Game Date: May 31st, 2064
Suggestions
Forum >> Suggestions >> Waivers Needs Fix? 
| 
| 
| Post ID | Date & Time | Game Date | Function |
|---|---|---|---|
| #17192 | 04/07/2015 7:22:49 am | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1 
| I do believe that the waiver system should be the one of the top three priorities for improvement in the near future. I do love to make a suggestion on it but I want to know if the majority believes it too. |
||
| #17193 | 04/07/2015 8:43:04 am | ||
|
cqk328 Joined: 07/28/2014 Posts: 289 Unalaska Alaskans VI.20 
| Definitely agree that something needs fixed. I haven't won a waiver claim since the 2019 season. Now I don't really have any suggestions...I'll leave that up to more innovative people. But really. One successful claim in 4 seasons? Don't think that I'm an inactive player either. I mean, I don't make claims EVERY day, but I probably make a minimum of 10-20 a week, and more in the offseason. This is ridiculous. | ||
| #17203 | 04/07/2015 10:15:01 am | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator 
| Okay. Is the problem that the waiver claim system doesn’t work well or there is just a shortage of elite players going through the system? At present, there are now roughly 550 managed teams and 200 bot teams. So there are very few top players ever being released. Ergo, it’s nearly impossible to get them because there are lots of claims for them. What’s the solution? 1. Artificially create more elite players for the waiver/free agent system 2. Prioritize the wavier claim system (but without more top players, it’s not likely to really satisfy the masses who still rarely get an elite player). 3. Continue to stress that teams need to build from within and depend on the free agency/waiver claim system to fill in their holes with role players. Steve |
||
| #17208 | 04/07/2015 11:22:37 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive 
| 1. Absolutely not. 2. I know there are many against a prioritized waiver system, but I'm completely for it. There have already been several examples during this short season where owners have gotten multiple longshot, highly sought after waivers. While a tiered structure wouldn't guarantee anyone would get a star or potential stud, it virtually guarantees an owner won't score multiple superstars. That creates more balance and levels the playing field a bit. 3. Like waivers, drafts rely on luck. With only ten a year, owners receive vastly different levels of talent. Some get three or four quality guys in a season, while others get nothing but duds. You can only develop what you're dealt. This isn't poker; you can't win by bluffing. Telling owners they need to develop players when they don't start with similar guys is a tough sell. |
||
| #17211 | 04/07/2015 11:59:23 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4 
| Can't believe I'm going to say this because we've butted heads on this issue but I'm more or less with Mike on all 3 points. 1. Ditto 2. Ditto 3. Could we add draft sessions? I like the current draft system but infusing more prospects would give more alternatives/choices. Updated Tuesday, April 7 2015 @ 12:02:20 pm PDT |
||
| #17214 | 04/07/2015 2:08:05 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| There have already been several examples during this short season where owners have gotten multiple longshot, highly sought after waivers. While a tiered structure wouldn't guarantee anyone would get a star or potential stud, it virtually guarantees an owner won't score multiple superstars. So if we somehow limited the waiver claim system such that one team could only pick up one 100+ SI player per season (or some other duration), would that provide sufficient fairness? Like waivers, drafts rely on luck. With only ten a year, owners receive vastly different levels of talent. Some get three or four quality guys in a season, while others get nothing but duds. You can only develop what you're dealt. This isn't poker; you can't win by bluffing. Telling owners they need to develop players when they don't start with similar guys is a tough sell. I recently went through the roster of the top two teams from last season to see what strategy they had used to build their roster -- because I am concerned about providing the correct balance between drafting and free agent/waiver claims. Of the key players on their big league clubs, they acquired most of them by two methods: 1. College Draft 2. Free Agent acquisition when the player was young (back in 2015 and before usually) They hadn't necessarily gotten lucky in the draft. What they had done was kept the good draftees and gone out and gotten more young talent to develop. Not sure if they used scouting reports or skills or what. Of course, this was a number of seasons in the making, but I think this was certainly a winning strategy. Steve Updated Tuesday, April 7 2015 @ 2:19:45 pm PDT |
||
| #17215 | 04/07/2015 2:32:36 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| to me if you win a waiver claim then you go back to the end of the line. You can make more waiver claims, but if someone else has a claim on the same guy, and hasn't won a waiver claim as recent as you, then they should be first inline. I think the majority of people is just wanting more fairness out of it. Instead of seeing 1 team hit 3 good waiver claims in 1 night and other teams hitting none is what I don't like. I don't want all luck, I want fairness and I would be pretty happy. | ||
| #17216 | 04/07/2015 3:38:04 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Right with Mike on this one. (Except on point one) Obviously, there are not going to be many elite players showing up on the waiver wire. Typically, teams want to keep their best players. They only drop them usually because of financial trouble. Owners shouldn't expect to acquire a stud per week. This being said, we will never be able to tell for sure whether the waiver system is truely random as the sample size is just too small. However, if there is a randomness, something should be done to at least minimize it. The tiered waiver system would be an awesome idea to do this. It is simple, very similar to the current system, increases strategizing by owners, and of course, minimizes this randomness just a bit. This following idea proposal came courtesy of Seca. Idea: Add a second round to the current waiver system. Managers would be able to make waiver claims as present, but would also have the option of making a claim a "priority" giving them a better chance to win the player. Realism: Not all players are pursued equally. Making a player a priority is akin to frequent visits with the agent, better signing bonus, special seating for the player's girlfriend at games, bowls of red M&Ms in the clubhouse, etc.. How it would work: An additional button / toggle would be visible on the player page near the waiver claim button. Clicking the button would place a "priority" claim. Once a priority claim is won, the button would grey out. The button would have a clear warning symbol / mouseover. "You may only win 1 priority waiver claim per season!". When a priority claim is placed, it would show up as a normal claim on the waiver button (other teams would know there is interest in the player, but wouldn't know the level of interest). When claims are processed, the player would be randomly assigned to a team that made a priority claim. If no priority claims were made, he would be assigned to a team making a normal claim. If no normal claims were made, the player would pass through to free agency. Why bother? I think it would add quite a bit of strategy to the waiver process. Do I want to build for the present (use p-claim on a major league player) or build for the future (use p-claim on a minor league prospect)? Is there a certain need my team has (pitching, SS) I want to emphasize? Do I go hard from the start of the season, or do I hold my p-claim for later hoping for less competition on a great player (risking not getting a p-claim at all)? It would also help "share the wealth", and give everyone an opportunity to emphasize some players they would really like to add to their team. How does this relate to other waiver issues? As stated, it helps share the wealth, potentially helping teams with streaks of bad luck. If a "search by potential" was added to the waiver system, it would add some thought to who to claim, rather than blindly claiming every 14 and 15 that shows up. Would this be hard to code? No idea.  It would seem to use the same machinery that is already in place.Problems Hey! That means I can only add 1 good player a season. That's kind of the idea. I also don't think that is true. I think managers would come to value their p-claim, and many good players would pass through the normal round. Later in the season, p-claims would be used up and more good players would be normally contested.I don't see much downside to this. This proposal will limit teams to one superstar player per season, or at least that's the idea. Updated Tuesday, April 7 2015 @ 3:39:02 pm PDT |
||
| #17226 | 04/07/2015 5:56:32 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| The Idea of Seca or the idea of Softshoe could be a great start. I am leaning more towards that of Seca... Without any numbers to back it up, their should be atleast 500 great current players and minor players that go to the waiver system so that should be at least one for each team. |
||
| #17231 | 04/07/2015 6:50:58 pm | ||
|
cqk328 Joined: 07/28/2014 Posts: 289 Unalaska Alaskans VI.20
| Like we've covered before--no system will be perfect. Seca's idea is very intriguing. I'd have to see it in action, but its definitely a start. Now to answer Steve's proposals: 1.) Like everyone who has responded before, I don't think this is the issue. During my waiver searches, I don't see that many elite players, but that's because my team is in the red. If I don't restrict salary, plenty of 100+ SI, elite players show up. My team just can't afford them.  -_-2.) As stated previously, I would definitely agree to a prioritized waiver system. Amount of elite players isn't a problem, so implementing a prioritized system wouldn't be a bad idea. Something like Seca's, experimenting with it could uncover flaws (if there are any). 3.) I am a fan of developing my team through the draft and the minors. However, let's pull out a real life example. Did the Cleveland Indians sign Nick Swisher to be a role player? No. They expected him to be a star. (Ignore how that actually turned out. Yankees expectations had been much different than the Indians. Cleveland put pressure on him, and he crumbled.) I'd find more, but I'm too lazy to do it. Bottom line is, free agents are usually used as role players, but not always. And like others have said, the draft is a game of chance. Will you get 5 POT 10's? or 3 POT 14's? You never know. If you wanna enforce this option, I'd say you should make each draft have at least one pitcher and one non-pitcher with POT 12+. Overall, yea, the waiver system needs a fix. Probably. Unless you go with my draft proposal. That doesn't have to be exact by the way. I'll leave it up to you. |
||
| #17233 | 04/07/2015 8:14:53 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| I'm seeing support for the two tiered waiver system being expressed. I personally think it's a great idea and should provide equity and strategy to this great simulation. I think it's possible it's time has come. | ||
| #17238 | 04/07/2015 9:34:57 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I agree | ||
| #17239 | 04/07/2015 9:43:59 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I recently went through the roster of the top two teams from last season to see what strategy they had used to build their roster -- because I am concerned about providing the correct balance between drafting and free agent/waiver claims. Of the key players on their big league clubs, they acquired most of them by two methods: First of all, I want to make sure I understand that correctly. You looked at two teams? I'm afraid that isn't looking deep enough. My biggest response to that, though, is that the game sure doesn't appear to be what it was back in 2013. I think sheer muscle/dedication could have gotten most owners a decent amount of success. From all I've read and gathered, Broken Bat has become much more competitive over the last couple of real-world calendars. Recently I looked at the top tier teams (Legends through III) and their drafts. Using the largest opposites in luck, from 2017-2021 Bay City drafted two players with 14 potential, while Jacksonville drafted eleven players with 14 potential and four with 15 potential. Does anyone seriously think this is equitable? A little variance is one thing, but that disparity is too large. You might have been able to make up for a decent chunk of that before with good scouting, work, etc.; I don't think that's the case any more. |
||
| #17240 | 04/07/2015 9:44:04 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| If we're vote counting, I'm still in favor of Seca's proposal if it is designable (which it seems like it should be, but I have zero programming knowledge). | ||
| #17242 | 04/07/2015 10:34:38 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| in my count their are six of us in this thread who are in favor of Seca's suggestion. We just need to wait for Steve to speak up |
||
| #17246 | 04/08/2015 12:37:18 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| There have already been several examples during this short season where owners have gotten multiple longshot, highly sought after waivers. While a tiered structure wouldn't guarantee anyone would get a star or potential stud, it virtually guarantees an owner won't score multiple superstars. It happened again tonight, but Seca isn't too bothered by it at the moment. At least these guys are 28 and 30 so the benefit is only for a few seasons. |
||
| #17247 | 04/08/2015 2:06:11 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4 
| Actually Mike, it happened twice last night. I had claims on six players, two went to Waterloo and two (Ramiro Barron & Jorge Castaneda) went to Pomona. The talent available isn't the problem, the problem lies in how that talent is being distributed. I was in support of Seca's idea when he proposed it and would be in favor of it being added at least on a trail basis until we see what unintended consequences it might bring with it. For whatever reason, the current system seems to be anything but fair with several examples during this season alone of teams getting multiple long-shots in a single day. The two teams that Steve pointed to were built before potential searches were added. Owners no longer have the option of adding young waivered players to develop if they were shut out on claims for veterans. Since the search was added, those players are as hotly contested as most 100+ SI veterans are. |
||
| #17250 | 04/08/2015 5:10:35 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Reference Seca getting 2 players last night... I had 5 claims out last night. 2 of those were claimed by Waterloo. Of the 5, 2 had 7 claims each, 1 had 14 claims and the other 2 were heavily claimed 60-90 claims. At least one of those guys Seca got was a 7 claim guy. Not sure but I think the other was one of the hail Mary guys. I checked the # of claims less than 4 hours prior to the claims being awarded. While I know 1/7 only gives me a 14.3% chance, I'll take those odds on waivers any day as I had hope lol. What I'm saying is Seca got at most one hotly contested waiver claim. The other only had 7 claims . I can't explain why he only had 7 claims. Salary? I don't know because I really wanted him. I'm just not sure this is an example of a miracle double claim award. |
||
| #17251 | 04/08/2015 5:46:57 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| No, waivers does not need any fixing. Once in a while there will be a team winning a couple of claims, but fixing that makes as much sense as trying to fix a good/bad streak of results/injuries/etc. And even if some teams occasionally win more than one claim, the truth is there is absolutely no hoarding of talent through either drafting or waiver wins, and there are no winning teams built on said lucky drafts/claims. If there’s anything wrong with the waiver system is the financial restrictions, because that reduces the number of claims placed, and the fewer the claims, the more often teams will win multiple players. Other than that, if it ain’t broken don’t fix it. |
||
| #17254 | 04/08/2015 7:20:04 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Just because ONE guy with a stacked team says it is not broke doesn't mean he is right ! It is broke and it does need fixed ! As far as that goes, I never thought the old system before the waiver system was broke either, at least then I could get some decent players now and then. | ||
| #17255 | 04/08/2015 7:28:53 am | ||
|
cqk328 Joined: 07/28/2014 Posts: 289 Unalaska Alaskans VI.20
| Mig, Saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" implies that it ain't broke. Now I'm not saying that the waiver system is necessarily the problem; the draft could be part of the blame. That stat brought up earlier involving the luck in the draft. Variation should occur, and teams will get lucky from time to time, but for the most part the draft should present equal opportunities to all teams. Now for the waiver system. I dug farther back into my team's previous ownerships and found that my team has won one waiver claim. Ever. And it was mine from 2019. Now those owners could have been inactive, but like I've mentionted, I have to be 1/100 by now. What's your percentage out of your last 100 claims, Mig? There are exponentially greater amounts of lower tier teams, but it seems like the majority of claims go to upper tier. Correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe it's just a league VI.29 thing. I see, at the max, 10 waiver claims a year in the league transaction feed. Like I said, tell me if it's just due to the number of bots in my league or if what I say is true. |
||
| #17256 | 04/08/2015 7:33:54 am | ||
|
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends 
| It happened again tonight, but Seca isn't too bothered by it at the moment. At least these guys are 28 and 30 so the benefit is only for a few seasons. Haha! What is kind of funny is that I wrote Haselrig a message yesterday saying I was going to try to keep more than 1 roster spot open just in case my front office got on a roll. Salary? I don't know because I really wanted him. Salary + a short waiver window + bad defensive player. I had a really good vibe about him earlier in the week when he was listed. For those who are dissatisfied with waivers, I feel it is the "double" wins that are the main cause. We don't expect the double wins, but we probably should. If you need a pitching prospect, you claim all the decent pitching prospects. If you need an OF, you claim every serviceable OF. Doubles are going to happen. In my case, if I had won Fischer earlier in the week there is a good chance I wouldn’t have had a claim on Gamez. I’m not convinced the 2-tier suggestion I made would work. There would be a learning curve. The forum would be full of “Grrrr…I borked my top tier pick … what is this garbage?”. More importantly, you would probably expect every newbie to make a mess of it. That kind of mistake might drive potential new managers away. Aside from looking for ways of preventing the “double” from occurring, the other option is to reduce the value of the double happening. Ie., the back end rather than the front end. Relevant salaries / finances is working on this. MukilteoMike’s recent Versalles – Gray decision is a good example. Versalles turned Gray into a 3 million dollar back-up. Because MukilteoMike is keeping an eye on his finances, he cut Gray. I think lots of teams wouldn’t have thought twice about keeping Gray as a back-up. If finances prevent the luckier teams from hoarding players, “doubles” aren’t really a problem. Player liquidity improves without changing player supply. In my case, like MukilteoMike, I am conscious of my finances. Winning Fischer and Gamez will result in me cutting 3 decent players (all hanging out in AAA at the moment – want to see a series or two with my “new look” first). |
||
| #17258 | 04/08/2015 7:54:28 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I agree with haselrig. I think it should be given a trial run to determine any unintended consequences.Another brief idea When you click on the priority claim button, make it ABSOLUTELY CLEAR to that person that they only get one per season. Flash a message on the screen in bold, capital letters. This way, no one will miss this fact, including newbies. If someone decides to ignore the message and click on a century crappy player, well, its part of the learning process and I promise you, they will never make that mistake again.There are already so many ways a newbie can screw up his team. (Im guilty of dropping a couple of 13 POT pitchers cause their SI was low ) The loss to newbies would be very minimal with this system. At most, they lose a star player. Thats AT MOST. Most will heed the warning on the priority claim and they will understand exactly what they are doing.Ok, buy and large, i think it should be given a trial run |
||
| #17260 | 04/08/2015 8:06:23 am | ||
|
Hardcastle Joined: 11/03/2014 Posts: 25 Inactive
|
http://simyard.com/help/waivers.php" class="bbcode_url" rel="external nofollow" target="_blank">http://web.archive.org/web/20100107112819/http://simyard.com/help/waivers.php Not all of the language in the link above would apply to Broken Bat.
Continual rolling list: waiver claims are processed in waiver priority order and each successful claim moves a manager to the end of the waiver priority list Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 8:10:17 am PDT |
||
| #17261 | 04/08/2015 8:06:47 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Regarding my Gray cut, that's part of why I like the financial aspect of the game--it keeps it more realistic. No one in real life is going to pay a premium for a guy that will get 200 at bats in a season. At least I hope they wouldn't. Seca, don't give up on your two-tiered system. I'm confident it would serve its intended purpose pretty well. Of course a few newbies will screw it up; if we don't think some screw their team up in dozens of ways now we're silly. There's a learning curve to everything; it wouldn't be any different. Besides, you know what's going to happen when someone does screw it up? They're going to get a decent player instead of a star. And guess what--he'll still be good enough to make the team. Also, you can be sure they'll only screw it up once. By the time the next season comes along, they'll have it figured out. If they haven't and screw it up again, well, they were never going to be a high tier threat anyway. If and when a priority claim thing is enacted, I think there does need to be some sort of caution/warning/announcement thingy that makes it perfectly clear the priority claim is being placed. It should probably be made on a special screen instead of the normal one. And obviously there needs to be a confirmation notice that is a double-check to ensure you really, really want to use your single priority claim for the season. Don't fear the tier! As Sir Francis Bacon said, "Nothing is terrible but fear itself." His last name is Bacon; need I say more? (Edit-I made this post on mobile typing slowly. Much of what I said is similar to Slug's comments a few minutes prior, which I hadn't seen yet.) Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 8:24:56 am PDT |
||
| #17276 | 04/08/2015 1:52:18 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| I have been playing fantasy football, baseball, basketball, etc., since the early '90s. Every game I've played that had a waivers system used a simple claim order initially based on worst to first, with the last team to win a claim going to the bottom of the list. This is my preference for this game, as well. The "random" system doesn't seem to be so random. Every team should be able to win a contested claim at some point during the season. With as many players as we have going through waivers at the beginning of the season, I'm guessing that some teams might even win a couple highly contested claims, if they choose wisely. Also, I see no reason to make up a complicated system with "tiered," "priority," "only on Monday if it's a full moon" or any other kind of waivers. Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 1:54:54 pm PDT |
||
| #17278 | 04/08/2015 2:19:01 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| @Bucfan I am leaning towards the priority two-tiered format because it is very simple, not complicated. The complication is an extra button beside the "claim player" button. That's it. The waiver order idea is not a bad one. It has been used in other games all the time, and it would achieve the same result as the two-tiered idea. However, consider the following example: The Berlin Badboys and the Yorktown Lightning both have their eyes on two stud players in the waiver wire. Both players have over 110 SI and they are just 26. The Badboys and the Lightning claim both players. The problem is, both players come off of waivers at the same time -- 2 AM the next morning. How does the waiver order system handle this? Does the order remain the same for that entire hour, allowing the higher order team to collect every player available from that hour, or does the program look at individual SI and prioritize the claims? The only way this could be managed is by having the owners prioritize their own claims. This could be fairly complicated because now, lets say the badboys prioritize a player coming off waivers two hours after the other player they claimed. Does the computer ignore any claims made before that hour... blah blah blah you get the idea. This system has many complications due to the players coming off of waivers at different hours. I think the two-tiered solution offers a simple solution to the problem without changing the heart of the waiver wire. Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 2:20:04 pm PDT |
||
| #17283 | 04/08/2015 2:54:44 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| Thanks for all the input everyone. Let me just say that the waiver claim system was implemented originally to provide more fairness – as some managers were able to grab new free agents as soon as they hit the market. I think it has eliminated that issue. When we implemented the random assignment of waiver players, we did so as a first step and said we’d examine the impact and shortcomings of it further down the road (perhaps now is a good time?. Question 1: If we go to a two-tiered or continual rolling list or other priority waiver system, is your position/status on the list public or unknown? What about when you put a claim in – does something say (“somebody with a higher priority has already put in a claim – you can only get this player if he takes somebody else first”?). Or is it a bit of a guessing game? Question 2: Does the priority system reset at the end of the season? Steve Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 2:55:26 pm PDT |
||
| #17284 | 04/08/2015 3:04:37 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| 1 I prefer priority waiver claim. No notification is necessary with this one other than a separate button to make the priority claim. Multiple priority claims on the same player will be a lottery. A priority claim must be successful or you retain your claim to use again. 2 You get one priority claim a season. Once you have used that claim successfully you can only make second tier claims. And yes, it should reset each year to the one claim. They should not roll over. |
||
| #17287 | 04/08/2015 3:37:16 pm | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Reading through this thread it sounds like people have got more of an issue with the Random Number Generator than anything else... The integrity of which has many more dependencies in the game than just waiver claims. Not wishing to open a can of worms here, but I'm guessing Broken Bat's RNG is based on the system clock, which I understand can be streaky and subject to rounding issues. Not saying it's corrupt or deliberately manipulable, just formulaic and systematic in deriving numbers by its very nature. Apologies if that's not the case but might it be easier to try a different method of RNG in the first instance such as harnessing collective mouse movements from the user base, rather than overhauling what is theoretically a fair system? |
||
| #17289 | 04/08/2015 3:44:12 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| @Slug5373 I would resolve waivers by position as they appear on the FA search tool: P, C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, OF. I would do that to avoid as many ties as possible -- P with a 106 SI and a SS with a 106 SS, for example -- would be resolved at different points in the process. If, in your scenario, both have identical SIs and play the same position, then a tiebreaker would need to be included; it could be as simple as resolving ties alphabetically or it could be some other stat or skill that only Steve knows about. As far as how it works, let's say Berlin is No. 1 and Yorktown is No. 2 on the claim list. Each team places a claim on both your players in the scenario. Berlin wins the claim on the first and immediately goes to No. 756; Yorktown gets the second player and immediately goes to 756; Berlin moves up to 755. Any other teams that unsuccessfully claimed those two players retain their claim position and are in line to win their next claim later that same day or the next. Also, the claim is always going to go to the team sitting in the highest position on the list. You could be sitting at 150 and if everyone else who claimed the player is below you, you'll still win and go to the end of the line. @Steve 1. I wouldn't show anything different than you do now: the number of total claims. Also, I would notify each owner of his position on the claim list in a way that no one else can see it; like you do Finances. 2. Do not reset the list at the end of the season. That would give some teams an incentive to tank to improve their position for the beginning of the following season. Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 3:46:11 pm PDT |
||
| #17294 | 04/08/2015 4:07:08 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I'm for the simplest solution that addresses the problem. As Jalapeno5 suggests, maybe looking into the mechanism by which the random numbers are generated would find and correct the problem without having to do any additional coding. If it turns out that that isn't the problem, we could always move to one of the solutions presented in this thread. | ||
| #17296 | 04/08/2015 4:46:46 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| As Haselrig said, if the Random Number Generator can be improved to be actually random rather than streaky as it is now, then I'd be for that. Otherwise I'm for the two tier system as described most recently by Tiger. I am totally against the rolling order, the problems with it have been detailed in several posts already. | ||
| #17297 | 04/08/2015 4:46:50 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| To answer Steve's questions (Please note that I am answering regarding a two-tiered system): 1. I think owners should know simply whether another priority claim has been made or not. This really wouldn't affect anything, but if, for example, let's say someone already used their priority claim. They want to use a normal waiver claim to claim another player they like in the waiver wire. However, they see that a priority claim has been used, making a normal waiver claim obsolete. Overall, it really doesn't matter whether owners know or not because there are no restrictions regarding number of claims anyway. 2. Yes, once the season rolls over and all the older players skills decrease, that is when the priority claim should reset. @ Bucfan That might work, but I would still prefer the two-tiered system. |
||
| #17300 | 04/08/2015 4:58:01 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| For Steve. Relating to Real Life. 1. You should show them if that player already receive a priority claim coz IRL, the media will already break the news the moment a GM will pursue a player hardly. 2. Reset the priority claim. This is worth a try |
||
| #17311 | 04/08/2015 9:48:06 pm | ||
|
gadzooks Joined: 05/11/2014 Posts: 54 Inactive
| 1. Public. 2. Reset and reseed based on updated rankings. Given the two choices - I think rolling claims are necessary to address the randomness issue where some teams get screwed over and others get waiver windfalls. It can be tiered but within the tiers the claims should still be rolling (in my opinion). As a programmer who teaches college statistics, I think it unlikely that there is a problem with the RNG. The current uneven distribution of waiver claims is to be expected with so many teams *sampling* from a uniform distribution. In other words, the streaks that others mention are to be expected with the current system and not likely a fault of a random number generator. Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 9:49:24 pm PDT |
||
| #17313 | 04/08/2015 10:46:08 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Definitely hoping for a two-tiered system over a rolling list. 1. Public. Other things have been modified in the game to give the casual fan a better chance; having the information public sticks with that theme. The dedicated (or crazy, depending on your point of view) ones would keep tabs on them anyway. Give everyone the info. Also, comments have been made worried about newbies. Providing all the info might steer them in a better direction. And I like the "somebody with a higher priority has put in a claim" statement. That does bring up another question, though. Can you put a priority claim on only one player per day? If you can put them on multiple guys, how is that order reconciled? I'm for the you-can-only-put-one-priority-claim-per-day side. 2. If there's a two-tiered system, you should get one to use for the season. If you don't use it, you lose it. On the other hand, if a rolling list is used (I hope that isn't the case), the list should not reset at the end of a season. Top teams may never get a claim if they're put at the end of the list every season. |
||
| #17314 | 04/08/2015 11:22:38 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Yep, I agree with Mike on every point listed. Updated Wednesday, April 8 2015 @ 11:23:40 pm PDT |
||
| #17315 | 04/08/2015 11:51:30 pm | ||
|
Holmes Joined: 11/07/2013 Posts: 1175 Inactive
| One of the main problems with random numbers is that if they are truly random, they always appear streaky. If someone is to generate pseudorandom numbers mamually, they usually can be easily identified, because we tend to avoid the "streaks" that naturally appear in true random numbers. In short, I am pretty sure what some of us perceive to be a problem has nothing to do with any weaknesses of the RNG. | ||
| #17317 | 04/09/2015 1:51:42 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Any "random" number generated by a cpu is pseudorandom though... It fundamentally has to be derived from an algorithm. Yes, it's a complex algorithm and you could never hope to predict or "fix" the outcome, but the output is essentially governed by a series of static rules and calculations; so patterns may emerge over time. In my experience, most "random" number calculations stem from the computer's internal timestamp being used as the random seed, and the fact Waivers are automatically kicked off at the same time each day might be a factor. Aside from going down the truly random number generation routes akin to automated Roulette wheels in Vegas, or Steve manually printing out and picking teams out of a hat each day, I know of other games that have overcome similar complaints from their users by revising RNG to be based on user inputted data such as mouse movement rather than system derived variables with good success. For the record I don't personally have an issue with the way the waivers have been processed, but I can see why some do; I just assume "randomness" in this case means my team will reap the benefits of a hot-streak one day! 😁 Updated Thursday, April 9 2015 @ 1:55:59 am PDT |
||
| #17323 | 04/09/2015 4:39:27 am | ||
|
FreddyTheEye Joined: 11/11/2014 Posts: 625 Inactive
| If things must be changed because some feel the RNG method is not fair enough: Then simply have a limit on number of claims you can make or win in a day/week/season or: A simple rolling waiver list where you know your own priority number and everyone else's from a simple numbered list and you go to the bottom after a successful claim...will get my vote. Keep priority at the end of the season to roll into the next season. Guys will then complain about being sent to the bottom of the list after a mediocre player claim etc. Guys will always complain. Not a fan of double tier waivers, extra buttons, voodoo chants or complicated systems that need explanations. I don't think the system is "broken" as badly as some seem to think. Just a simple fix to prevent multiple studs from all going to the same teams with some sort of transparency (numbered list)to put an end to the endless complaining so we can just play ball! Cheers! |
||
| #17324 | 04/09/2015 5:05:29 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I think saying that people are over-complaining about waivers is a bit unfair Freddy. Feedback, even frustrated feedback, seems like it would be invaluable in a game like this. There's no road map. Every upgrade is pushing into new, unexplored territory. Sometimes things will need to be looked into and adjusted. Steve himself said that he thought the waiver system might need to be looked at some day. Adding the potential search feature seems to have clogged the waiver system a bit, making some of the flaws that were likely there all along that much more noticeable. |
||
| #17325 | 04/09/2015 5:29:44 am | ||
|
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends
| Question 1: If we go to a two-tiered or continual rolling list or other priority waiver system, is your position/status on the list public or unknown? Although it might seem complicated, I consider a priority claim a relatively small change to the existing system. The vast majority of players passing through waivers would be processed exactly as today. The only ones handled differently are those at the top end. If the number of top end players on waivers per season is ~80-100, and the number of managers actively using waivers is ~200-250, luck is still going to play a role. There will still be teams who don't get a top end guy every season. What this system does is distribute those guys a little more evenly. A priority list on the other hand is a very significant change which affects access to all parts of the player market (ie., a person high on the list "can't" make claims on lower quality players due to the value of their position). What about when you put a claim in – does something say (“somebody with a higher priority has already put in a claim – you can only get this player if he takes somebody else first”?). Or is it a bit of a guessing game? In the original suggestion this was hidden. The mouseover would show the total number of claims regardless claim quality. This does a couple of things. It forces the manager to make his/her decision based on: "How important is this player to me?" rather than: "How important is this player to other managers?" I think hidden also increases the likelihood that a very good player would pass through into normal waivers. Having some guys slip through is important - helps maintain interest after a team has already used their priority claim. Question 2: Does the priority system reset at the end of the season? Yes. I feel one of the main drawbacks of a priority system is the reduced excitement once you've actually won your claim. |
||
| #17326 | 04/09/2015 5:31:31 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| If there isn't an easy fix in the method of random number generation and this is an unofficial vote for which of the two systems presented in this thread we prefer, I think they both have valid arguments for and against them. I'd opt for whichever of the two would be considered easiest to code and implement, and maybe just as importantly, easiest to roll back or tweak should it prove to be problematic down the road. | ||
| #17327 | 04/09/2015 5:41:47 am | ||
|
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends
| @ Newbies: - could disable the priority claim for a the first week or two for new managers (assuming not near September 1st). Would let them get their feet on the ground before they use it. @RNG generator: - you can tweak the random number generator if you want. Won't prevent "lightning strikes". 6 managers need a SS. 2 good SSs are on waivers. They all claim both. When player 1 is processed they all have a 17% chance of success. Manager A wins. When player 2 is processed, all 6 managers still have a 17% chance to win. The more managers claiming, the less likely the chances lightning will strike. But lightning strikes will still happen. In a priority system, manager A would be excluded from player 2. No lightning strike possible. Further example, being a jerk I pointed out how Missoula won the top 2 pitching prospects in the off-season, and how Long Beach won the top 2 position players. In both of these cases, the successful claims were separated by days. This is not a problem with random numbers. It is just good luck. |
||
| #17328 | 04/09/2015 6:21:28 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| I think the point is, that people wouldn't necessarily mind "lightning strikes" as long as they can be assured it is a truly random process, as they would be relatively rare and would indeed be true good luck. As Holmes said - with true random number generation you will get a degree of repetition. All I'm suggesting is that as is, we can't be 100% sure that the Missoula/Long Beach scenarios you point out aren't due to a flaw with the RNG routines (again, not in any way implying there's any sort of intentional shennanigans going on, just that due to the way computers work it may not be as random as you might think). My roulette/names in a hat examples were flippant but I believe to get a truly random number out of a machine you'd need something like this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_random_number_generator But even without that there are more robust methods of creating random numbers than others - the section on Cryptography in that article calls out the possible issues with the way "random" numbers are likely being generated presently. Edit: Slow day at work so just spent a little bit of time reading up on this further and if anyone's interested here's an interesting visualisation of the results of a couple of different RNGs side-by side - True versus Pseudo. https://www.random.org/analysis/#visual Updated Thursday, April 9 2015 @ 8:37:02 am PDT |
||
| #17333 | 04/09/2015 8:37:02 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| How did we get on the subject of RNGs? I don't think a fix to the rng is necessary. I like the two-tiered system because (a) It's a good idea anyway, even if the waivers didn't need fixing (b) Since many people want to avoid "lightning strikes," this would prevent most of them from even happening, without preventing an owner from sucessfully claiming a lower-end players after a claim. (As in the rolling system) |
||
| #17334 | 04/09/2015 9:24:00 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Fair enough Slug - if it's an interesting new feature you think will add depth and a layer of strategy to the game it sounds like there's others here that agree with you. If it's a knee-jerk reaction to the distribution of talent I just wanted to point out that the current system should theoretically be fair to all (and fairness - i.e. everyone gets one star signing - seems to be what you're trying to advocate too); so if people aren't perceiving it as such it might be worth re-evaluating a fundamental game mechanism on which we all rely as players before going down that route. Bear in mind Random Number Generation's still going to be a part of any claim you put in where multiple people have used their token - I think the 500th person to redeem their priority claim because all their others have been contested is still going to be a little put-out. |
||
| #17335 | 04/09/2015 9:58:21 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| @Jalapeno5 Understood, and you are correct that the current system should theoretically be fair and you might also be correct that if anything, the RNG is just a bit biased. Of course, the RNG will still be used in the two-tiered system. So, if any improvements can be made to it easily by Steve, by all means go for it. I'm just saying I don't think that it's a gigantic problem even in the current system. I'm here because the two-tiered idea is a good one anyway and it will more evenly distribute the superstars which seems to be what everyone here wants. Edit: I think I came off a little hostile last post. sorry about that.Updated Thursday, April 9 2015 @ 10:18:53 am PDT |
||
| #17342 | 04/09/2015 4:47:13 pm | ||
|
Holmes Joined: 11/07/2013 Posts: 1175 Inactive
| Oh, please, I've had some less than lucky streaks here, too, mostly on the draft until it turned two rounds ago, but blaming the RNG rather than your own perception is just... well, a typical human fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion We can fiddle with the waivers system whatever we want, as long a the demand for good free agents is 100 times larger than the supply, 99 of 100 will feel disadvantaged. Ultimately, the only way the only way to get supply and demand aligned is to allow the price to go up. Preferably automatically, when there is such imbalance in the market. If we don't want that, the lottery we have is as good or as bad as any other non-solution. |
||
| #17363 | 04/09/2015 10:14:14 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Holmes, your point actually works against you about waivers. Yes, there is high demand for quality claims. Instituting a tiered system, though, would reduce the number of claims on the better players, especially if owners can only use their priority claim on one player per day. You're correct in the fact that we still would not hit a homer with our claim most days, but our odds of striking out for an entire season would decrease dramatically. In one stroke it would distribute the best waiver claims much more evenly across the Broken Bat universe. |
||
| #17369 | 04/10/2015 2:49:10 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| @cqk You can’t just look at the transaction pages to say the system is broken. You’re not taking into account the number of claims those players had in them, and you’re not taking into account how many claims a team is putting every day. Obviously, if you’re claiming players with not many claims, you will win more players, and if you’re putting more claims than other teams, chances are you will also win more players. Teams in upper divisions get exactly the same chances of winning a player as teams in lower divisions. It doesn’t get any fairer than this. |
||
| #17371 | 04/10/2015 3:02:19 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| Regarding the 2-tier system, it’s a bad idea. It’s nothing but a bidding system in disguise, except that instead of money, the currency is the priority bid. As any other bidding system, it’s going to favor the teams who have more of said currency, and in this case it will be the teams who will be able to hold on to their priority bids until a top player shows up. Those teams are the best teams, because they are not going to be tempted by secondary players that don’t improve their teams and they won’t waste their priority bids on those players. So, when a top players shows up, only the best teams will be in position to claim them. In the end, this would contribute to increase the gap between the best teams and the weaker ones. The current system is working just fine and does much more to level the playing field than this system that is being suggested. |
||
| #17372 | 04/10/2015 3:20:56 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| As any other bidding system, it’s going to favor the teams who have more of said currency, and in this case it will be the teams who will be able to hold on to their priority bids until a top player shows up. ^^^ This is called strategy Mig |
||
| #17374 | 04/10/2015 3:49:19 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| Not baseball strategy. But I understand that people who are clueless about baseball need this kind of workaround to get ahead. |
||
| #17375 | 04/10/2015 4:01:37 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| It very much is baseball strategy as you need players to actually play baseball. The priority claims would limit to one top player per season, given that several examples have already appeared of teams winning multiple top players and it's only April, it would actually be much more fair. Btw, not responding to your trolling again Mig, since you are unable to have a discussion without ad hominem attacks about others baseball knowledge. Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 4:03:23 am PDT |
||
| #17376 | 04/10/2015 4:07:32 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| It's also very difficult to hoard something when there's only one of it available. Use it now, use it later, you still only get the one. | ||
| #17387 | 04/10/2015 5:50:41 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| Yes, but the thing is the ones the best teams would be getting would always be better than the ones the weak teams would be getting, and that is not fair. And like I said before you can’t just single out a few odd cases of teams who have won more than one player to claim that there is hoarding. There is no hoarding at the moment, and anyone who says that is lying. This system that is being proposed would actually contribute to hoarding as the best players on waivers would always land in the same cluster of best teams. |
||
| #17389 | 04/10/2015 5:54:50 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| @newt Not having baseball knowledge is not an insult. There are many people who have no baseball knowledge and they are very happy like that. I’m just telling like it is. Stop being so sensitive. |
||
| #17400 | 04/10/2015 6:58:41 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Yes, but the thing is the ones the best teams would be getting would always be better than the ones the weak teams would be getting, and that is not fair...This system that is being proposed would actually contribute to hoarding as the best players on waivers would always land in the same cluster of best teams. What the heck are you talking about?! Everyone has the exact same opportunity. Everyone can choose how much risk they want to take with their priority claim. And as was mentioned above, you can only "hoard" one guy a year with the priority claim, just like everyone else. |
||
| #17402 | 04/10/2015 7:11:24 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| I've already explained that in this very thread, but I'll post it again just for you. Regarding the 2-tier system, it’s a bad idea. It’s nothing but a bidding system in disguise, except that instead of money, the currency is the priority bid. As any other bidding system, it’s going to favor the teams who have more of said currency, and in this case it will be the teams who will be able to hold on to their priority bids until a top player shows up. Those teams are the best teams, because they are not going to be tempted by secondary players that don’t improve their teams and they won’t waste their priority bids on those players. So, when a top players shows up, only the best teams will be in position to claim them. In the end, this would contribute to increase the gap between the best teams and the weaker ones. The current system is working just fine and does much more to level the playing field than this system that is being suggested. |
||
| #17407 | 04/10/2015 7:48:10 am | ||
|
Dcmrulz Joined: 02/14/2013 Posts: 588 Inactive
| When I played simyard, there was a numbered claim system. Initially randomly ranked (but in this case, could be ranked from worst team to best in rating), a team would put a claim on him, and highest claim number gets the guy, then goes to the back of the line. For example, say there was a guy in the waivers waiting to be claimed. My claim number would be #741, not very good. I would put a claim anyway. Say the Orem Giants would put a claim on the same guy, his claim # is 27, so he would be the top bidder for a particular guy. If Orem wins (none of the 26 teams currently below him don't put a claim on the guy), he goes to the back of the line (#757), and everyone else goes up 1 spot. One could only do one claim at a time unless they either win the guy or get outbid, so you would have to be very careful about who you get. Might be tougher than the current system since you can only go after 1 guy at a time, and might create a lot more free agency in theory (to which the most active teams will sign). The claim order would only need to be done by reverse ranking once...though I would wonder if bots would be allowed to claim, or clog up the top spots...I guess if they don't a new owner for that team would have a very strong claim number. |
||
| #17408 | 04/10/2015 7:53:12 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| @Mig Hey man! Been a while Yes, but the thing is the ones the best teams would be getting would always be better than the ones the weak teams would be getting, and that is not fair. What are you talking about? The weak teams get just as many priority claims as the top teams -- 1. The next argument might be that the weak teams can't claim the very top players because of salary issues. Ok, fair enough, but isn't it already this way? What would the two-tier system change making it impossible for weaker teams to acquire better players. They already can't pick up the best due to salary issues, so really, nothing changes there. What DOES change, however, is the way the players are distributed, and the level of strategy involved in claiming players. Do you use a priority claim on a 15 POT prospect, or on a 115 SI 29 year old pitching stud? For weaker teams, who can't afford the 115 SI guy anyway, no matter what system we are using, they must start claiming top notch prospects, or cheap superstars. Regarding distribution of players, this will make the waiver system more fair, plain and simple. Teams aren't guarenteed a superstar every season, but their odds of getting one will increase since every team can really only get one star(Unless somehow one slips through the cracks and into the normal waiver system). And, unlike the rolling system, owners could still acquire middle of the road players through waivers because even after they use their priority claim for the season, they can still make normal waiver claims. I trust Steve will make the best decision, taking into account how many are for and against this. Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 7:57:05 am PDT |
||
| #17410 | 04/10/2015 8:00:52 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Since the ability to read and understand the English language are apparently not traits used by some posters in this thread, I'll leave it with my vote for the two-tiered (or priority claim button) system or if the RNG can be improved to be less streaky I would go for that. I am still against the rolling (or priority) system based on rating as described for whatever reason for at least the 3rd time in this thread by Dcmrulz in the post above for the same reasons I was from the start. | ||
| #17411 | 04/10/2015 8:29:53 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| Salary restriction need to go as well. That’s another bidding system in disguise, except that instead of being overbid, teams take themselves out of the auction because they can’t afford the salary, or because they are in financial difficulties. All this is about money, not baseball. All this salary talks, priority biddings, this has nothing to do with baseball and have no place in this game. All those things will trump everything else and make all the baseball strategies and management irrelevant. It’s obvious to me there are people here who are clueless about baseball and want to play a money game instead. Most of them are probably playing other sports management games where the winning formula is always the same. Penny pinching, day trading, signing the best players, win. Broken Bat has the merit to be different. You can’t, well, you couldn’t until know, get away here with the same old accountants and merchants crap. There is nothing wrong with the current waiver system and the only thing it needs is to free itself from the shackles of financial restrictions. The fewer the restrictions on the system the more people will be claiming and the better will be the distribution. The real game, the real challenge starts after that, but that’s not a concept baseball clueless people will ever understand. |
||
| #17412 | 04/10/2015 8:41:33 am | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| With all due respect to the great Mig, I think we just need to ignore him for now because it seems he really does not see the obvious reason why we want a change in the waiver system. Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 8:45:18 am PDT |
||
| #17416 | 04/10/2015 8:56:14 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Can we please ignore any trolls, and avoid petty arguments which make this idea less likely to become a reality. Mig... cough cough, sorry, Trolls are simply looking to stir up an argument because he... (cough cough) they don't want this idea to go through. The more we argue, the less likely this awesome idea enters the game. So far, I think a big confrontation has been avoided. Let's keep it that way. My vote is also with the two-tiered system. Anyone else? |
||
| #17417 | 04/10/2015 9:01:15 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| You guys are deluded if you think the 2-tier system is an improvement to anything. On top of everything bad about it already mentioned, that system removes excitement from the game. After spending your precious priority bid, you will have no more chances of winning a top player. In the current system, the chances are very remote, but you will always have a chance every time, every day. In a 2-tier system, after spending the special bid, the chances of winning a top player is 0. No more excitement for months until you eventually get another special bid. |
||
| #17420 | 04/10/2015 9:15:55 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| As long as the door is left open for a rollback should it have unintended consequences, I don't see any reason not to at least give the 2-tier system a trial run. It seems like it would be the easier of the two choices to implement as it seems like an amendment to the current system instead of the complete rewrite the Simyard model would likely involve. I think we've reached a point were something needs to change with waivers. There are more owners which means there is less opportunity for each individual owner. It strains realism to have teams across the board unable to sign mid-level, not elite, but mid-level free agents. You're left to decide between nothing or over-the-hill free agents with bloated contracts that nobody else wanted. That's not really a compelling choice. |
||
| #17421 | 04/10/2015 9:29:59 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| That’s not true. All players are always going to some team. Just because they are not going to the same bunch of whining forum ramblers, it doesn’t mean there is something wrong with the system. If there’s a shortage of players that would be improvements to current teams, then people just have to adjust their expectations. No system will sort that out. |
||
| #17424 | 04/10/2015 10:57:18 am | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| I'm against random. Period. So, I don't care for the current system because, as it has been reported previously, some teams' lucky numbers are coming up more often than others, including multiple times on the same day. I also don't care for the two-tier system because it solves nothing. Everything is still determined randomly. I looked at my notes from this season. The No. 1 pitcher with a salary I could afford was a 23-year-old named Quintero. 102 SI 12/14 potential. I believe he had 175 claims the last time I looked. In the two-tier system, how many of those claims do you think would be "priority" claims. 100? 150? Guess what. After several days of the new season, you'll be hearing this in the forums: "I placed a priority claim on a stud pitcher/prospect every day for the past 10 days and I haven't gotten one. It's not fair!" You solve nothing with this idea, except restricting the number of claims any one team will win. Also, I would prefer that the sports simulations I play attempt to follow reality, with some adjustments made for playability. In this case, there are definite rules regarding waiver claims in MLB. None of them include "priority" claims. None of them include a randomness factor. Claims go to the team with the worst record. Here, we should follow MLB's lead and do the same, with the playability adjustment of a rolling claim system to ensure that all teams have a fair shot at winning claims. (And because we don't want all the studs in Division 6!) |
||
| #17425 | 04/10/2015 11:05:29 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Why does everyone want to make things so hard? If everyone has exactly the same salary cap to spend every season no matter what level they are, then things will be as fair as humanly possible. On the waiver claims leave it like it is, and let people bid on how much they are willing to pay a player on a waiver. Keep the bids hidden and the highest bidder wins. Do away with the stadium finances and all the other crap that don't matter and just have the same salary for everybody. EVERYTHING WILL BE THE SAME FROM THE TOP TEAMS DOWN TO THE BOTTOM TEAMS... | ||
| #17426 | 04/10/2015 11:13:35 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| I am against a rolling claim system and a salary cap. A salary cap just makes this a money game and a rolling claim system is inferior to what we have in my opinion. Tweaking our current system makes more sense to me rather than burning the system down. | ||
| #17427 | 04/10/2015 11:17:03 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Yes lets keep doing the same random B.S. and that way we can keep the forum busy with how unfair it all is. Like I said lets keep making it harder than it needs to be. LMFAO I mean who really wants to play a game where everyone has a equal chance any ways. | ||
| #17428 | 04/10/2015 11:17:52 am | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| @Tiger504 How is a crapshoot better than a rolling claim system? Please explain. |
||
| #17429 | 04/10/2015 11:23:01 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Softshoe, your suggestion would make this a money game. It's not simpler and would take advantage of newer players. Bucfan, two-tiered would make a big difference in your chance to get a player. Even the mega-studs would improve probably by 20%; the lesser ones could easily double your chance of success. Despite what Migg says, it would reward the best baseball decisions. Every team is different and has its own strengths and weaknesses. Owners who simply look at SI or potential and don't consider their team will not target the proper players. |
||
| #17430 | 04/10/2015 11:25:12 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| lmao, A money game ? yeah everyone would have the same money wouldn't they? what the hell do you think you have now???? A MONEY GAME WITH SOME RICH TEAMS AND SOME POOR TEAMS !! SMDH look at your finances now, all I see is money this and money that.. Are you not paying your players a salary now? Then there would be no difference. | ||
| #17431 | 04/10/2015 11:31:27 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| You misunderstand, Softshoe. Your way would turn this into Moneyball. Whoever comes up with the best monetary evaluation for players would win. Also as I said, it would take advantage of newer owners considerably. It would take many seasons to come to a decent understand of price valuation. Besides, that wouldn't even be fun. | ||
| #17433 | 04/10/2015 11:34:28 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| yeah because it so much fun right now, putting in waivers left and right and spending all the time looking at guys to get none of them. At least with a Salary cap If I need a certain position player, I have a good chance of outbidding someone to get what I actually need for my team. | ||
| #17434 | 04/10/2015 11:36:27 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| @Bucfan - how in the world does being stuck at the bottom when the player you really want/need becomes available make sense? Making waiver claims two tiered is about adding strategy and managerial control. | ||
| #17435 | 04/10/2015 11:37:03 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| oh and Mike if I was a new owner, I would much rather come in knowing I have exactly the same money as everybody else to try an assemble a competetive team. Instead some teams have 30 times more money than mine, and I get to play catch up on money and players. | ||
| #17437 | 04/10/2015 11:43:02 am | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| @MukilteoMike I get that. If only 100 of 175 claims on Quintero are priority, chances are improved for those who placed priority claims on the player. But it's still random. If only 2 claims are priority on a player with 5 total claims, yes, your chances are improved. But it's still random. I simply don't want random. Here's another scenario: Team A and Team B both want Player X and Player Y, who clear waivers on the same day. Both Team A and B place priority claims on Player X. Both place regular claims on Player Y. The RNG is working ...... and Team A wins Player X. The RNG is working ...... and Team A wins Player Y. Player B goes to the forum and posts that he still hasn't won a waiver claim ... New system; same outcome. |
||
| #17438 | 04/10/2015 11:44:54 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Looks like the debate is spiraling at the moment. I understand not everyone will like the same idea but I like the framework of this game and prefer tweaks to the current system rather than burning it down and making it something else. | ||
| #17439 | 04/10/2015 11:44:58 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Actually, it is kind of fun. If it isn't fun softshoe, why are you still here? lol So, let's go the "simple" route and change everything about the game. We'll completely change the salary system, add a salary cap. Everyone will be equal, completely dump financials. This is SO SIMPLE!!! Really now, if you don't like like the two tier system, then you must also dislike the current waiver system, because they are practically identical. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE is an extra button which will increase your chances of receiving a star player. "The No. 1 pitcher with a salary I could afford was a 23-year-old named Quintero. 102 SI 12/14 potential. I believe he had 175 claims the last time I looked. In the two-tier system, how many of those claims do you think would be "priority" claims. 100? 150?" This is the absolute extreme. Literally everyone could have used Quintero. He had everything. It was early in the season, most would have used a priority claim on him like you said. But lets take your example. If 175 claimed him normally, then 100 use a priorty claim, your odds of getting him significantly increase. But guess what? If one team gets him, they won't be able to get another player like him all season. I would postulate it will be exceedinly rare for a player to have more than 60 priority claims, let alone 100. Despite what some think, the odds will grow in your favor if you use a priority claim. This does not even mention the increase in strategy. |
||
| #17440 | 04/10/2015 11:48:06 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Still will be random luck then wouldn't it .....lol I bet you like playing slot machines also. | ||
| #17441 | 04/10/2015 11:49:01 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| OMG!! Its Mig!!! lol | ||
| #17442 | 04/10/2015 11:50:56 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| Stop being a creep stalker, you multi account psycho. Spending time doing searches, putting in claims and not winning players is as fun as spending time doing searches and not putting claims because you don't have enough money/priority bid/whatever currency. At some point many teams will be competing to sign the same player, and only one will get him. It will always be like that, whatever the system. People just need to get a grip and stop being hysterical about it. |
||
| #17443 | 04/10/2015 11:51:16 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Don't start calling me names !! | ||
| #17445 | 04/10/2015 12:06:12 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| @Mig It was a joke. Sorry to offend you by saying you had more than one account. (IRONY ALERT) At some point many teams will be competing to sign the same player, and only one will get him. It will always be like that, whatever the system. This is 100% true. Plain and simple. However, if the talent can be better spread out with a very slightly different system, why not do that? I highly doubt this would take Steve an enourmous amount of time to code, and it adds a little bit more fairness and strategy to the game. @softshoe I think he was referring to me Old argument which I thought was history but apparently not. |
||
| #17446 | 04/10/2015 12:08:33 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| how in the world does being stuck at the bottom when the player you really want/need becomes available make sense? Making waiver claims two tiered is about adding strategy and managerial control. I asked in another thread about how many players clear waivers each day during the height of the claiming period -- the first week or so of a new season. No one answered. Honestly, I haven't been around long enough to make an educated guess at that. But let's say, just for discussion, that 100 players have claims placed on them each day for the first four days. That's four hundred players in four days. For the moment, Steve says there are about 200 Bot teams. They do not pursue players on waivers, leaving about 550 human-controlled teams. A portion of those do not pursue players on waivers for whatever reason. Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that 150 human-controlled teams don't place even one claim on waivers. That leaves 400 teams pursuing 400 players. I believe that if you were sitting at No. 1 on the first day and get the first player to clear waivers, you would be back at No. 1 at least by the end of the week. So, I don't think anyone is going to get "stuck at the bottom" for very long. And I honestly think a rolling system will not only guarantee you landing one, but possibly a couple waiver claims at the beginning of each season. For those players who have posted things like "I'm 0 for 69 now," I would think that would be a step in the right direction. As far as strategy goes, how about this: You win a claim on the first day; go to the bottom. Nothing interests you on the second day, but you rise from the bottom 100 spots (equal to the number of claims won that day). Nothing interests you on the third day; you rise another 100 spots. Remember there are only 400 active "claimers." So you've moved from 400 to 200. On the fourth day, there's a pretty good pitcher with a kind of high salary that could step into your rotation right now and a good looking prospect; both have only a few claims on him. You know you're in the middle of the pack on the claim list. What do you do. Go for immediate help, or plan for the future? Or pass on both and wait another day? No shortage of strategy here. |
||
| #17447 | 04/10/2015 12:16:43 pm | ||
|
FurySK Joined: 02/07/2015 Posts: 299 Inactive
| No shortage of strategy for the top end guys looking for the one or two guys to fix their team. loss of basically weeks of work for bottom feeder teams and new owners trying to rebuild rome in a week or two. It's arguably the most frustrating thing for me to see given how bad the team i took over was and still is (and i was one of those 0 for forever on major league waiver pitchers, but i'd rather suffer that fate than screw a newbie over to satisfy the whine in the forums). Still sitting at only about 2.9mil in cash thanks to getting the two most difficult matchups in the cup and zero home games in the first week of the season after starting the offseason at 6mil. |
||
| #17448 | 04/10/2015 12:19:11 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| @Bucfan Look. The rolling waiver system is not a terrible idea, it is better than the current system, but it accomplishes the exact same thing as the two-tiered system. I am supporting the two-tiered system because it is simpler (I think) to code than the rolling waiver system, and it accomplishes the exact same goal -- the even distribution of players. The strategy is slightly different on both ends, but at least on both ends strategy is added. I think there is more strategy on the two-tiered system, but that is my opinion. If Steve, for whatever reason, supports a rolling waiver system and he claims it is easier to code or whatever, I am good with that. I would prefer a two-tiered system, but if its either keep waivers the same or rolling waivers, then I would take rolling. |
||
| #17449 | 04/10/2015 12:21:46 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| This is the absolute extreme. Literally everyone could have used Quintero. He had everything. It was early in the season, most would have used a priority claim on him like you said. But lets take your example. If 175 claimed him normally, then 100 use a priorty claim, your odds of getting him significantly increase. But guess what? If one team gets him, they won't be able to get another player like him all season. Not necessarily. If everyone has used their priority and some team owner decides to clean house mid-season, you could still have a good player claimed on a regular waiver by a team that got a stud early. Not likely, but possible. |
||
| #17451 | 04/10/2015 12:36:55 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| You are correct. There is just enough of a chance that a good player slips through the cracks for owners to keep coming back and claiming good players after their priority claim was used. It adds a bit of excitement. In a rolling system, if you are the very bottom, there is no point in claiming anyone until you move up a good 50-100 spots. Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 12:37:41 pm PDT |
||
| #17452 | 04/10/2015 12:42:49 pm | ||
|
FurySK Joined: 02/07/2015 Posts: 299 Inactive
| i would remain status quo if we had a choice. Chances for everyone are equal. May not mean a fair outcome, but doesn't unnecessarily harm others in the way of self preservation. | ||
| #17453 | 04/10/2015 12:43:07 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| In a rolling system, if you are the very bottom, there is no point in claiming anyone until you move up a good 50-100 spots. If you're at the bottom, you just won a claim!!! Do you have to win the claim on every single player that gets released? |
||
| #17454 | 04/10/2015 12:58:52 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Of course not. I guess the same kind of goes for the two-tiered system. More people here seem to prefer the two-tiered system because it is so similar to the current system. But, I wouldn't have a problem with either one. I think Steve should decide which one to incoorperate. I really don't want to argue any more about rolling or two-tier. I would just like this to be decided. Rolling or two-tier, i don't care. Let's just pick one and move on with the game. |
||
| #17456 | 04/10/2015 1:19:52 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| Who's arguing? It's just a healthy debate. Well, except for that softshoe guy. |
||
| #17458 | 04/10/2015 1:41:07 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Buc, except most of those claims are by teams that are middle of the pack or worse on players that wouldn't help really good teams. Thus the really good teams would sit at the top til a player that actually helped them came along and then the mid-tier and worse teams wouldn't get a shot at the top players. That is the problem with the rolling system, and the difference between it and the two-tiered system. With the two-tiered system the lower teams would be get a top player as long as they saved the priority one for a guy worthy of it. Sure the first season some newbs would blow it on a 12 POT, but they would learn from the mistake and not do it the second season. There is a difference between the rolling and two-tiered systems, the two-tiered system is better than the current one while the rolling system is not. | ||
| #17468 | 04/10/2015 3:23:08 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Sorry Bucfan, but I don't drink any ones Kool Aid ! I have my own thoughts and opinions and I express them just like anybody else, if folks don't like them they can just skip over my posts, and all will still be well. | ||
| #17474 | 04/10/2015 3:48:18 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| Wow…this thread has really taken off. Let’s keep everything about the issue and not make it personnel. Seems like one of the key complaints of the current system is the random factor. Of the two prevailing suggestions, it seems like the Two Tiered system would still depend largely on random factors (except for maybe that one priority claim per season). Seems like a Rolling Waiver system wouldn’t depend on random at all. Wouldn’t that be preferable? Steve |
||
| #17477 | 04/10/2015 3:58:11 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I there any significant difference in the coding and time/work that would go into making either system work Steve? | ||
| #17478 | 04/10/2015 4:00:22 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Steve, what ever would take the most Random Luck out of the game would be a great place to start. I like the idea of a rolling waiver system the best out of the 2 choices, at least then when it is my turn I can get who ever I want or wait until a guy I want comes along. Seeing my Salary Cap option is frowned upon, and hurts others feelings, I will keep that to myself for awhile !! |
||
| #17479 | 04/10/2015 4:04:02 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I have no problem with the RNG. I still prefer the the two-tier waiver system. | ||
| #17481 | 04/10/2015 4:06:28 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Yes, the two-tiered process still incorporates some luck. For many reasons listed above, though, Imany of us think it is a better system for this game. | ||
| #17482 | 04/10/2015 4:13:17 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| I there any significant difference in the coding and time/work that would go into making either system work Steve? The rolling waiver is the easiest to implement. Each team just has a "last waiver claim" parameter added to its record and when you process the waiver claims, you just order oldest to newest. Winner has his parameter updated. Steve |
||
| #17483 | 04/10/2015 4:20:36 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Edit: Well if the rolling claim system is easiest, I'll go with it. Should be fine for me since I can be really patient and have a team already built. Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 4:23:07 pm PDT |
||
| #17484 | 04/10/2015 4:26:34 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Newtman, the rolling system will give the new players the same chance at a great player. If they can't wait for a great one on the rolling system, what makes you think they are gonna wait on the priority one? Good managers will get what position players they actually need for there team, bad managers wont. IMO patience for getting what position player you need for your team will be needed in both systems. | ||
| #17485 | 04/10/2015 4:47:50 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Softshoe, there's a huge difference in the two. With the rolling list they can claim far more lower level players and not have to be patient. With the two-tiered way, you only get one priority pick a year so you need to be patient to make sure you get the right guy. | ||
| #17488 | 04/10/2015 5:20:31 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Mike if they are gonna be patient in one system they will be patient in the other as well. I don't know about you, but no one offered me a baby sitting class when I started playing this game. This is not rocket Science we are doing here. | ||
| #17491 | 04/10/2015 5:33:19 pm | ||
|
Bucfan Joined: 09/23/2014 Posts: 50 Inactive
| My choices in the order of preference: 1. Rolling system 2. Priority system 3. Leave it as is |
||
| #17497 | 04/10/2015 7:37:52 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| Heres some of my queries for a rolling system.. 1. Where will the bot team be incorporated in the rolling ranking? 2. How about the new managers? 3. And, how do the rolling works? because in my understanding even if you are in the bottom you still have a small chance of getting a waiver right? |
||
| #17498 | 04/10/2015 7:48:22 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| 1. Where will the bot team be incorporated in the rolling ranking? Bot teams don't make waiver claims...only sign occasional free agents. 2. How about the new managers? Since they are taking over bot teams (who don't make waiver claims), they should be near the front. 3. And, how do the rolling works? because in my understanding even if you are in the bottom you still have a small chance of getting a waiver right? Rather than being randomly assigned, the player goes to the team who last waiver claim was the oldest. If nobody above the bottom put in a claim, then bottom guy gets him. Otherwise, no chance -- but, of course, he's on the bottom because he just got somebody. A lot of fantasy football leagues use the rolling waiver claim process. In MLB, the team with the worst record gets the top waiver spot, but that's not really applicable with a tiered league system like we have. Steve Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 7:53:36 pm PDT |
||
| #17501 | 04/10/2015 7:57:29 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| I am fine with that then. So, are you decided on it steve? |
||
| #17502 | 04/10/2015 9:11:42 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Well, its not exactly what I was hoping for, but it is better than the current system. I say we try it. But, three quick questions for Steve. I think I already asked the first one earlier in the thread. 1. If two teams (team a, team b) claim the two different players who come off of waivers at the same time, how are the players prioritized? Let's say Team a holds the top spot in the rolling system and Team b holds the second spot. How do you determine which player goes to Team A? Do the owners prioritize their claims in a seperate page? 2. Will the waiver order be public? 3. When would this system be incoorperated and how will the initial order be calculated? By team rating with the lowest ratings holding the top spots? Updated Friday, April 10 2015 @ 9:14:15 pm PDT |
||
| #17505 | 04/11/2015 3:35:50 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| The rolling waiver is the easiest to implement. Each team just has a "last waiver claim" parameter added to its record and when you process the waiver claims, you just order oldest to newest. Winner has his parameter updated. Steve In that case I would have to move my support to the rolling waiver system. I'd personally prefer the two tier system, but the rolling option isn't that far behind it in my mind. I know that waivers aren't all processed at the exact same moment, so with multiple waivers you'll never know the order in which they'll be processed. For the times that you happen to hold the top spot, it might be smart to whittle your claims down to the one player you really want for that day. |
||
| #17509 | 04/11/2015 6:55:42 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| For the times that you happen to hold the top spot, it might be smart to whittle your claims down to the one player you really want for that day. Yep, if you're high on the list use targeted claims on only players you really don't mind going to the back of the line for. If you're at the back of the line the current throw out 20 claims and hope one falls to you will continue to rule. Updated Saturday, April 11 2015 @ 6:56:09 am PDT |
||
| #17514 | 04/11/2015 7:31:06 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| I guess what would kinda be cool is at the beginning of each season the lowest ranked team gets the first pick and so on. It would continue in that order the rest of season, and the following season it would reset to the lowest ranked team that year. Steve would have to figure out how he would insert new team owners in the middle of the season as far as the order of there pick. It would be nice to somehow know where you are at on the list as far as order goes, not sure if Steve could set up a page that would somehow keep up to date on who is next and so on. Just throwing things out there.... | ||
| #17517 | 04/11/2015 8:10:49 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I guess what would kinda be cool is at the beginning of each season the lowest ranked team gets the first pick and so on. No it wouldn't, resetting the order each season would mean many teams would never make the front of the line. |
||
| #17519 | 04/11/2015 8:35:04 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Every team will make the front of the line every season at some point, unless you think everyone is gonna be waiting for that 110 plus skill index waiver. let them if they want, plenty of mid 90 to 105 players I would love to have throughout the season. | ||
| #17520 | 04/11/2015 10:45:26 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| I still prefer a two tier system but will support whichever option Steve decides on. | ||
| #17521 | 04/11/2015 12:59:10 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I'll quit the game if it resets the order every season with a rolling order, just saying that point blank. I also know several people would be happy with that, don't really care. My support for a rolling order is only if it doesn't reset at the end of the season. I'd go for the current RNG before a rolling order that resets each season. Edit: The vast majority of the top tier players go through waivers at the beginning of the year, so each season the bottom ranked teams would get to eat up most of the top talent. It would encourage tanking in order to get a shot at the top players. Updated Saturday, April 11 2015 @ 1:02:58 pm PDT |
||
| #17522 | 04/11/2015 1:06:12 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Right with Newtman. I wouldn't quit, but I would prefer the current system over one that resets every season. Newtman also gave excellent reasons why it would be detrimental to the game. Updated Saturday, April 11 2015 @ 1:08:38 pm PDT |
||
| #17524 | 04/11/2015 3:37:48 pm | ||
|
mytton Joined: 11/15/2014 Posts: 45 Inactive
| Late to this discussion, but here's my 2c worth: I'm really very wary of this proposed rolling waiver system. I think it will be all to the advantage of managers of established teams who can sit and wait for the few good players who will improve their team. Managers starting out with weak teams are likely to want to be very active in waiver claims. Not on top players but on easier-to-get players who will incrementally improve their team. If doing this keeps dropping them to the bottom of the list they will have zero chance when a big player becomes available. One possible saving grace might be if everyone gets cagier about making claims at all and more decent players will make it through to free agency - but that's a big maybe. For the record I would be very happy with the priority claim idea, or just with the status quo, which although it is too random for some, at least encourages involvement by having no down side to pursuing as many claims as you have time to scout out. |
||
| #17528 | 04/11/2015 4:16:53 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I've definately seen more people in favor of the two-tier system on here. But, in the end, its all about what Steve wants to do. If he would be willing to implement the two-tier idea, I'm all for it. But, he seemed to express more interest in the rolling idea, so that's what looks like is going to happen. I still think the rolling idea worth a try though. Updated Saturday, April 11 2015 @ 4:18:05 pm PDT |
||
| #17529 | 04/11/2015 4:21:19 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| Easier to add is also easier to remove if the rolling waiver option turns out to be unworkable. | ||
| #17534 | 04/11/2015 5:27:28 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| The biggest question right now is when will it be installed in the game. For me, it should be put into the game as soon as it is coded. Their is no point of waiting for anything. |
||
| #17535 | 04/11/2015 5:48:00 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| I would suggest that any proposed change occur in the off season. | ||
| #17592 | 04/13/2015 3:20:53 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| The rolling system is also a bad idea. With it, for every player on waivers that is an improvement to a team, that team’s manager is always going to be asking himself if claiming that player is worth moving down to the end of the line, and in most cases no claim would be put. As a consequence, there would be a dramatic decrease in the global number of claims puts, which means many, many players would reach free agency unclaimed, just to be hoarded by people who are willing to get up from bed at 3am. That would be a huge step back in this game and it would completely cripple the whole purpose of the waiver system. The current system is the best and fairest of them all. |
||
| #17594 | 04/13/2015 4:43:46 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| ^^^^^^^^ Not Even Worth A Reply !! | ||
| #17595 | 04/13/2015 4:54:11 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| My concerns on the rolling system echo Mig's - and that's coming from someone who's up at 3am anyway! :op My hypothesis is waivers will become a slow-moving (i.e. seasons long) queue for rarely-released 15 potential megastars, whilst free-agency becomes a bun-fight over guys that currently merit a few waiver claims. Happy to be proven wrong... |
||
| #17597 | 04/13/2015 5:14:06 am | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| lets implement it now and lets find out | ||
| #17600 | 04/13/2015 5:39:30 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Well I will tell you what, I hope all of you wait on the 15 potential mega stars with waivers, because I will be more than happy to get several level 100 skill players to fill out my team, while you all wait for the Superstar. For those who want to wait for the 15 pot guys that is great, there will be plenty of guys like me filling there team up with good maybe not great players who we actually need. Just because the guy in front of you does not put in a waiver claim does not mean you have to wait on them to get your man. | ||
| #17603 | 04/13/2015 5:58:52 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I have a team full of 100+ SI position players, or guys who will be shortly. Why would I bid on a guy no better than what I already have? | ||
| #17607 | 04/13/2015 7:09:30 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| well Newt you are doing great then, I will happily take some young 100 Si guys on my team. I have a team full of older players, not to mention all my pitchers are 32 years old and most are in the 80's in SI. Wonder what I could have done last season with a team of good pitchers !! Once again to each there own....If you want to wait on the hailmary then by all means do it. Some of us I am sure wont be waiting for just that 1 guy. I have been waiting all waiver season for 1 decent claim, turned in over 100 now and nothing yet but a backup 1B that no one else wanted, and also a 34 year old 88 si pitcher that no one else wanted that I had to give 1.95 mill for. Yeah I would love some 100 si players. If you already have them, then maybe you should be happy for what you have, cause a lot of us don't ! | ||
| #17609 | 04/13/2015 7:27:16 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I'm moderately shocked, but I agree with Mig. I think rolling waivers work well for small regular fantasy leagues, but they aren't good for mega-leagues with hundreds of players. | ||
| #17610 | 04/13/2015 7:39:24 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| There very well may be some significant unintended consequences with the rolling waivers. That's why I prefer the priority system. It tweaks an already fair system. I can understand guys who are new and need a lot of bodies being excited about the opportunity to overhaul their team in one season but building a champion should take time. I don't really want this game to pander to hit it and quit it type players. I picked up a few players my first season and committed to a philosophy. Over time I have picked up a few key players through waivers and the draft. I have rented a couple of older guys each season and still am this season. |
||
| #17611 | 04/13/2015 7:45:51 am | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| @Mike/Mig I think, it will work with a league like us but it will not work like how the rolling system of smaller leagues like the fantasy leagues do. With a bigger league, we actually have more strategy to go for. We can do the: 1. Be patient and wait for the superstar 2. Get as many all stars as possible 3. Accumulate very good players 4. Combination of those three I actually think a rolling system will be fun. |
||
| #17612 | 04/13/2015 7:49:46 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Tiger touched on an important point there, I built my position player roster over time and developed all of them at the very least from no major league experience, many played minor league ball for me. Pitchers are another story, much harder to get ones who are going to develop into quality players. Of course I have seven pitchers who will make their major league debut in the next two to three seasons, so I may make that pool a bit deeper soon. | ||
| #17615 | 04/13/2015 7:59:12 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| I prefer the rolling system myself, but really I wish Steve would put up a voting poll or something, or just say which direction we are going, so I know in what direction to take my team. With the older players I got, and there higher salaries and no hope to be found in the current waiver system, it might be in my best interest to cut all the salaries and 30 plus year old players from my team and go in rebuild mode for 5 years until my minor league players become ready to play in the big league. Then I will have some finances still left to keep them around throughout there good years. Either way it is not worth arguing over, just want to know which way we are going. Updated Monday, April 13 2015 @ 7:59:47 am PDT |
||
| #17621 | 04/13/2015 9:48:40 am | ||
|
Hardcastle Joined: 11/03/2014 Posts: 25 Inactive
| some ideas:
Updated Monday, April 13 2015 @ 9:56:31 am PDT |
||
| #17657 | 04/13/2015 9:06:19 pm | ||
|
FurySK Joined: 02/07/2015 Posts: 299 Inactive
| no need to turn waivers into a circlejerk of trying to block one another from getting players we need from the team. Still laughing that this has turned into what it has. We're trying to find a way to appease some people who felt the current system was out to get them, and trying to make it more restrictive for everyone else and them so that everyone gets screwed, rather than trying to cope with the fact that what we have now is just about as close to fair as it is going to get. |
||
| #17672 | 04/14/2015 8:50:03 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| A Two tiered system would be almost exactly the same as the current system and it would appease those not happy with the current system. Just saying... | ||
| #17675 | 04/14/2015 10:28:12 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Slug don't be talking for the rest of us, because the two tier system sure wouldn't appease me. LOL Updated Tuesday, April 14 2015 @ 10:29:50 am PDT |
||
| #17680 | 04/14/2015 10:54:15 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I agree with Slug. The two-tier system is the change that is most like what already exists. As a result the unforeseen negative impact is small while still adding a strategic element to the process. It's easily my preferred choice. Maintaining the current waiver system would be my second choice. |
||
| #17681 | 04/14/2015 11:34:53 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| LMAO, Mike if everyone was as lucky as you in the waiver system, we all would like it just like you do. I see you added another nice one last night.... SMDH | ||
| #17685 | 04/14/2015 12:16:19 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I admit this season I have gotten a bit lucky; I'm an amazing 0.7 players successfully claimed over what I should have. Ooooo, lucky me. For my four seasons here, I'm still more than a handful of players short of even expectations. The two-tiered system distributes top waivers very well, which is why I like it. The rolling waivers has too many side effects. I've seen it in other games and am not excited about the prospect of living with that again. |
||
| #17688 | 04/14/2015 1:16:39 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| to each there own, but whatever..... Another thing that might help on the amount of claims on a player is to lower the waiver time. Make the waiver time only 24 hours, if people can't log in once every 24 hours why should they even be rewarded a chance for a top prospect? Why should a guy who checks in once every 3 or 4 days have the same lucky chance at a top prospect as a daily player? nothing else in life is that way, well unless it is something the government has control over I guess. | ||
| #17698 | 04/14/2015 4:09:01 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| We used to have very short waiver claim period (players went directly to free agency) and everyone complained that it was unfair that people who spent all day trolling for free agents got all the good one. So that's why the claim period is set as it is. Steve |
||
| #17701 | 04/14/2015 4:59:29 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Steve so is any of this waiver stuff going to change or just stay the same as it is? I am past the point of really caring, just wanting to know which way to take my team. Apparently the guy who checks in 1 time a week should have the same chance of getting good players as the guys who plays and checks in everyday. To bad I can't get my boss at work to feel the same way. | ||
| #17706 | 04/14/2015 6:20:12 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| I am going to quit blowing this forum up with my thoughts about the waivers, I am taking my team on a 5 year complete rebuild mode, gonna be cutting most all players that don't fit within my plan when 5 seasons get here, and cut all players cost that I can for the next few seasons, so there will be a lot more guys hitting the waiver market. Happy Hunting !! | ||
| #17729 | 04/15/2015 11:15:58 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Ok, what is going on with this? Is something going to change? | ||
| #17736 | 04/15/2015 3:40:42 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| Here is my currently thinking... I’m considering implementing the rolling waiver system at some point because: 1. It’s widely used in other games. 2. There is no random element (ergo eliminates people’s concerns about RNG). 3. Simple to implement. The two tiered system has two major drawbacks as I see it. 1. Except for the one priority claim, it’s essentially the same system as we have currently. So we haven’t improved the system for ~90% of the claims. 2. More complicated to use. More complicated to implement. And if really necessary, we could add a priority system later. Steve |
||
| #17737 | 04/15/2015 3:50:13 pm | ||
|
Spoonerific Joined: 01/17/2013 Posts: 339 Inactive
| Rolling waiver as in utilizing a priority order mechanic (you are given a number and if your number is the highest for that waiver and cover all other parameters like roster space, funds, etc. ) then you'd get that player and move to the bottom of the pile? I haven't really kept up with this forum. |
||
| #17744 | 04/15/2015 6:39:41 pm | ||
|
cqk328 Joined: 07/28/2014 Posts: 289 Unalaska Alaskans VI.20
| @Spoonerific I believe that's essentially what it is. From what I've read that's my basic understanding of it. | ||
| #17747 | 04/15/2015 8:24:37 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Ugh. | ||
| #17758 | 04/16/2015 7:35:01 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Thumbs up !! | ||
| #17778 | 04/16/2015 6:29:32 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Worth a shot... It can always be changed back or adjusted | ||
| #17779 | 04/16/2015 6:45:35 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| I wouldn't expect anything to change back once a change is made | ||
| #17784 | 04/16/2015 8:03:55 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I’m considering implementing the rolling waiver system at some point because: ?? So are priority claims. 2. There is no random element (ergo eliminates people’s concerns about RNG). Tell them to buy a flashlight to ward off the bogeyman. And randomness is going to be taken out of the draft then, right? The two tiered system has two major drawbacks as I see it. It would improve more than 90% of the high-quality claims and I think that's what most people are interested in. 2. More complicated to use. More complicated to implement. I can't comment about the implementation because I don't know squat about programming. However, if owners will still be allowed to claim more than one player per day, which I'm confident owners will want, the rolling system is more complicated than the two-tiered one. How is the order determined? Owners could wait to the last minute to put in the claim, so it's not as if we would know what would happen. It becomes a mess. With the two-tiered system, the order doesn't matter. You only have one priority per season; you're either thrown into that pool or the secondary pool. |
||
| #17785 | 04/16/2015 8:36:36 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Mike, I agree that a two tiered system would be better, but frankly, a rolling system would accomplish the same objectives people here are wanting. The rolling system may not do it as well, but at least it does the job. I know a little bit about programming; however, I'm not an expert and I'm not claiming to be. But, Steve's comment regarding ease in implementing the rolling system makes sense because all you have to do is assign a number to an owner and the lowest (Or highest depending on Steve's preference) number who claims a player gets him, then you assign that owner's number to 756 (Or 1, again, depending on Steve's preference) after moving all other owners behind him/her up 1 spot. With Steve's experience, I imagine it would be a breeze to implement. This being said, Steve said that the rolling system would be easier to implement, not that it would be difficult to incorperate the two-tiered system. There are a few complications which would make the two-tiered system a bit harder than the rolling system like, for example, creating a new look for the claiming button at the bottom of the player page and in the free agent menu. In addition, Steve would have to code that players receive no more than 1 per season, and a couple of other miscellaneous details. I think, personally, that it wouldn't be a terrible burden to implement it, if it was ever decided to down the road. I am still leaning towards the two-tiered system, but lets be honest. Everything owners complained about (Oddly, it was mostly the RNG, which makes no sense at all. If you are playing NBA 2K15 and you miss a three-pointer when your shot was almost perfect, do you yell at the RNG claiming its an inaccurate generator?) would be resolved with the rolling system, I think it might slightly improve the waiver system, barring any unforeseen consequenses, and it will satify owners. The betterment of the game and player enjoyment while playing the game are probably the two biggest priorities. The rolling waiver system might do both. There's no point in beating a dead horse. If Steve doesn't want to code it, he won't. End of story. Its his game, and I applaud the fact he's even listens to other's opinions. Other games claim they listen to suggestions when they actually don't. I'm content with the fact that every suggestion is at least considered and the fact he has the game's best interests at heart. Updated Thursday, April 16 2015 @ 8:37:29 pm PDT |
||
| #17786 | 04/16/2015 10:01:08 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| I just want something to be implemented already and lets find out if it will improve the game |
||
| #17787 | 04/16/2015 10:01:08 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| I just want something to be implemented already and lets find out if it will improve the game |
||
| #17788 | 04/16/2015 10:07:35 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| The scenario I see happening is that everyone is going to be saving their priority claim for the next superstar. When he hits the waiver wire, a bunch of folks use their priority claim (expecting to get the player). One lucky club gets him, the rest still have the same feelings/complaints as they do with the current system. As the season rolls on, more superstars are assigned to lucky clubs. But as the season comes to a close, there are still a lot of teams who, although they used their priority claim multiple times, have never gotten a top player. So they either are forced to waste their claim before the September deadline hits or see it reset at the start of the next season. It eliminates the scenario whereby one club might get lucky on multiple claims in a season. But I don’t see it really improving the system for most clubs. With a completely deterministic mechanism, there is no luck involved…you can employ any strategy you like and you successes and failures are yours alone. Steve |
||
| #17790 | 04/16/2015 10:43:09 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| totally agree with Steve. I believe the rolling order is the better option to implement first. | ||
| #17791 | 04/16/2015 11:10:20 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| I understand all of that, but no one has addressed the problem of multiple claims for the same day under the rolling waiver system. Would that no longer be allowed? And if it still would be permitted, how would that be resolved? When implemented, be prepared for the MF quick-draw competition. That's Midnight Frenzy, by the way. For the marginal waiver players, owners won't claim them and will instead hunt them down at midnight by trying to time the release to free agency. I guess you can argue that's a skill, but it's really just another crapshoot. Then again, maybe it's like trying to hit a knuckleball; wait for it, wait for it, guess, swing! Updated Thursday, April 16 2015 @ 11:11:19 pm PDT |
||
| #17792 | 04/17/2015 12:16:46 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| I see plenty of owners claiming the marginal waiver players. If I am in the mid pack or back of line and someone I could use comes up for waiver claim I am putting a claim on him. What would I have to lose win the waiver and head back towards the back again? | ||
| #17793 | 04/17/2015 12:49:40 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Haselrig - nice analogy on the RNG... All I was advocating there is we check it's coded to work as intended before changing anything, and following Steve's comments we can eliminate that as a potential resolution. Mike - I'm with you, but I imagine it's pretty straightforward to order players by the time they're added to a given day's waiver clearances. I'd have thought that's likely happening at the moment in case you try and claim two players with only one roster spot free. Sounds like what we're doing here is creating a separate line for the front of the rollercoaster. Those looking to overhaul their teams quickly with better players can keep going round and round, but their team's only going to get so good before they want to join the line for the front; and as I said before I imagine that's going to be a long wait. Thinking back to the off-season I probably put in about 50 claims on various players; but even with my ropey division 6 team, under this new system there's only about 5 of those I'd have given-up my place in line for. |
||
| #17794 | 04/17/2015 2:01:48 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| My analogy from the other waiver thread regarding the RNG probably works here too: About RNG, I was going on the "Check that it's plugged in first" doctrine when I was talking about checking it. When your computer doesn't come on, don't go in ripping stuff off the motherboard before you've checked that the computer is plugged in to the outlet. If Steve says the RNG is solid, that's good enough for me and we can move to the next "fix". |
||
| #17795 | 04/17/2015 2:33:13 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| It baffles me how the same people who have gotten all worked up when one team won two waivers in the same day are now ok with a system that would allow one team to sign several unclaimed waivers in the same day. Sure, we’re talking about different types of talents here but, if in one hand the rolling system would prevent teams from winning 2 top waivers in the same day, something that rarely happens, and when it does it has no significant impact in the long run; on the other hand it creates a much bigger problem with the average players. If it’s important to fairly distribute the top players among teams, it’s even more important to distribute the other types of players, because you can’t built a winning team with those 2 top players you were very lucky to win in one day, but you can quickly build a winning team if you are given the chance to sign in bulk all the average players no one else wanted to spent their spot on the line with. |
||
| #17796 | 04/17/2015 3:13:17 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I don't disagree that that's a way the rolling waiver system might go Mig. I'd preferred the two-tier system because it minimized the possible downsides to the rolling system you're describing here. I'm hopeful that if it turns out the rolling system causes more problems than it fixes, that it will be tweaked or rolled back. I think that's it's main advantage over the two-tiered system. The fact that it's relatively simple to add to the game, or remove from the game if it comes to that. |
||
| #17797 | 04/17/2015 3:24:33 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Okay I need a clarification Do i Understand that right? Under the rolling system you are only allowed to place one claim a day? |
||
| #17798 | 04/17/2015 3:33:35 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| My interpertation would be you can place as many as you like, but if any of them are contested by someone in front of you in the queue, you lose. As soon as you win a player you go to the back of the line. |
||
| #17799 | 04/17/2015 3:49:54 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| @hasel The 2-tier system favors the stronger teams. I’d probably benefit from it more than any other team, yet I’m against it because I’m sure the current system is better than any of the ones that have been suggested. I don’t need to guinea pig the game to find that out. |
||
| #17800 | 04/17/2015 3:56:31 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| In the two-tier model, you'd only get one claim. Any possible damage would be very limited. I don't have any experience with a rolling waiver system, but I would think the effects, both negative and positive, would be in effect throughout the season. Different approaches and different strategies would be needed and the system would evolve over time. I don't think your most dire predictions are likely, but an adjustment period would be necessary before we could fully judge the effects. I think it's worth the risk to at least try the rolling system before we condemn it. |
||
| #17801 | 04/17/2015 4:07:23 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| After the harm is done there is no going to back. The rolling system would open up a door for people to get up at 3 am and sign several unclaimed waivers. I guarantee there are people who are willing and would do that, and then what? How many times would that have to happen before people realize it was a bad move? And what would you do at that point? Would you take away all those players from those teams? Are we going to play Broken Bat or Broken Bed? |
||
| #17802 | 04/17/2015 4:22:23 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| Yes, but what's to prevent me from putting a waiver on a guy when I'm lower on the claim totem pole? It's all about strategy and the current makeup of each individual team. Right now my roster wouldn't benefit from many more 100 SI guys, so I likely hold on for a superstar or a great looking prospect. Teams with holes to fill might be very happy to land four or five 100 SI guys per season and feel it's worth claiming them instead of letting them get to free agency. It's all about the strategy you'd employ. | ||
| #17803 | 04/17/2015 4:55:22 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| My interpertation would be you can place as many as you like, but if any of them are contested by someone in front of you in the queue, you lose. Here's the problem with that--you don't know the order the players are going to be awarded. Example--There a catcher and a shortstop you like. You're willing to put in a claim for either, but you'd rather have the catcher if he's available. Broken Bat decides to award the shortstop first and you're first on the list; you get him. However, you also were first on the list for the catcher who is your preferred choice, but because it randomly placed the shortstop first you don't get the catcher. That will happen a lot when you're in the bottom third of the line, but happen even when you're considerably higher. Then there's the added problem of "if I get my top guy, I also want to put my claim in for a couple other low end guys, but only if I get the best guy." You don't want to drop to the bottom of the list for the lesser ones. Example--you're at 300 on the list. There's a first baseman you'd take with that spot. There are also two outfielders you'd like to have, but only if you drop to the bottom of the list after taking the first baseman. You probably won't risk putting in your bottom rung claims because if your top one gets trumped, you wasted your high spot on a nothing. After the season flip, this would probably happen every single day. Even throughout the season it will happen at times, but it will be a daily occurrence when the new season kicks in. Definitely not a fan. |
||
| #17804 | 04/17/2015 5:01:38 am | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Just seen I made a typo in 'interpretation' - oops. I don't think it's anything that couldn't be fixed with the addition of a sequential number applied to every player coming out of waivers on any given day in the order they're added... but I'm with you - not a fan. |
||
| #17813 | 04/17/2015 5:37:02 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| @hasel That won’t happen. With a rolling system, every claim will have a cost, the cost of moving to the end of the line, and in most cases people will not be willing to pay the price. My bet is most of those players that usually get fewer than 10 claims right now will not get any with a rolling system. In the end this is just another form of bidding system with currency other than money where you’re allowed to use unrelated baseball strategy to compete. On top of that, lurkers and no lifers get back an unfair advantage over casual players. All in all, it feels the game is moving away from baseball further and further… |
||
| #17815 | 04/17/2015 5:40:48 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I don't have any experience with a rolling system, so I can't really speak to how it will work here. I will say, I'd avoid absolutes on what I will and won't do in that new system. Bargain shopping might be as viable a strategy as headhunting the top guys. Can't say until I'm in it. | ||
| #17829 | 04/17/2015 8:29:19 am | ||
|
Frankebasta Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 885 Kodiak Mules III.3 
| After the harm is done there is no going to back. The rolling system would open up a door for people to get up at 3 am and sign several unclaimed waivers. I'm in Italy: it's gonna be very handy to sign FAs after waivers deadline. It's 9am here! In fact, I did just that last week (Kane), signed 30 seconds after he was declared FA. Gonna happen a lot more often, as I certainly not going to lose my picking order on marginal players. That's absolutely a step back for Broken bat: the waiver system wascreated to give any manager the same, fair, chance to get any player of his lliking. In contrast to people favored by time zone, or... lacking commitments in Real Life, stockpiling prospects. Which, BTW, that's how the current dynasties ruling over BB were built. One more issue I didn't hear any comment for, is the placement of Bot teams in the picking order. If they're treated like anyone else, they will naturally fall to the top. So much so a new, shrewd, manager will choose his newly assigned BB team JUST because of that fringe benefit. It only takes just ONE smart new manager a week, picking first among human teams, to erase any chance long time managers have to get those prized pot15 FAs we all covet. On the side: potentially open to fraud! There might be some nasty user who opens a new account in order to screw his fellow managers's picking rights. Picking the star player not for his own ( main) team, but for a foo one. Only to keep that player away from the competition. What's the answer to that? |
||
| #17831 | 04/17/2015 8:44:51 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| Maybe a unofficial and not 100% secure poll would allow people who don't usually participate in the forums a chance to be heard without having to put their name on their opinion: http://strawpoll.me/4143213 |
||
| #17833 | 04/17/2015 9:32:13 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| @Frank Couldn’t agree more. Regarding your BTW remark, I don’t know which teams you are referring to, but if you’re referring to my team you’re dead wrong. I still remember the days when one team alone would sign sometimes 20 players in the first days of the season and I couldn’t sign anyone during that period because there were people refreshing player pages every 5 minutes to sign players as soon as they came off waivers, and obviously I couldn’t, not wanted to compete with that. I was probably one of the most vocal people against that system, still am, and if it had stayed that way I would have stopped playing long ago. Saying I have built my team abusing that system is utter nonsense. |
||
| #17834 | 04/17/2015 9:58:05 am | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Not a fan if this goes to guys scooping the free agent market. With two tier you would only get one priority claim a season but would have as many other claims as you wanted otherwise. |
||
| #17835 | 04/17/2015 10:01:41 am | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| ummmm, Tiger you would get as many as you wanted with a rolling system as well.SMDH | ||
| #17836 | 04/17/2015 11:44:34 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| softshoe's valid point here is that the guys who have claims now would still have claims because the people who have shoddy teams would still see those guys as improvements and would take advantage of the pickiness of the people in front of them to vastly improve their teams. There would be no free agent scooping, because the teams in the bottom 100 of the order would have zero incentive to wait for their chance at a 15 potential after all the people in front of them when they could just pick up the guy (12/13 potential) who is an improvement which does drop to them. The guys who drop through to waivers now because they suck, still would, while the guys who would be improvements would still be picked up by the active teams at the end of the queue. If you're already at 756 in line, there is zero reason to let any useful player go past you. The only valid point left is the fact players could start multi-accounting taking all the bots left in order to deny active managers from getting the best waiver wire players. Honestly, people could do that now though, if you own 5 accounts/teams and place a waiver claim with all five you are 5 times more likely to get the player on one of your teams than the person who only has one team. Not quite the same thing, but there will always be ways for people determined to cheat to improve their chances. |
||
| #17837 | 04/17/2015 11:56:52 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| @Mike, what it will mean is that if you are high on the list you will only put in claims on THE guy you want coming off waivers any particular night. Thus the higher you get on the list the more people will have to think before just mashing the place claim button on everyone who is halfway decent. I'm actually in favor of a system that rewards thinking strategically like that. |
||
| #17839 | 04/17/2015 12:32:35 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Thank you Newtman, for saying exactly what I was trying to say.... |
||
| #17842 | 04/17/2015 1:44:22 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Ummmmm softshoe, I asked the question earlier and got no answer so you'll just have to put up with my paranoia over this system that i dont understand that ya all want so bad. Either way, I prefer the two tier system and feel as entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. Ps...edit...I've never found it to be a successful tactic when trying to sway people to dumbf***er them. Only do that when you are trying to beat them into submission...that being the case, I'm so firmly in the two tier camp now you won't get me out of it. Updated Friday, April 17 2015 @ 1:50:50 pm PDT |
||
| #17843 | 04/17/2015 1:47:14 pm | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Frankebasta raises a very good point - I hadn't even considered the deliberate manipulation / cheating potential of a rolling system. I'm front of the queue. What's to stop me acquiring the Moore Colts with a secondary account and releasing this guy: http://brokenbat.org/player/75391 No one else could touch him as long as I get my claim in... |
||
| #17844 | 04/17/2015 1:53:04 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I actually still think the two tiered system would be better if the RNG used something like mouse movement of users or something else that doesn't generate the streakiness that the current RNG does. Some streaks are to be expected in truly random number generation, but the system clock simply has too many streaks. Another one happened just last night, the same guy won the jackpot on Roy Morrison and won another guy with multiple claims as well. I don't go for polemics though, any point made must be valid and accurate regardless of whether I'm actually on the same side in terms of agreeing with the position. Tends to result in me being somewhat like a live grenade in a debate because I will poke holes in my sides' argument too if it is done poorly. | ||
| #17845 | 04/17/2015 2:00:27 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I have some other thoughts on that Jalapeno, one is that guys with a 110+ SI could not be released by a team until 30 days after an owner has taken over the team (this would also prevent real noobs from making boneheaded mistakes). That would prevent superstars from being manipulated (at least quickly) | ||
| #17848 | 04/17/2015 2:39:33 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| Why not just have teams drop to the bottom of the waiver list the moment they are relinquished by a human owner? In addition, maybe bot teams can not move up the list at all? They would just be ordered by latest to be relinquished. A new, human owner would then have to move up the list from the bottom. That would also clear up a question I'd had about how we'll know who the real #1 claimant is. In a system where bot teams move up the list, they would just logjam at the top correct? | ||
| #17849 | 04/17/2015 2:40:17 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Tiger, not sure you know this, but I don't care what camp you are in or not in. I wasn't trying to belittle you or anything else. I was stating a fact, not speculation. | ||
| #17851 | 04/17/2015 2:44:50 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| Whatever softshoe, I asked a question I actually had to ask twice to get an answer. And had you just answered it politely that would have been great but you didn't. I see you trying to ram your opinion down people's throats and the fact is, your idea is the second best one out there. Just a fact. | ||
| #17854 | 04/17/2015 4:55:10 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| No that is just your opinion Tiger, The only fact is Steve thinks the rolling system is better than the 2 tiered as well.... Just a Fact !! | ||
| #17855 | 04/17/2015 5:07:13 pm | ||
|
FurySK Joined: 02/07/2015 Posts: 299 Inactive
| neither system is really worth the time taken to implement. Both are inferior to the way it is now. But meh, if we want to erode the player base by complicating their lives, by all means. | ||
| #17856 | 04/17/2015 5:56:25 pm | ||
|
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4
| softshoe...it's a fact that I had to ask the question twice and you had to be a snot when you answered...the rest is my opinion but it's well grounded and I've been open minded until I got tired of your strong arm tactics...I've looked back and you don't hesitate to dumbf***er folks that don't agree with you...just play nice and respect other opinions and you might do fine | ||
| #17857 | 04/17/2015 7:19:08 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Why not just have teams drop to the bottom of the waiver list the moment they are relinquished by a human owner? In addition, maybe bot teams can not move up the list at all? They would just be ordered by latest to be relinquished. A new, human owner would then have to move up the list from the bottom. That would also clear up a question I'd had about how we'll know who the real #1 claimant is. In a system where bot teams move up the list, they would just logjam at the top correct? This would solve the multi-account problem, and all the valid opposition that I've seen. Would this make it harder to code than the two-tier system? Doubt it, but don't know. Also, would this create potential rollback problems if a rollback was necessary? |
||
| #17859 | 04/17/2015 8:11:07 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| Tiger, if I answered a question that you asked about 2 times and I am the only one that answered you, then I am the one who was actually being nice to you and actually answered your question instead of ignoring you like everybody else did. So I guess I was playing nice after all. Don't worry, next time you can ask your question 3 or 4 times for all I care, but I will let someone else more caring than me draw you a picture to answer your question. Tiger good luck this year, and I am done responding to you on this forum. Anything else you want to add, private message me and we will keep it off of here. | ||
| #17861 | 04/17/2015 8:27:05 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Why not just have teams drop to the bottom of the waiver list the moment they are relinquished by a human owner? In addition, maybe bot teams can not move up the list at all? They would just be ordered by latest to be relinquished. A new, human owner would then have to move up the list from the bottom. That would also clear up a question I'd had about how we'll know who the real #1 claimant is. In a system where bot teams move up the list, they would just logjam at the top correct? I disagree about that being a good solution. It's hard enough for new owners to take over a bad team. Putting them at the bottom of the list makes it even worse. Granted they'll use their pick quickly, but hopefully it will be on a quality player. I also think it's a bad idea about bots being at the bottom for the exact same reason. Let them rise toward the top so the future owner has a chance at a quality guy when they take over a team. Another added benefit is that it immediately piques the interest of the newbie. They might have a horrible team, but they see they're in the top third of the list or whatever so they can get an instant boost. It would be nice if there was a way to have a programmed override of horrible choices by newbies, mainly for the anti-sabotage purpose, but something tells me that won't happen. Of course a much easier solution is to not implement rolling waivers. Updated Friday, April 17 2015 @ 8:28:25 pm PDT |
||
| #17863 | 04/17/2015 9:33:53 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Except the bottom part of the list of active owners will be very fluid as they will not be afraid to use their claim on anyone. I totally disagree that new owners should get a top pick, because really new owners wouldn't know what to use the number 1 pick on and "new" owners (see multi-account) who had experience shouldn't be at the top. If a top pick is what keeps them playing the game, then why would they stay til the next time they have the top pick or why do they stay now? I think the game has other merits that should suffice for new players. Haselrig's solution very much is the win-win being looked for if a rolling waiver is implemented. | ||
| #17867 | 04/17/2015 11:02:39 pm | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Now Newtman's in on the squash-any-thought-that-doesn't-agree-with-him, huh. He must be a multi-account with (insert name of choice). Haselrig's solution very much is the win-win being looked for if a rolling waiver is implemented. State your opinion if you'd like, but it's not gospel. And I still think you're completely wrong. Screwing new owners is not a good policy. Neither is automatically putting them at the top. If the team they take over happens to be near the top, so be it. I totally disagree that new owners should get a top pick, because really new owners wouldn't know what to use the number 1 pick on. This is a very funny argument. How is it going to harm the new owner by letting them use a top pick? Your solution is to not give them that opportunity by putting them at the bottom of the list, guaranteeing they can't get a top guy. Yeah, that's very helpful. Not. About the paranoia of multi-account holders...If you're so worried about the few owners who might try to gain an advantage due to multi-accounts and the proposed rolling waiver system, say you'd like to not have the rolling waiver system. Pretty simple. Neither the current waiver process nor the two-tiered one affords those hacks the same opportunities rolling waivers does. |
||
| #17868 | 04/17/2015 11:33:43 pm | ||
|
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive
| Sorry - I'm still confused as to how pushing bots to the bottom of the pile solves the multi-account issue. My primary team A gets to the front of the waiver line. I take over team B (currently available) with a secondary account and release this prospect who gets around the proposed SI cap (and any sensible constraint on releasing players I can foresee): http://brokenbat.org/player/101989 I can then pick this guy up uncontested with my preferred team A. Unless I'm missing something, where team B is in the queue is completely irrelevant on this one as I'm using it to release a player, not acquire one. Obviously I'd never do this out of respect for myself, Steve and everyone else who plays this game; but it is a concern, and it seems every trade proposal is shot down for this same reason. Edit: Sorry - wrong player link Updated Friday, April 17 2015 @ 11:40:35 pm PDT |
||
| #17870 | 04/18/2015 2:39:57 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| It's starting to become apparent to me that a rolling waiver system, despite it's successes elsewhere, may not be a good match for Broken Bat. The regulations it would require be placed on new players just to cover the exploits we've envisioned to this point would border on suppression. There are likely other, unforeseen holes in the system that would only be discovered after implementation. Human beings find exploits in systems. It's just what we do. In most cases, it's not even malicious. Maybe we should take a step back and reexamine Seca's two-tiered system or, if it's again decided that that is not a viable option, continue to dance with the waiver devil we know. I hate to say it, but "sticky" randomness is better than a scenario where players use multies to get top prospects/players. |
||
| #17873 | 04/18/2015 4:55:24 am | ||
|
FreddyTheEye Joined: 11/11/2014 Posts: 625 Inactive
| Agree with Haselrig. (and Steve about not rushing and letting the solution evolve) I liked rolling waiver until I really thought about it. Now I don't. To me the best idea is leave things as they are and put a cap on daily successful waiver claims and maybe weekly claims as well. If the cap was 1 per day then for sure nobody wins two in a day..right? The waiver claim would have to be processed by SI from top down (I think makes most sense?). But no new big system necessary. |
||
| #17874 | 04/18/2015 5:00:17 am | ||
|
Frankebasta Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 885 Kodiak Mules III.3
| That would also clear up a question I'd had about how we'll know who the real #1 claimant is. In a system where bot teams move up the list, they would just logjam at the top correct? Sorry to break the news, folks. But we will NEVER have an -active- team ranked 1 in the picking order. Even if you relagate Bots at the bottom, the top spots will be taken by Human Controlled Teams, perfectly legit ones, whose owner for whatever reason does NOT get involved in the FAs market. I have no clue how many they may be. 50-100? They will sit at the top, for a season or three. For this reason I envision the top prospects going to a team ranked 40-60. Not a situation where you can feel assured it is GONNA BE ME, anyhow. |
||
| #17876 | 04/18/2015 5:35:30 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I actually like Freddy's suggestion of one claim per day quite a bit. I think that would accomplish much of what Seca's two-tier system seeks to accomplish with a much simpler mechanic. It would also add some strategy and requires owners to make decisions on individual players instead of just shotgunning everybody with a pulse. It would accomplish the job of eliminating any one owner striking gold more than once per day without any of the side effects of the rolling system. No obvious exploits of a single claim system come to mind either. |
||
| #17877 | 04/18/2015 6:37:34 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Sorry to be such a downer on all of these, but I don't like one claim a day for many reasons. First of all, it creates many problems without solving anything. What's the difference between getting superstars on back-to-back days versus the same day? Absolutely nothing. Also, it's impossible to reconcile everyone's order of preference. Just because a guy has a higher SI, doesn't mean that guy would be anyone's top choice for the day. You also can't have everyone put their list in from top to bottom because they won't match up with others. I've moaned about lucky streaks from others and unlucky streaks by me, but it's all just been for fun. I've never once thought there's a conspiracy or problem; we just like to groan. Drafts are a different thing altogether. I will continue to voice my displeasure about them because the variance on them is far too great due to there only being a maximum of ten per season. With waivers you can put in claims for hundreds of players. Luck does tend to balance out more on them as a result of the number of events. |
||
| #17878 | 04/18/2015 6:44:28 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| No obvious exploits of a single claim system come to mind either. On days when superstars hit waivers it would mean the choice of putting your claim on the superstar or one of the other guys. This would result in a lot more guys hitting free agency, except the multi-accounts like Mike could use their secondary accounts to snatch up the other good players. Plenty of exploits with this as well. Mike has now been added to Mig on my personal ignore list. |
||
| #17879 | 04/18/2015 7:08:27 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I had a whole write-up on this, but I deleted it. Why fight these fights? They never go anywhere but back to start. Status quo for the win. | ||
| #17880 | 04/18/2015 7:50:45 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| Ha! I'm so injured. I guess Newtman is more than willing to listen to anyone who agrees with him, but no differing opinions. Impressive. I don't think Freddie was suggesting a one limit claim attempt per day because there's no reason to say they'd be done from highest to lowest SI. I believe he was saying to limit it to one successful claim per day and I mentioned some of the problems with that. I wouldn't be strongly opposed to just one waiver attempt per day. There are problems with that too, though. It screws the newer owners far and away the most, which as I said above regarding other proposals, I think is uncool. The other issue is the one Newtman brought up- there would be more free agents, which would hurt the casual player who is not willing to be up and play the midnight mad dash for new free agents game. (Good luck, Newtman, trying to figure out who else I am. Paranoia runs rampant here.) |
||
| #17881 | 04/18/2015 7:57:21 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I had a whole write-up on this, but I deleted it. Why fight these fights? They never go anywhere but back to start. Status quo for the win. I concur. No matter what system is suggested someone will find a problem with it. |
||
| #17883 | 04/18/2015 8:46:59 am | ||
|
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive
| These are forums, after all, where ideas are supposed to be discussed. There are pros and cons to everything. I think we all need to relax a bit. When someone disagrees, it doesn't mean anything other than they disagree. We need to quit taking things so personally. We're talking about a silly, but fun, game; it's not life and death. |
||
| #17970 | 04/20/2015 3:33:12 am | ||
|
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive
| There’s one other thing people seem to be forgetting every time they complain about the RNG and a team winning 2 players with multiple claims on the same day: teams with full rosters are not eligible to win a waiver. It’s not uncommon for teams that have claimed a highly sought player to have other claims put as well, so it may be that when that highly sought player is up for draw some of the teams that had a claim on him may not be eligible because their rosters got filled with other claimed players, and that is something that increases the chances of one single team winning 2 highly sought players in the same day. |
||
| #17982 | 04/20/2015 10:18:48 am | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| There’s one other thing people seem to be forgetting every time they complain about the RNG and a team winning 2 players with multiple claims on the same day: teams with full rosters are not eligible to win a waiver. It’s not uncommon for teams that have claimed a highly sought player to have other claims put as well, so it may be that when that highly sought player is up for draw some of the teams that had a claim on him may not be eligible because their rosters got filled with other claimed players, and that is something that increases the chances of one single team winning 2 highly sought players in the same day. I've wondered about this, but was hesitant to bring it up. It does seem like most teams have full rosters most of the time, so I’m wondering if they’re not selective enough with their claims and are full by the time the superstar claims processing comes around. Steve |
||
| #17983 | 04/20/2015 10:23:59 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I don't know about anyone else, but I tend to claim as many roster spots I have when the odds are good to great (five or less claims at log-off), and claim more players than spots when odds are long (20+ claims) and the talent is pretty much equal among the targeted players. I don't think I've ever missed out on someone by over-claiming. It's usually the opposite, getting less than I think I will. | ||
| #17984 | 04/20/2015 10:45:06 am | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| I'm in the same boat as Haselrig, I've had 2 spots open since the start of the season, and hadn't won a claim til last night when I won a guy who was only claimed by one other team. I'm sure some teams are over claiming, but I'm not one of them. | ||
| #17988 | 04/20/2015 12:10:27 pm | ||
|
softshoe Joined: 01/24/2015 Posts: 72 Inactive
| I am also in the same boat, I have always had spots open for waiver claims. I have Not missed out on any due to No room. | ||
| #18142 | 04/23/2015 5:45:18 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| any update here admin? | ||
| #18196 | 04/24/2015 10:17:23 am | ||
|
Bilbo Shaggins Joined: 01/01/2015 Posts: 59 Inactive
| 1-10-15 was my last successful waiver claim. I have been putting 1-2 claims up just about every day since with no success. Updated Friday, April 24 2015 @ 12:20:20 pm PDT |
||
| #18197 | 04/24/2015 10:31:16 am | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I went all season without one, then I won four in a row. The only one that didn't have two claims on him had six, so still not very impressive. | ||
| #19254 | 05/21/2015 4:19:20 pm | ||
|
Balbinjj Joined: 05/27/2014 Posts: 213 Appleton Foxes III.1
| Any update about this? | ||
| #19580 | 05/31/2015 11:10:37 am | ||
|
raygen12 Joined: 04/04/2016 Posts: 52 Inactive
| Any update? My thought is leave it alone or go to the rolling format. | ||
| #19583 | 05/31/2015 2:40:23 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1 
| I'm guessing things are staying as they are. General consensus seemed to be that things are working fine. If Steve was planning any changes, I'm sure you'll all hear. In the mean time it seems pointless to keep bumping this thread. | ||
| #19625 | 06/01/2015 12:40:08 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| Currently, there is only one change scheduled for next season with respect to waivers. Basically, the order for waiver claim processing has been random. Starting next season, each evening the processing of waiver claims will be in descending SI order (i.e. “best” player first). This should prevent the scenario were a roster fills up with “lesser” players so that claims on the “better” players are prevented because of a full roster. Note: this is not intended to fix all the real or perceived issues with the waiver claim system. It’s only an incremental improvement to make the system more workable. Steve Updated Monday, June 1 2015 @ 2:09:42 pm PDT |
||
| #19626 | 06/01/2015 12:49:46 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Nice, that should partially address the worries with putting in claims on secondary guys. | ||
| #19627 | 06/01/2015 2:03:52 pm | ||
|
Pig_Cola Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 1445 Glendale Marshals III.2 
| This should prevent the scenario were a roster fills up with “lesser” players so that claims on the “better” players are prevented because of a full roster. I don't quite understand what you mean by this. |
||
| #19628 | 06/01/2015 2:07:54 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| Roster maximum is 50 players. If you have 49 players on your roster and two waiver claims, there is a possibility that you get the first claim and the second claim is invalid because you've now got 50 players on your club. Steve |
||
| #19629 | 06/01/2015 2:12:06 pm | ||
|
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive
| Very simple Pig, he means it will prevent the guys with lower SIs from going through waivers before the guys with high SIs. If a team had claims on two players but only had one spot open, then in the past the guy with a lower SI MIGHT process before the guy with the higher SI, meaning that the roster would be full when the higher SI player actually processed eliminating that team from contention for that second player. | ||
| #19630 | 06/01/2015 2:15:12 pm | ||
|
Pig_Cola Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 1445 Glendale Marshals III.2
| I understand now. | ||
| #19631 | 06/01/2015 2:41:02 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| Nice! Now we can put in backup claims without worrying about messing up are primary target. Great improvement! | ||
| #20830 | 07/07/2015 7:26:20 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| Are we on a rolling system right now? I have probably made 50 waiver claims since preseason and haven't gotten any -- many of which had fewer than 10 claims. So, is it pure coinincidence or are we on a different waiver system? | ||
| #20843 | 07/07/2015 9:23:48 am | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| Not sure what you mean by a rolling system -> Currently, there is only one change scheduled for next season with respect to waivers. Basically, the order for waiver claim processing has been random. Starting next season, each evening the processing of waiver claims will be in descending SI order (i.e. “best” player first). This should prevent the scenario were a roster fills up with “lesser” players so that claims on the “better” players are prevented because of a full roster. I don't see how this would address the issue you are implying in any way. Updated Tuesday, July 7 2015 @ 9:25:06 am PDT |
||
| #20845 | 07/07/2015 9:27:21 am | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I don't think any changes have been made, but I'm just checking due to my horrificly bad luck this season with waivers. I was referring to the system where the highest person in the waiver order receives the player in question, and is then moved to last in the order. |
||
| #20847 | 07/07/2015 10:00:40 am | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| I'm pretty sure there were never any plans to put such a system into place. | ||
| #20849 | 07/07/2015 10:55:20 am | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| The only change was this one: "Starting next season, each evening the processing of waiver claims will be in descending SI order (i.e. “best” player first). This should prevent the scenario were a roster fills up with “lesser” players so that claims on the “better” players are prevented because of a full roster." Steve |
||
| #20853 | 07/07/2015 1:17:41 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| It could backfire due to the fact that random numbers don't come out in a nice even distributions, but personally I think the best fix for this "problem" would be to record how many waivers were actually put in for each player that gets claimed on the transaction page. Of course that is also additional storage requirements. | ||
| #20856 | 07/07/2015 2:48:33 pm | ||
|
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator
| You mean just provide more information? The number of current waiver claims do display in a pop-up when you put in the claim...but you want something that enumerates them on the transactions page? Steve |
||
| #20863 | 07/07/2015 4:38:57 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| I'm not really complaining about my luck, I understand that sometimes thats just how the random numbers fall. I +1 Rock's suggestion, but as he correctly noted, it would be more information to store. I think Rock means that on the transactions page, to note how many other claims were made on each player. I believe that this was suggested recently as well. Edit: Maybe he means that on the player page, where it says the player was acquired through a waiver claim, that it lists the number of claims made on him. Updated Tuesday, July 7 2015 @ 4:40:57 pm PDT |
||
| #20870 | 07/07/2015 9:15:05 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| Yeah, I mean on the transaction history so we can see after the fact. So it would say something like "Waiver Claim (43)" under the Transaction Type rather than just "Waiver Claim". | ||
| #21046 | 07/13/2015 2:57:30 am | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| Thanks Steve! | ||
| #23215 | 08/27/2015 1:54:37 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| Either I'm getting very lucky this year, or this is working, because seeing the real claim numbers is making me feel like I've gotten really lucky with claims. Three guys with 10+ claims already! I probably would have thought two of those guys only had 5-6 claims on them without the actual number being shown. | ||
| #23217 | 08/27/2015 2:07:42 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| I'm one for thirty or so this season. The one was a longshot with 29 claims on opening morning. Nothing since. Kindof used to it at this point. I don't expect to win waivers anymore. Not even ones with less than ten claims. | ||
| #23218 | 08/27/2015 2:41:53 pm | ||
|
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1
| If you made 30 claims, and you got a guy with 29 claims on him, then you're doing par for the course. | ||
| #23225 | 08/27/2015 3:44:58 pm | ||
|
Peekay Joined: 03/26/2014 Posts: 146 Inactive
| I'm having a terrible offseason. Haven't counted up the number of claims I've put on but I'm sure it's over 50. So far - 0 won. Ah well |
||
| #23226 | 08/27/2015 3:53:31 pm | ||
|
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4
| 29 claims? I'd say I'm well ahead of the game. That's the sad part. I'm probably done for the year for anything over 5. | ||
| #23298 | 08/28/2015 11:43:54 pm | ||
|
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive
| My GM is feeling it this offseason. I've claimed 3 guys worth keeping. One with only 3 claims, a pitcher with 17, and this guy. 62 claims! Not to mention I drafted a solid 14 POT pitcher. This kind of makes up for my waiver/draft woes last season. |
||
| |