us a clearer understanding of the game ratings and their effects would be good. Overhaul in that it would give more options for leagues like live play and draft, variable budgeting and prospect ratings.
5/8/2018 12:49 PM
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Tweaks in IFA, budget, hiring coaches, and better manuals that would give us a clearer understanding of the game ratings and their effects would be good. Overhaul in that it would give more options for leagues like live play and draft, variable budgeting and prospect ratings.
"more options for leagues" is the one that stands out to me.

If you wanted a league with a 100M payroll cap, or a certain IFA cap (just two easy examples) that should be a setting you could adjust.
Then no monitoring necessary. Lots of variables that could be adjustable for any particular world.
5/8/2018 1:08 PM
Posted by Vitamin_C on 5/8/2018 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Tweaks in IFA, budget, hiring coaches, and better manuals that would give us a clearer understanding of the game ratings and their effects would be good. Overhaul in that it would give more options for leagues like live play and draft, variable budgeting and prospect ratings.
"more options for leagues" is the one that stands out to me.

If you wanted a league with a 100M payroll cap, or a certain IFA cap (just two easy examples) that should be a setting you could adjust.
Then no monitoring necessary. Lots of variables that could be adjustable for any particular world.
The caps on spending would go into the tweaks which would be good for the game. The overhaul would allow for live play options, budget rollover and game revenue (like soccer dynasty) Would allow for prospect rankings for example of A,B,C,D,E,F instead of on a 1-100 scale and perhaps a text evaluation of the future expectations of a player. Technology can do a lot when it comes to simulations and HBD while I love the game does feel like a arithmetic matrix at times and not like a real life baseball simulation. If you figure out the matrix you win.
5/8/2018 1:32 PM
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Vitamin_C on 5/8/2018 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Tweaks in IFA, budget, hiring coaches, and better manuals that would give us a clearer understanding of the game ratings and their effects would be good. Overhaul in that it would give more options for leagues like live play and draft, variable budgeting and prospect ratings.
"more options for leagues" is the one that stands out to me.

If you wanted a league with a 100M payroll cap, or a certain IFA cap (just two easy examples) that should be a setting you could adjust.
Then no monitoring necessary. Lots of variables that could be adjustable for any particular world.
The caps on spending would go into the tweaks which would be good for the game. The overhaul would allow for live play options, budget rollover and game revenue (like soccer dynasty) Would allow for prospect rankings for example of A,B,C,D,E,F instead of on a 1-100 scale and perhaps a text evaluation of the future expectations of a player. Technology can do a lot when it comes to simulations and HBD while I love the game does feel like a arithmetic matrix at times and not like a real life baseball simulation. If you figure out the matrix you win.
This may be T-H-E most retarded suggestion I have ever read in the Forms. That's quite an accomplishment.
5/8/2018 9:46 PM
Posted by sjpoker on 5/8/2018 9:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Vitamin_C on 5/8/2018 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stews_blues on 5/8/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Tweaks in IFA, budget, hiring coaches, and better manuals that would give us a clearer understanding of the game ratings and their effects would be good. Overhaul in that it would give more options for leagues like live play and draft, variable budgeting and prospect ratings.
"more options for leagues" is the one that stands out to me.

If you wanted a league with a 100M payroll cap, or a certain IFA cap (just two easy examples) that should be a setting you could adjust.
Then no monitoring necessary. Lots of variables that could be adjustable for any particular world.
The caps on spending would go into the tweaks which would be good for the game. The overhaul would allow for live play options, budget rollover and game revenue (like soccer dynasty) Would allow for prospect rankings for example of A,B,C,D,E,F instead of on a 1-100 scale and perhaps a text evaluation of the future expectations of a player. Technology can do a lot when it comes to simulations and HBD while I love the game does feel like a arithmetic matrix at times and not like a real life baseball simulation. If you figure out the matrix you win.
This may be T-H-E most retarded suggestion I have ever read in the Forms. That's quite an accomplishment.
"retarded" really? Are you shallow as well as stupid.
5/9/2018 8:38 AM (edited)
Posted by stews_blues on 5/7/2018 5:09:00 PM (view original):
There are 127 worlds with 32 teams per world 4 seasons per year and if you assume that average pay per season is $15 to $20. Total revenue is about $250,000 to $300,000 a year. Need I say more. HBD is a quirky game that could use an overhaul, but how much can you really expect?
I think you and I are saying the same thing.

The reason HBD grosses just a few hundred thousand dollars a year is because everything about it, from the first page you land on before you join, to the boring first few weeks of the experience, needs a complete overhaul.

All things MLB and online gaming are booming. This game struggles. It's not because there's no market. It's because this version of HBD need to go the route of Windows 1.0 -- into the trash bin of history -- with full acknowledgment of what it was, in it's day.

It's day has passed.

Everything but the game simulation could be made much better. More fun. Less time. More strategy. More flexible.
5/15/2018 7:51 AM
Not a fan of the A,B,C,D etc. of players. 1-100 is more accurate. Playing MLB on PlayStation use to have that for the draft prospects and you really didn't know who was any good or not.
5/17/2018 10:35 AM
Posted by Seventy_77 on 5/17/2018 10:35:00 AM (view original):
Not a fan of the A,B,C,D etc. of players. 1-100 is more accurate. Playing MLB on PlayStation use to have that for the draft prospects and you really didn't know who was any good or not.
I think that's the point of going from numbers to letters. Makes the ratings more fuzzy. Just like real life.
5/19/2018 7:52 AM
The prospects are fuzzy enough. That would just make people want to quit if they had a top 5 pick and it was garbage. Not good for the game
5/19/2018 7:08 PM
There should be the option to have 24, 28, and 32 team leagues.

24 would have 2 leagues and 4 divisions with 6 teams each. 8 teams make the playoffs.

28 would have 2 leagues and 4 divisions with 7 teams each. 12 teams make the playoffs.

32 would have 2 leagues and 8 divisions with 4 teams each. 12 teams make the playoffs
5/19/2018 9:04 PM
Posted by Seventy_77 on 5/19/2018 7:08:00 PM (view original):
The prospects are fuzzy enough. That would just make people want to quit if they had a top 5 pick and it was garbage. Not good for the game
I had a top 10 pick that rate ovr in the mid 80s possible all star. He turned out to be a AAAA player. What I would like to see is that the prospect is 100% accurate an A player is just that. Not that you draft a player that is an 85 (A player) and he turns out to be a 70 (Low B player)
5/20/2018 1:25 PM
12 Next ▸
Increase the Player Pool Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.