Is it true that ADMIN will not allow an owner to be replaced simply because they are in violation of these guidelines?

I'm in a world where the owner logs in about once every 10 days or so. Just enough that we can't have him replaced for being an absentee owner (which requires he fails to check in for 14 consecutive days).

He has NO rookie pitchers at all. His position players do all the pitching and are all fatigued. He had 8 pitchers left in LoA (all at 0).

He has 23 players currently on the DL due to his neglect.

I traded with him early on and basically threw in a decent P to help with his fatigue issues. He didn't bother to ever assign any of them and all 3 players were claimed off the WW by decent teams.

He is currently 18-73 at the all-star break, which is below .200. FPG state .250 is the threshold.

Does anyone know if WIS just doesn't care enough anymore to remove owners for violating their own FPG?

In case anyone wondered. Here's the actual response from ADMIN:

"Wouldn't call his situation a violation of fair play guidelines. His ML team doesn't really look bad.

Some neglect in the minors for sure, mostly due to pitchers having to fill in for position players. I logged in and fixed up his minors a little bit to get them back in shape. Let's give him until the 26th, and if he's not back we can replace him."


Reminder. He's at a .196 winning percent. Which apparently, according to this moron, equates to "His ML team doesn't really look bad".

So I guess the Fair Play guidelines are simply for show and ADMIN does not really care about the worlds.

I'd venture a gentle reminder that the Fair Play guidelines were not written by the current administration of WiS. The folks who wrote this game up aren't here.

Your outrage is justified, but the document you're referencing probably shouldn't be referenced. Whoever answered your ticket may not have even read it.

Also note that when he says "I logged in and fixed up his minors a little bit to get them back in shape."

He did practically NOTHING.

He now has 1 pitcher in rookie ball and the same 8 fatigued guys throwing at zero in LoA.

He's got 10M unused player payroll, so the least he could have done (if he were really trying to "get them back in shape" is sign some pitchers)

Really starting to recall the reason I left the game 4 years ago. Looks like it has done nothing but get worse.

Public league?

Posted by mempgrizz on 5/24/2018 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Public league?

That's exactly what I thought when I first read it - this comes with the territory in public leagues. I've had no difficulty getting teams removed that break private world rules.

I think they went public to fill.

Essentially verifying that fair play guidelines are a joke then.

The fact that they remove teams for breaking private world rules is irrelevant.

The topic is about how they WON'T remove folks for violating the fair play guidelines, which should be applicable to any world public or private..

Posted by Vitamin_C on 5/24/2018 3:46:00 PM (view original):
I think they went public to fill.

Essentially verifying that fair play guidelines are a joke then.

The fact that they remove teams for breaking private world rules is irrelevant.

The topic is about how they WON'T remove folks for violating the fair play guidelines, which should be applicable to any world public or private..

Thing is nothing you described actually violates fair play guidelines, he has to either clearly be tanking or have abandoned his team. Your owner is just new and doesn't put in much time, that's the risk of going public

The #1 item in the fair play guidelines is maintaining a .250 winning percent .Isn't it?

Posted by Vitamin_C on 5/24/2018 4:49:00 PM (view original):
The #1 item in the fair play guidelines is maintaining a .250 winning percent .Isn't it?

That's in order to initiate a WIS investigation

"At that time, we review the situation. If it's clear the owner is tanking or has abandoned his team, the franchise will be stripped and assigned to the designated replacement owner...If we do not believe the owner is intentionally tanking, he will maintain his team."

Thanks for sharing that.

Odd thing is he checks his other team daily. Just pops in to check on this team about every 10 days.

Counting on current management to do anything is setting yourself up for failure. I used to think he was just lazy, but I think he just has no idea what to do or where to start. So doing nothing is going to be the prevailing approach until he either gets some help or some direction. He might be a great coder, but he's not so good at the other aspects of his current role.

Posted by slashtc on 5/25/2018 8:53:00 AM (view original):
Counting on current management to do anything is setting yourself up for failure. I used to think he was just lazy, but I think he just has no idea what to do or where to start. So doing nothing is going to be the prevailing approach until he either gets some help or some direction. He might be a great coder, but he's not so good at the other aspects of his current role.

I don't expect real engine changes in HBD, ever.

It has been several years--since tzentmeyer left, I think-- since any of the original code-writers for HBD were supporting it. I don't code at all-- but I imagine it must be incredibly hard to sort through the huge volumes of code that is HBD if you didn't write it, just in order to figure out where to start to change it.

Changes that don't involve code might happen as seble settles in. But the effort involved even for a minor change-- for example, allowing slightly better players to get a DitR-- would (I expect) be substantially time-consuming. Something like allowing outfielders to make throwing errors would be way more effort than that.

If you code, and I'm wrong about my underlying assumption, feel free to correct me.

Here's what we know for sure: He's not a customer service guy, he's not a marketer, he's not a guy that inspires confidence in his vision or leadership. If he's not a coder, he's in the wrong job and we're screwed.

As for sorting through the code, it would depend on how it was written. I imagine in some ways it's fairly complex and little changes in one area of the gameplay can have unintended consequences. I would think some cosmetic things would be easier to change. I don't care if they never change a thing tbh, but they need someone that can attract new owners, get people engaged in playing the game, and keep the owners we have through some sort of incentive (and I don't necessarily mean a financial incentive). What they were doing before they sold the game wasn't very good...what they've been doing since is downright putrid. This is on course to crash and burn if something doesn't happen and I have no confidence that Sable is the guy to make it happen.