-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
New League Discussion
- Thread starter NML
- Start date
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
I was just kidding. I think some are bored of my input....
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
I've voluntarily done it, I think Travis has (maybe jokingly?) offered to swap names with one of the lower budget franchises and build them up, etc. So if the new guys want an established team finances wise we can give them that (either swapping teams or artificially boosting budgets with cash), I understand not everyone is weird like me and wants to build from the ground up so no problem.
The thing is finances in OOTP are notoriously difficult to balance and I just worry we go through all this only to end up with one team at 200M in 5 years anyways unless there's massive amounts of revenue sharing (something I'm also tinkering with right now). And if that's the fix, then we can just do that in our current league and call it a day.
Simming 20 years in the future will take a logn time because market sizes will bounce up and down and fuck with our delicate financial balance as it is, so that's another factor to take into account. I am watching that in this tutorial league right now happen as teams slowly creep their way up and I have to go back and re-edit their market sizes and bump up rev sharing again.
The thing is finances in OOTP are notoriously difficult to balance and I just worry we go through all this only to end up with one team at 200M in 5 years anyways unless there's massive amounts of revenue sharing (something I'm also tinkering with right now). And if that's the fix, then we can just do that in our current league and call it a day.
Simming 20 years in the future will take a logn time because market sizes will bounce up and down and fuck with our delicate financial balance as it is, so that's another factor to take into account. I am watching that in this tutorial league right now happen as teams slowly creep their way up and I have to go back and re-edit their market sizes and bump up rev sharing again.
NML
Well-Known Member
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
You have to do that yearly for the advance to work properly
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
And this.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
Yeah I've been doing so now and it's working better
Technically yes with National Media Contracts, though it's not solely that number so would need some tweaking. I'm testing out Revenue Sharing percentages to help with that as well
Soonerfan09
Well-Known Member
quit idgaf
I took Moscow over in '58 after they had been the worst team in the league for a few seasons and had a budget of $89M.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
The thing is though that our financial setup hasn't changed, you can still do so now, it's just super time consuming to learn which is why making tutorials is super important for new owners. And like I said, we'll give them an extra 20M cash the first couple seasons too, why not. But a new league might be overkill.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Can you make the financial tutorial like a power point office presentation with pointy stick and everything.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
How do these changes sound?
Budget floor
Otto 2.0 where we make them active in free agency
No IFA
I think this would keep the Otto teams from falling too far and becoming total dumpster fires. They might even finish ahead of some of our more inept owners!
Budget floor
Otto 2.0 where we make them active in free agency
No IFA
I think this would keep the Otto teams from falling too far and becoming total dumpster fires. They might even finish ahead of some of our more inept owners!
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
I still like Hard Cap on IFA over removing it, but the other two are fine
NML
Well-Known Member
I just think if ur best example of a owner staying around is a guy who was here for seven seasons, ur kinda making my point
Irishman
Ur
There's enough glitches in the sim already. Between @Travis7401 posting stats in flood plain maps and @Karl Hungus cross-posting the Accepted Trades thread to ma'Facebook, I think the glitches are making the sim too unstable.
Schauwn
Well-Known Member
Old multi-time quitter here...
FWIW, my issues for leaving both times had nothing to do with league setup or lack of knowledge. The first time I joined back in the UBL, it took me a while to understand how the game and the league worked, but I had guys that helped me out @OU11 and @Orlando. Between the two of them I was able to get my feet under me without feeling like I was digging too big of a hole. So I think tutorials are huge for new guys that we get in the league, if nothing else to give a baseline for the league and it’s idiosyncraties.
The thing thats caused me to quit last time, is the time commitment and the lack of owners. I think when I quit last time there was a large number of people not exporting. That along with not always having 5 minutes a day made me want to quit because I felt guilty for not exporting. It felt more honorable to quit rather than not export until I felt like joining back up. Plus there was a wait list iirc, and I wanted to let someone in that wanted to play rather than holding up a team and not exporting.
This is how I remember it at least, and an O can correct me if I’m wrong.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Budget floor or payroll floor?
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
So, conveniently, these are the highest and lowest budget teams from last year's revenues. Our financial settings have National and Local media fairly even, and though this can be tweaked a touch I don't think it's a huge deal (9M in media deals is nothing comparing the two team's histories). Merchandising can be tweaked by a few million as well. Our Rev Sharing is currently at 25%, I'm experimenting with something like 33% up to 40%, this would drop Doh's budget down to around $193 which is good, Lisbon would climb back over 100M. But as you can see, Attendance matters A TON. Here's the problem: Lisbon's ticket prices are $31 dollars right now, so they have 6k people coming to home games. That explains the vast majority of why their budget is so low.
I think the rules are mostly fine, it's just lack of knowledge or lack of owner there to fix it that causes these shitty budgets. Lisbon has a discrepancy of nearly 70 MILLION because they were selling 30 dollar season tickets as the worst team in the league.
My thoughts on trying to make budgets more equitable:
1. Is there a way to just set a new budget when an owner takes over a team? If a new owner wants to compete could we not just offer them a starting budget of $150M and some extra compensatory draft picks to help their transition? I honestly don't know if you can edit/change budgets manually?
2. I like the idea of Revenue sharing, but it often doesn't work because teams who already have >$10M in cash surplus and I don't believe they receive the revenue sharing. It still takes from the top teams, but it only redistributes to financially reckless bottom teams. Bottom teams that are fiscally responsible don't receive revenue sharing because they are effectively capped at $10M cash, which they are already carrying. This is something that I pointed out multiple times when I was bringing the riggers up from $95M budget. I don't know enough about the game to offer a solution to this that is easy for the O's to implement. The easy solution of letting teams carry more cash helps the HAVES more doe. They also could have fixed the way revenue sharing was handled since I was bitching about it being added as cash (OOTP16)
3. If we want budgets to be closer between top/bottom, there is a $13 M gap between top and bottom in Media Revenue and a $6.5M gap in merchandising. I personally prefer these longer term budget considerations, because they reward regular winning and punish tanking, but I suppose they could be tightened to make things more communist?
3. A lot of new owners just don't understand the budget system, and I think this is a bigger problem than the system itself. They probably have a lot of their budget locked away in draft/scouting/development without understanding that they can change it. A lot just have sub-optimal ticket pricing as well, which is the largest dial on the budget computer. This is the most necessary tutorial, IMO.
4. The best way to limit the MEGA rich teams, IMO is to cap ticket prices ticket prices are the big difference between a team with a budget of $150M and $200M. If we set a ticket price max of like $35 then the max gate revenue and season ticket sales numbers would be capped and even Las Vegas would be at like $170M with that ticket price. I assume Doh's ticket price is in the high $40s?
Edit: lol, what Yankee said.
1. Is there a way to just set a new budget when an owner takes over a team? If a new owner wants to compete could we not just offer them a starting budget of $150M and some extra compensatory draft picks to help their transition? I honestly don't know if you can edit/change budgets manually?
2. I like the idea of Revenue sharing, but it often doesn't work because teams who already have >$10M in cash surplus and I don't believe they receive the revenue sharing. It still takes from the top teams, but it only redistributes to financially reckless bottom teams. Bottom teams that are fiscally responsible don't receive revenue sharing because they are effectively capped at $10M cash, which they are already carrying. This is something that I pointed out multiple times when I was bringing the riggers up from $95M budget. I don't know enough about the game to offer a solution to this that is easy for the O's to implement. The easy solution of letting teams carry more cash helps the HAVES more doe. They also could have fixed the way revenue sharing was handled since I was bitching about it being added as cash (OOTP16)
3. If we want budgets to be closer between top/bottom, there is a $13 M gap between top and bottom in Media Revenue and a $6.5M gap in merchandising. I personally prefer these longer term budget considerations, because they reward regular winning and punish tanking, but I suppose they could be tightened to make things more communist?
3. A lot of new owners just don't understand the budget system, and I think this is a bigger problem than the system itself. They probably have a lot of their budget locked away in draft/scouting/development without understanding that they can change it. A lot just have sub-optimal ticket pricing as well, which is the largest dial on the budget computer. This is the most necessary tutorial, IMO.
4. The best way to limit the MEGA rich teams, IMO is to cap ticket prices ticket prices are the big difference between a team with a budget of $150M and $200M. If we set a ticket price max of like $35 then the max gate revenue and season ticket sales numbers would be capped and even Las Vegas would be at like $170M with that ticket price. I assume Doh's ticket price is in the high $40s?
Edit: lol, what Yankee said.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Comp picks for being new? Ugh, millennials
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
1. Yes absolutely we can set budgets manually
2. I believe the budget does take into account Rev Sharing, even though the owner takes cash he sets the budget based on what revenue was and that's calculated after Rev Sharing. Lisbons' accounting sheet shows this (81.7M in revenue last year but 98M budget after 15.7 in rev sharing)
3. Slightly, yes
4. Yes, tickets are the problem, see my above post. Though I think it's more boosting the bottom than taking from the top. Maybe we bump the Attendance Baseline across the board, which won't help the big teams like Doh who sell out their (45k capacity for everyone) stadium every game anyways
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
With making those tweaks (on the old sim) I was able to get the top projected budget to 190M and the bottom to 100M. -2M Merchandising, -3M Local Media, +5M National Media, +2000 Attendance Baseline. The rest is up to the teams themselves to set ticket prices correctly.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
With these settings Lisbon's projected budget next year is 112M (no change to season tickets since I haven't simmed a day), this is the extreme that I'd go because that attendance baseline is a tad high (Las Vegas would go up by 8M with the drop from 25% to 20% rev sharing)
Also, like @Yankee151 mentioned, a new player can straight up have the riggers. They are an established franchise and have a good young group of players with some nice prospects going forward. The only potential limiting factor is I currently have a pretty high payroll and they won't have much financial maneuverability for the next year because I took a CUM DUMP from @hayvis so they won't have any money for FA. By 2082 the payroll drops to $83M so they can start making their own mark on the team at that point.
The only rule I have if you take the riggers:
Either you have to agree that you won't move/rename them, or I get to take the riggers name/minor league names with me.
I'd just take over the worst team because I'm pumped for a rebuild.
The only rule I have if you take the riggers:
Either you have to agree that you won't move/rename them, or I get to take the riggers name/minor league names with me.
I'd just take over the worst team because I'm pumped for a rebuild.
Try increasing attendance baseline AND capping ticket prices at $40. I bet that'd bring both within 60% or so instead of the >100% difference we have now.
If you move I’m moving one state below where you move to for the rivalry
Also, instead of manually signing FA for the OTTO teams, can you just turn OTTO FA capabilities back on once spring training hits?
Schauwn
Well-Known Member
In short, it was about time for me
Having more active owners would have made me more interested in making the time to draft, set lineups, set rotations, watch my minors, etc., less active owners makes me less interested in making the time for all that.
So whatever get's more people active...that's what I'm here for.
Having more active owners would have made me more interested in making the time to draft, set lineups, set rotations, watch my minors, etc., less active owners makes me less interested in making the time for all that.
So whatever get's more people active...that's what I'm here for.
wouldn't leave you much room. The Cape of Agulhas Tulips?
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
They aren't though it's a range of 6k from lowest to highest
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
To get active owners, I think we just need to relentlessly recruit owners literally anywhere but on Nutopia. I would have thrown up a recruitment thread on the OOTP Forums today, but I think we're better off settling on a version before we do so.
If we're sticking with OOTP19, that's okay I guess, but I think we'd be better off moving to OOTP20 if we're going to recruit.
If we're sticking with OOTP19, that's okay I guess, but I think we'd be better off moving to OOTP20 if we're going to recruit.
Yankee151
Hot Girl Summer
That does help, though hard to tell without a full sim since season tix are already locked in. I don't want to increase attendance baseline to capacity because it puts less value on the popularity system and whatnot
That should probably change.
NML
Well-Known Member
Yep! I definitely wouldn’t consider anyone who left to have a worthwhile opinion! For that matter, the new owners don’t either!
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
No, because they would be countering every day while human owners could only counter weekly.