Killebrew Rules! - Page 4 - Hardball Dynasty

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Posted by peanutjets on 4/15/2014 2:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2014 12:41:00 PM (view original):
That's only if you vote on banishment. If you say "Win 50 or beat it", it takes 3 seconds.
Isn't 50 MWR just window dressing? What's the difference between someone winning 50 games and someone else winning 40? Or 35? Or 55? Or 60? Those that want to tank will just tank to the newest threshold. The only reason I voted for it in our world is because it gives team that play these tankers an unfair advantage, but I'm not even sure it does. I think that every team within the AL and NL plays the other NL or AL teams (respectivley) the same amount of times.

The reason why I voted against a multiple year MWR is because I think it's unfair. Say I'm a new owner and I join your world. You got 100+ seasons under your belt. I bet 1/3 of the owners in your worlds are similar. That's an insane advantage over my 8. ****, it took me to just 3 weeks ago to figure out what "designated for assignment" meant. There's no way in hell that I'd be a playoff contender in a world with owners who are that much better. What should I do? Should i spend 20-30 seasons learning the nuances of the game while stuck in mediocrity? Or should I bottom out, grab a half dozen balls to the wall awesome players and meet you at a position of strength? It'll take me 1/5 the time to be as competitive. Why wouldn't I go with the latter option?

Well, to answer the first question, it's a number of wins(or losses) that you must achieve(or avoid). And I know, without question, that there is some "soft tanking". You can't legislate it out. That said, that's why it's multi-season. For someone to hit the MWR exactly, they have to win 55, 70, 70 and 85 wins in the 4 consecutive seasons. Then, if they want to get their tank on, they can win 55 in S5 to repeat the process(sort of). So, the question is, wouldn't it just be better to win rather than wait 2 calendar years to get enough high picks to build a line-up of studs? It's not unusual for 85 win teams to make the playoffs in my worlds. And, in a short series, anything can happen.

You can do whatever you want to build your dynasty within the rules of the world. Your strategy won't work in my worlds because you won't be around long enough to realize success. As for the world itself, owners have waited 3-4 seasons to get in. There's something to keeping your type of strategy out.

4/15/2014 3:45 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

To put it another way, at game 120, you're 50-70 and 15 games back. Why shouldn't you use training camp players to to finish 50-112? After all, losing benefits you.

4/15/2014 4:24 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

In fact, why shouldn't everyone who feels their season is over just attempt to lose every game the very moment they feel that way?

4/15/2014 4:25 PM

peanutjets

Posts: 679 (0)

Hall of Famer

38 9

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2014 4:25:00 PM (view original):
In fact, why shouldn't everyone who feels their season is over just attempt to lose every game the very moment they feel that way?

I think they should and I don't understand those that don't. If you have no shot at winning it all, you should be trying to build for the future. Cut your budget, load up on INTL FAs and maximize your draft so you'll be able to win down the road.

4/15/2014 5:20 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

And therein lies the problem. In an obvious extreme, you've got a dozen 130 win teams, a dozen 30 win teams and 8 guys stuck in the middle wondering WTF is going on. Does that sound like fun?

4/15/2014 5:23 PM

jb01

Posts: 413 (0)

Hall of Famer

72 27

Prospect

As I read these comments I'm reminded of one of the first polls conducted on our blog: What makes for a good HBD world? We had 13 total responces- 7 were for the absence of world drama; 5 voted for little or no, owner turnover; and 1 vote for world parity. All three of these answers support the cause for MWR, IMO.

4/15/2014 6:22 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

I'd say a competitive enviroment and no concern of cheating(alias or collusion). Competitive enviroment is akin to parity but I do believe all teams, in a competitive world, will eventually see a valley. You can't maintain peak if your competition is competent. I could care less about drama. We were given a block feature if someone is too stupid, annoying or stupidly annoying. Turnover is good if someone can't keep up or is stupidly annoying.

4/15/2014 6:41 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

That said, it seems that some of you recognize there is a problem within your world and you're taking steps to rectify it(or at least identify it). That's a good start.

4/15/2014 6:44 PM

peanutjets

Posts: 679 (0)

Hall of Famer

38 9

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2014 5:23:00 PM (view original):
And therein lies the problem. In an obvious extreme, you've got a dozen 130 win teams, a dozen 30 win teams and 8 guys stuck in the middle wondering WTF is going on. Does that sound like fun?

I mean the numbers are extreme but f you take it for what it is, you got 1/3 of the league (or every playoff team) with a shot to win the whole thing. Then you got 1/3 with no shot of winning whatsoever and you got 1/4 of teams that are either narrowly missing the playoffs or mired in mediocrity. I don't think the ratios are outrageous or even that far out of line with what you have in your uber exclusive worlds.

4/15/2014 7:27 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Yeah, it's way out of line. But it's sort of pointless to even say "Go ahead and look".

4/15/2014 7:40 PM

arcticlegend

Posts: 484 (0)

Hall of Famer

2 200

Rookie

I can't believe people are trying to argue that tanking is okay. On its face, it's completely contrary to common sense, decency, and sportsmanship. Not only that, but it's pretty much pointless.

It's one thing if your team isn't competitive and you don't try to contend (avoiding major free agents, playing a few AAAA guys after September callups, resting good players when there's nothing to play for, etc.). But to intentionally make your team worse than it is? That's terrible, and it's against the rules of What if Sports, regardless of what your league's rules are. Someone mentioned earlier that his team won only 37 games; the Fair Play guidelines state that a losing percentage of .250 or below is grounds for removal from any league.

Beyond that, how could it be any fun to win that way? I mean, the only real reason to play this game is personal achievement, since its no like you win money or anything. It doesn't take any great intellect to tank for 6 seasons and horde 90+ overall players then go on a 110 won rampage. Building a team with a couple stars and making clever decisions about a bunch of 70-79 players takes actual skill. If the only thing you're playing for is personal satisfaction, why not take the greater challenge?

4/15/2014 11:00 PM

damag

Posts: 5373 (0)

Hall of Famer

1723 70 11

Veteran

There. That's what was missing from this discussion.

I agreed with jb's thought... When you enter a world and realize that teams are not on an even footing, it's disheartening. You see that a strategy that's counterintuitive might be most successful, and you ask yourself if this is what you really wanted.

Peanuts is also right. The game is fun to play when your players are kicking butt. The best, fastest way to get players like that is to tank. Depending on the amount of tankers in your world, it may be the only way to get them through the draft.

But legend just hit on what decided it for me. When I figured out exactly what tanking could do for my team, and what I would have to do to make it work, I realized it was actually the easiest team building strategy to execute. So I didn't.

4/15/2014 11:14 PM

peanutjets

Posts: 679 (0)

Hall of Famer

38 9

Prospect

Posted by arcticlegend on 4/15/2014 11:00:00 PM (view original):
I can't believe people are trying to argue that tanking is okay. On its face, it's completely contrary to common sense, decency, and sportsmanship. Not only that, but it's pretty much pointless.

It's one thing if your team isn't competitive and you don't try to contend (avoiding major free agents, playing a few AAAA guys after September callups, resting good players when there's nothing to play for, etc.). But to intentionally make your team worse than it is? That's terrible, and it's against the rules of What if Sports, regardless of what your league's rules are. Someone mentioned earlier that his team won only 37 games; the Fair Play guidelines state that a losing percentage of .250 or below is grounds for removal from any league.

Beyond that, how could it be any fun to win that way? I mean, the only real reason to play this game is personal achievement, since its no like you win money or anything. It doesn't take any great intellect to tank for 6 seasons and horde 90+ overall players then go on a 110 won rampage. Building a team with a couple stars and making clever decisions about a bunch of 70-79 players takes actual skill. If the only thing you're playing for is personal satisfaction, why not take the greater challenge?

Tanking is completely logical. Even with constrains that don't exist in WIS (fan expectation, revenue etc) professional teams do it all the time. The NBA turned it into an art form.

Personal achievement = winning, does it not? The year I won 37 games, another team won 38. The 1st overall pick went to me by the slimmest margin. With that pick, I drafted a SP who, in his first full season last year, won the Cy Young. You think I care that I had to lose an extra dozen or so games to land him? I'll have him for 10 seasons. He's probably a Future HOF. I'm having a ton of fun with him on my team winning 110 games. I would 100% do it all over again if that was an option. You played this game for 4 months and you're enthralled by it, I get it. Come back here after you got 10 full seasons under your belt and you're still struggling to win a playoff series and tell me how much fun you're having.

4/15/2014 11:47 PM

asher413

Posts: 609 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 9 2 25 248 23 67 4

Rookie

My $0.019:

Each world to their own. I personally wouldn't even think of joining a private world where tanking is allowed and there isn't some anti-tanking process in place. And let me be very clear- in my opinion there's a huge difference between rebuilding and tanking- tanking is holding back good players with the intention of losing, or not fielding your best lineup for a large chunk of the season, or playing guys out of position, or choosing lesser players with the idea of losing (not saying spend for a top FA). Rebuilding is having a down year, letting some older salary go/trading it, and investing in the future. I'm an idealist, but I think you should be just as fair to every team you play from game 1-162 (especially since we have a true balanced schedule in HBD)- and as stated before, you can EASILY win 40-50 games with any team in this game.

But, it's up to the people in the world and the commish. I'm not going to tell anyone how to run their league- but since it's been asked, I think that the rules are more than fair, but you want to watch out for the people that may lose out intentially after hitting 40 or 50 wins. You may not have them voted out when they are clearly playing to pass the letter of the rule, but not the spirit.

4/16/2014 1:52 AM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Posted by peanutjets on 4/15/2014 11:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by arcticlegend on 4/15/2014 11:00:00 PM (view original):
I can't believe people are trying to argue that tanking is okay. On its face, it's completely contrary to common sense, decency, and sportsmanship. Not only that, but it's pretty much pointless.

It's one thing if your team isn't competitive and you don't try to contend (avoiding major free agents, playing a few AAAA guys after September callups, resting good players when there's nothing to play for, etc.). But to intentionally make your team worse than it is? That's terrible, and it's against the rules of What if Sports, regardless of what your league's rules are. Someone mentioned earlier that his team won only 37 games; the Fair Play guidelines state that a losing percentage of .250 or below is grounds for removal from any league.

Beyond that, how could it be any fun to win that way? I mean, the only real reason to play this game is personal achievement, since its no like you win money or anything. It doesn't take any great intellect to tank for 6 seasons and horde 90+ overall players then go on a 110 won rampage. Building a team with a couple stars and making clever decisions about a bunch of 70-79 players takes actual skill. If the only thing you're playing for is personal satisfaction, why not take the greater challenge?
Tanking is completely logical. Even with constrains that don't exist in WIS (fan expectation, revenue etc) professional teams do it all the time. The NBA turned it into an art form.

Personal achievement = winning, does it not? The year I won 37 games, another team won 38. The 1st overall pick went to me by the slimmest margin. With that pick, I drafted a SP who, in his first full season last year, won the Cy Young. You think I care that I had to lose an extra dozen or so games to land him? I'll have him for 10 seasons. He's probably a Future HOF. I'm having a ton of fun with him on my team winning 110 games. I would 100% do it all over again if that was an option. You played this game for 4 months and you're enthralled by it, I get it. Come back here after you got 10 full seasons under your belt and you're still struggling to win a playoff series and tell me how much fun you're having.

Like this guy? Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Jimmy Powell

Won 71 games and grabbed him with the 3rd pick(4th won 73, 2nd won 70). ROY and 4 straight CY. And I don't have to say "I had to tank hard to get him."

4/16/2014 10:03 AM

Forums

Killebrew Rules! Topic

Search Criteria