Jump to content

Baseball Needs Some Tweaking


Clarke
 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Lightning said:

That isn't much better making the buttons smaller and is worst for the health of your eyes. 

That suggestion is only to balance out the changes I suggested that give nations more revenue, 200 games per a turn is still quite a lot and 99% of people won't get near that limit. You don't need to lecture me about global market manipulators lol.. Placentia ;)

I'm forced to play home games to make money, I would make next to nothing playing away games. It may be a choice but so is being poor and I wouldn't recommend someone to choose being poor over being wealthy. 

  Yeah its going to drive those players and others away from Baseball because they will have trouble finding matches and making money, less players is bad. Instead the system needs to change to make it fairer for the nation that plays away games so there won't be an issue with people only hosting matches, they will be encouraged to play away games. 

I looked at the forums history and read many posts on suggestions for baseball so I know all that I need to know, embargoing nations has being mentioned for the past 2 years and I can only assume it hasn't being implemented because Sheepy knows it is dumb and will hurt Baseball. 
The problem isn't the players, it is the system under which they interact. Those players don't hurt Baseball, the system hurts Baseball. 

You don't deserve to win for neglecting your team. It will make me tweak it to make it fairer if you have evidence. 
The problem is there is very few max teams so they won't be playing many matches against each other unless they organize it which is a terrible idea. I would still make a lovely profit if I was to play 200 games a day against max teams but the problem is it would be difficult to play 200 games against so few teams. 

 

It's not "winning" really, considering that if the odds are against you, you will only earn more than the better team on few occasions since on the other occasions, they'll be stomping you repeatedly. Also it's not intended neglect, it's the inability to spend 40 mil neglect. Well of course there's less max teams, but if every weak team embargoed the better teams, then that would only leave them to play against each other, which I'm fine with. Not sure how farming with another max team is a bad idea, I'd think it's a good idea. Two max teams versing each other would cause a larger attendance = more money, then they would split their profits. It would not in any way be difficult for you to play against max teams. Off the top of my head, Syrus, Flavee, Imperium, and Don't Know come to mind, who play at least 100 games straight before taking a break. You should have no issues finding and playing against them, since they are on consistently.

I don't really have any more interest in continuing this debate, so whatever message you send next I will read but not respond to. Hope you enjoy the rest of your evening.

Edited by Cianuro
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
I have no idea what I'm doing but that doesn't stop me from doing it.

pfp_maybe_1_15.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cianuro said:

It's not "winning" really, considering that if the odds are against you, you will only earn more than the better team on few occasions since on the other occasions, they'll be stomping you repeatedly. Also it's not intended neglect, it's the inability to spend 40 mil neglect. Well of course there's less max teams, but if every weak team embargoed the better teams, then that would only leave them to play against each other, which I'm fine with. Not sure how farming with another max team is a bad idea, I'd think it's a good idea. Two max teams versing each other would cause a larger attendance = more money, then they would split their profits. It would not in any way be difficult for you to play against max teams. Off the top of my head, Syrus, Flavee, Imperium, and Don't Know come to mind, who play at least 100 games straight before taking a break. You should have no issues finding them and playing against them, since they are on consistently.

You aren't exactly lacking money as you spent more on the quality of your stadium than I have, you chose to invest it differently which resulted in your team still having a poor rating. I'm pretty sure I would have trouble finding matches, that's all I'm saying. 

  • Like 1

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I would only use the embargo on high level teams that never play away games or give tips to those that do. I'm perfectly fine with playing away games against lower level teams as long as I get some home games in return. Unless I catch people playing away games for tips I play a lot more away games than I do home games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lightning is at least partially right, there is absolutely no reason for anybody to play away games, unless they go through the effort of organizing it with one of the few people even interested in baseball.

Maybe, and, here's a real idea since this is not real life, and the money here can be created out of thin air - maybe instead of taking more money from Person B to give to Person A, which just bring Person A up to a similar level as B?

A bonus for winning is still fine but there's no point playing away games, unless you're coordinating with the home team player to get a tip. That's an absolutely asinine setup. Here's some RealTalk guys, almost nobody will do something that there's no incentive for them to do, that comes with little if any benefit to them. Now, if you'd like more than 15-20 people, or whatever the tiny minority of regular baseball players is, to be playing, you will have to compensate the Away players somehow. Tipping is not enough, i already know there's been communities who tried to coordinate all this and tip people, they've failed. It does not work. 

I'm sitting on $41.5 million right now, with resources and raids another 6-7 coming in in the next couple days. I have nothing to do with it, i don't intend on getting into baseball with it, not like this anyway. Either i become another leech in the pond or i become the equivalent of a beggar on a street corner - i refuse to be either of those. Whatever the home team gets for being, home, give the Away 50%. Do not TAKE the 50% from the Home team, since, apparently this gets everybodys underwear twisted into a knot, that they might be forced to help or contribute to others. Instead, make the money just magically appear, because it can. 

I disabled my baseball team because i was told by people who'd spent a handful of millions on theirs that they struggle to make over $1000 per game, just not worth their time or mine. It's almost pointless for the game to exist, so few people seem to use it.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2018 at 12:45 PM, Lightning said:

Its best to eliminate that problem I think by making it so the home game doesn't mean you profit more as I described in 1). 

You should profit more from home games, the host is the one getting paid for ticket sales.

it also would decrease the incentive to even bother with upgrading your stadium. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ukunaka said:

You should profit more from home games, the host is the one getting paid for ticket sales.

it also would decrease the incentive to even bother with upgrading your stadium. 

The issue is that there is *only* profit to be had from home games; away games earn literally nothing for the most part and essentially nothing otherwise. This means that the incentive to play away games is practically nil, which causes 'leeches' that just spam home games and nothing else, and since there's no way to block or discourage that behavior, playing away games is a straight up suckers' play and it works against you.

Which means that there's fewer away games, which means that home games make less, which brings our tragedy of the commons to its' inevitable, avoidable, and destructive end. And just like all of these tragedies, everyone is worse off, including if not especially the leeches that screwed it all up for everyone in the first place just to try and sneak themselves a temporary advantage. And guess what: This screws Sheepy too, since no more baseball click generator!

Of course that always happens. Idiots play themselves, sh*t the bed, and now there's sh*t on the bed that the sh*tters have to lie in along with everyone else. For all my years of playing these games, the pattern is a constant; until we're rid of self-serving morons, unto sh*t we shall always return.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The issue is that there is *only* profit to be had from home games; away games earn literally nothing for the most part and essentially nothing otherwise. This means that the incentive to play away games is practically nil, which causes 'leeches' that just spam home games and nothing else, and since there's no way to block or discourage that behavior, playing away games is a straight up suckers' play and it works against you.

Which means that there's fewer away games, which means that home games make less, which brings our tragedy of the commons to its' inevitable, avoidable, and destructive end. And just like all of these tragedies, everyone is worse off, including if not especially the leeches that screwed it all up for everyone in the first place just to try and sneak themselves a temporary advantage. And guess what: This screws Sheepy too, since no more baseball click generator!

Of course that always happens. Idiots play themselves, sh*t the bed, and now there's sh*t on the bed that the sh*tters have to lie in along with everyone else. For all my years of playing these games, the pattern is a constant; until we're rid of self-serving morons, unto sh*t we shall always return.

well i do think that the away team should make some cash but not at the expense of the home teams ticket sales because its all about investment, if you play home invest in the stadium, if you play away invest in the players. i haven't really had any problems getting home games within around 5 minutes and the few times i do i clear all the away games even though my players have had much less investment than my stadium so i lose most of them

Edited by Ukunaka
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The issue is that there is *only* profit to be had from home games; away games earn literally nothing for the most part and essentially nothing otherwise. This means that the incentive to play away games is practically nil, which causes 'leeches' that just spam home games and nothing else, and since there's no way to block or discourage that behavior, playing away games is a straight up suckers' play and it works against you.

Which means that there's fewer away games, which means that home games make less, which brings our tragedy of the commons to its' inevitable, avoidable, and destructive end. And just like all of these tragedies, everyone is worse off, including if not especially the leeches that screwed it all up for everyone in the first place just to try and sneak themselves a temporary advantage. And guess what: This screws Sheepy too, since no more baseball click generator!

Of course that always happens. Idiots play themselves, sh*t the bed, and now there's sh*t on the bed that the sh*tters have to lie in along with everyone else. For all my years of playing these games, the pattern is a constant; until we're rid of self-serving morons, unto sh*t we shall always return.

Its the system that is at fault, not these so called "leeches". Blacklisting nations is only going to make it so groups isolate themselves so that they only play against certain people which would hurt the profits for everyone. Hate the game, not the player. There needs to be a huge incentive to play away games. 

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lightning said:

Its the system that is at fault, not these so called "leeches". Blacklisting nations is only going to make it so groups isolate themselves so that they only play against certain people which would hurt the profits for everyone. Hate the game, not the player. There needs to be a huge incentive to play away games. 

The leeches are the result of the flaws in the system. Flaws which can be addressed in a constructive or punitive manner. Allowing nations to 'blacklist' other nations' baseball teams through embargoes would indeed result in isolated groups playing against and for each other, and indeed reduce the number of potential baseball matchups.

And that would be perfectly fine. In fact it would be ideal. Players should have control over who has access to their away games. If people want to go embargo-happy then they should be able to do that and make it meaningful. Enabling people to be selective about who their away games go to enables them to make deals and play baseball politics, and thus provides the options necessary to create their own incentives to play away games.

 

Also, when the players deliberately and knowingly screw themselves over, then they're idiots and should be hated. Just because they were able to cock up the system doesn't mean they didn't have the option to not screw themselves and everyone else out of a good deal.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

The leeches are the result of the flaws in the system. Flaws which can be addressed in a constructive or punitive manner. Allowing nations to 'blacklist' other nations' baseball teams through embargoes would indeed result in isolated groups playing against and for each other, and indeed reduce the number of potential baseball matchups.

And that would be perfectly fine. In fact it would be ideal. Players should have control over who has access to their away games. If people want to go embargo-happy then they should be able to do that and make it meaningful. Enabling people to be selective about who their away games go to enables them to make deals and play baseball politics, and thus provides the options necessary to create their own incentives to play away games.

Also, when the players deliberately and knowingly screw themselves over, then they're idiots and should be hated. Just because they were able to cock up the system doesn't mean they didn't have the option to not screw themselves and everyone else out of a good deal.

If the system is flawed then the system must change which is why giving people reasonable money for playing and winning away games is ideal without effectively making baseball slower for everyone by allowing people to isolate who they play against.
That is definitely not fine, we players want a smooth system where we make lots of gains. 

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lightning you are leeching my games from 2 days. 

How are you expecting me to play away games, when there's no incentive for me from you?

And that's why we need to embargo those teams who doesn't split profits.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Flavee said:

@Lightning you are leeching my games from 2 days. 

How are you expecting me to play away games, when there's no incentive for me from you?

And that's why we need to embargo those teams who doesn't split profits.

I don't know who I'm playing tbh so sorry I guess :(
You're playing away games so your friends can make money, that's your incentive I think. 
I give everyone I play with a little something something after they message me in-game.

  • Downvote 1

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flavee said:

@Lightning you are leeching my games from 2 days. 

How are you expecting me to play away games, when there's no incentive for me from you?

And that's why we need to embargo those teams who doesn't split profits.

 

 

Or, we could do something that's more logical, and less whining based. For example, changing how the system works so that tipping just is not necessary because everyone actually gets something.

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lairah said:

Or, we could do something that's more logical, and less whining based. For example, changing how the system works so that tipping just is not necessary because everyone actually gets something.

 

Sponsorship revenue: paid only to the team playing away, $1 for every 0.01 of team rating. This encourages 100 rated teams to spam aways and lower rated to host.

Edited by Galerion
correcting math
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with a lot of what @Lightning is saying, there are things wrong with baseball but it's not anything that you've really covered.  However, @Sir Scarfalot is on the right track in regards to the embargoes for people who are just going to sit on home and never play away.

I was thinking of an idea for having the ability where you can just play with only your alliance which helps people stay active/busy and gives them something to do while things aren't going on without having to bother with the people who want to abuse a system by doing purely home games. 

I rather have the option to not deal with morons than be forced to deal with them because I can't do anything to prevent them from doing solely home games only caring about themselves.

Other than that, I have no issues with baseball.  Is it tedious?  Yes, but that was the intention and if you play it then you should expect nothing less.  It shouldn't be changed so people can be lazier and get the same reward or allow the richest to reap all the rewards.

  • Upvote 4

gog-forum-size-regs.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lairah said:

Or, we could do something that's more logical, and less whining based. For example, changing how the system works so that tipping just is not necessary because everyone actually gets something.

That's just a different approach to the same end; enabling people to restrict who they play aways for should be more flexible, interesting, and fun though. But, like I and others have said before, that would work.

3 hours ago, Galerion said:

Sponsorship revenue: paid only to the team playing away, $10 for every 0.01 of team rating. This encourages 100 rated teams to spam aways and lower rated to host.

I like this idea. Could get a bit OP though since that represents $100k, guaranteed money, per away game. That'd ramp up crazy fast. Maybe $1 per 0.01 rating would be better. Right now, at best, the host team can get somewhere around $40k per game, so that's the current maximum baseball value (and it's still very high).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

I like this idea. Could get a bit OP though since that represents $100k, guaranteed money, per away game. That'd ramp up crazy fast. Maybe $1 per 0.01 rating would be better. Right now, at best, the host team can get somewhere around $40k per game, so that's the current maximum baseball value (and it's still very high).

Yeah you're correct I did the math wrong, max 10k a game or a bit less should even things out. Max for hosting is currently around 25k.

Edited by Galerion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Ukunaka said:

well i do think that the away team should make some cash but not at the expense of the home teams ticket sales because its all about investment, if you play home invest in the stadium, if you play away invest in the players. i haven't really had any problems getting home games within around 5 minutes and the few times i do i clear all the away games even though my players have had much less investment than my stadium so i lose most of them

That's a decent enough way to do baseball, and it's basically what I do. Good on you for not being a leech!

Anyway, the thing is, as I said, there is a huge imbalance in favor of the home team, investment or not, since ticket sales are the vast majority of the money baseball makes. In order to make baseball a viable thing to do, there should be either a mechanical encouragement to do away games, I.E the away team earns money proportionate to the ticket sales. Whether it is deducted from the home team's revenue or not is immaterial, and either way still dramatically improves home team revenues purely by encouraging baseball to be played far more. If you earn 90% of what you did but did ten times the games, then you're still ahead.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/13/2018 at 8:59 PM, Lairah said:

I'm sitting on $41.5 million right now, with resources and raids another 6-7 coming in in the next couple days. I have nothing to do with it, i don't intend on getting into baseball with it, not like this anyway. Either i become another leech in the pond or i become the equivalent of a beggar on a street corner - i refuse to be either of those. Whatever the home team gets for being, home, give the Away 50%. Do not TAKE the 50% from the Home team, since, apparently this gets everybodys underwear twisted into a knot, that they might be forced to help or contribute to others. Instead, make the money just magically appear, because it can. 

 

21 hours ago, Galerion said:

Sponsorship revenue: paid only to the team playing away, $1 for every 0.01 of team rating. This encourages 100 rated teams to spam aways and lower rated to host.

I said I wasn't gonna come back, but seeing as the discussion has reached more people and that more ideas are being thrown out there (all of which I think are terrific btw) I decided to just throw myself back in. For Lairah, I think that the winner taking 50 or 40% of the collected profits would be good, I think that would solve many problems. I just think winner takes 90% is excessive since that would take away the incentive for hosting games considering that most hosting teams invested in their stadiums rather than players which would result in them losing 90% of their stadium's profits (which they invested heavily into) in a majority of the played games. The only reason why I would suggest host takes 60% is because they are the ones selling tickets, but also because the away player gets bonus cash if they win.

And regarding the sponsorship idea, I think that's also a great idea, but I don't think it should be added alongside the above-mentioned one. In my opinion it would have to be one or the other.

I think the former solution fixes more problems than the latter. The first solution fixes issues with leeches, removes the need of sending trades in order to split profits, incentivizes people to play away games, and is fair to both the wealthy and the poor. All in all, a terrific idea, and on top of the 'team embargo' I think this would fix many of the current problems we're seeing in baseball.

However, the sponsorship idea would also incentivize people to invest into their away teams, and would be beneficial to both the wealthy and poor. Leeches would still exist, but it wouldn't matter much since the away team is getting compensated whether or not the host chooses to split his profits.

Edited by Cianuro
I have no idea what I'm doing but that doesn't stop me from doing it.

pfp_maybe_1_15.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enabling people to restrict who they play with will just kill Baseball as more people will stop playing it because they can't find matches and make a profit and that means less revenue for Sheepy as well. That is not a good suggestion, it has being suggested for 2 years and it was still bad when it was first suggested. 
I know you guys have bias because you want to play in your own groups and not play any one else but there is a much better way of solving it is which giving the away team just as much revenue if they win their away match. Fixing the system is not hiding the problem as you suggest. 

10 hours ago, Seeker said:

 However, @Sir Scarfalot is on the right track in regards to the embargoes for people who are just going to sit on home and never play away.

No he is not. His suggestion which is an old suggestion is bad and doesn't help grow the baseball community, it does the opposite. 

10 hours ago, Seeker said:

Other than that, I have no issues with baseball.  Is it tedious?  Yes, but that was the intention and if you play it then you should expect nothing less.  It shouldn't be changed so people can be lazier and get the same reward or allow the richest to reap all the rewards.

Baseball will remain tedious under my suggestions, no lazy people will get the same reward as people who spend hours playing baseball. 

8 hours ago, Cianuro said:

I said I wasn't gonna come back, but seeing as the discussion has reached more people and that more ideas are being thrown out there (all of which I think are terrific btw) I decided to just throw myself back in. For Lairah, I think that the winner taking 50 or 40% of the collected profits would be good, I think that would solve many problems. I just think winner takes 90% is excessive since that would take away the incentive for hosting games considering that most hosting teams invested in their stadiums rather than players which would result in them losing 90% of their stadium's profits (which they invested heavily into) in a majority of the played games. The only reason why I would suggest host takes 60% is because they are the ones selling tickets, but also because the away player gets bonus cash if they win.

Mhmm no the winner needs to take the majority of the profits so that would need to be 60 or 70 percentage. 40%/30% is still a large amount for the host. 10% is allocated to the away team if the win or lose, 40% is allocated to the host team if they win or lose and rest of the money is up for grabs. I don't think you're understand hosting all that well, if you want the make the most money hosting then having a max team rating is a requirement. I mostly just host and share my revenue with those who helped me and I certainly would be less inclined to host if my team had a team rating of like 20 or something.
I wouldn't mind hosting or playing away games with those profit margins, it will make baseball much smoother so much so you will have trouble finding away games next :). 

 

Edited by Lightning
  • Downvote 1

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Mon May 14 2018 at 4:07 AM, Lightning said:

That isn't much better making the buttons smaller and is worst for the health of your eyes.

You can stop playing baseball if you are soo much caring about your health, after all you need to click 100s of time in a minute and all that stress on your eyes.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Mon May 14 2018 at 4:07 AM, Lightning said:

 

That suggestion is only to balance out the changes I suggested that give nations more revenue, 200 games per a turn is still quite a lot and 99% of people won't get near that limit.

99% don't even play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lightning said:

Mhmm no the winner needs to take the majority of the profits so that would need to be 60 or 70 percentage. 40%/30% is still a large amount for the host. 10% is allocated to the away team if the win or lose, 40% is allocated to the host team if they win or lose and rest of the money is up for grabs. I don't think you're understand hosting all that well, if you want the make the most money hosting then having a max team rating is a requirement. I mostly just host and share my revenue with those who helped me and I certainly would be less inclined to host if my team had a team rating of like 20 or something.
I wouldn't mind hosting or playing away games with those profit margins, it will make baseball much smoother so much so you will have trouble finding away games next :). 

 

Why do you believe the winner should take the majority of the profits?

"I don't think you're understand hosting all that well" Didn't you say you only came to baseball 3 or 4 days ago?

Having a max team is *only required* to make max profits, but not everyone can *afford* to max their team. Some of us (like myself) just invest solely into our stadiums and play home games; some of us split the profits, some of us are leeches and the leeches are one of the problems we're dealing with.

Edited by Cianuro
I have no idea what I'm doing but that doesn't stop me from doing it.

pfp_maybe_1_15.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lightning said:

Enabling people to restrict who they play with will just kill Baseball as more people will stop playing it because they can't find matches and make a profit and that means less revenue for Sheepy as well. That is not a good suggestion, it has being suggested for 2 years and it was still bad when it was first suggested. 
I know you guys have bias because you want to play in your own groups and not play any one else but there is a much better way of solving it is which giving the away team just as much revenue if they win their away match. Fixing the system is not hiding the problem as you suggest.

Alex created baseball as a way for bigger nations to waste cash, I assume that's still his purpose for baseball. I don't think he cares if people stop playing baseball because the game could survive without it. 

I fear that people constantly asking him to implement x,y or z will just cause him to remove baseball outright. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Alex locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.