Online League Management

[estelle11151972]

Hello Gary and all,

Good to see another iteration of this sim! I have a question about online league management as it pertains to commissioner oversight.

When trades are submitted, is there a mechanism by which a submitted trade can trigger a commissioner email to approve/deny?

I've been testing a season and it looks like submitted trades between two GM's have no oversight from the commissioner. That can be problematic when it comes to an online league.

Also, there does not appear to be a hard "budget" cap option. I see the league has the ability set a salary cap but, theoretically, GMs can just spend and spend over that cap to no end. If firing is not turned on, there is no other control mechanism for rampant spending.

Am I missing something there?

[mpleague]

The online league I run has everything go through a forum. GMs don’t make trades in the program, they post their trades on to the forum and the commissioner enters it into the game.

As for spending, we use our own luxury tax/hard cap system. At a certain $$$ amount spent, we strip draft picks, free agent exceptions (like the MLE or LLE), etc.

[Gary Gorski]

Only the commissioner can process trades in a multiplayer league or any other in-season roster movement (like signing a free agent) - otherwise multiple people could do it and mess up the file.



*edit - meant to say commissioner can process

[mpleague]

Only the GM can process trades in a multiplayer league or any other in-season roster movement (like signing a free agent) - otherwise multiple people could do it and mess up the file.

Do you mean commissioner or GM?

[estelle11151972]

The online league I run has everything go through a forum. GMs don’t make trades in the program, they post their trades on to the forum and the commissioner enters it into the game.

As for spending, we use our own luxury tax/hard cap system. At a certain $$$ amount spent, we strip draft picks, free agent exceptions (like the MLE or LLE), etc.

See, to me, that kind of kills it for me. There's all this great interaction experience built into this sim. Players relate to other players and GMs to owners but the GM to owner interaction has no meaning if firing is turned off and, in an online league, the commissioner is required to manually monitor teams' expenditures and arbitrarily enforce them. Everything else is so streamlined.

I want it to be a system whereby the owners set expectations to the GMand the GMs strive to, in whatever way they see fit, deliver on those expectations. In a multiplayer league, odds are that GM firing is turned off so the only mechanism is to have the commissioner of the league set some arbitrary budget and then enforce it in the effort to create verisimilitude? Even the antiquated JSB and even the slightly less antiquated FBB3 had a financial system and an increase/decrease mechanism as a result of season performance so it seems odd that a sim this complex in other areas is so thin in this one.

I would think that would be easily implemented in DDSPB, so I'll do a thought exercise below:

1.) Stadium data
# General/Club/Stadium Seats
General/Club/Stadium Seat Prices
Stadium Age - Age in years since stadium was built
Stadium Upkeep - Annual cost of maintenance. Presumed to increase as facility ages. Would also show the cost when building.
Stadium Location - Establishes market for ticket purchase (see below).

RATIONALE: Number of seats X cost per seat = ticket revenue. If you wanted, add in merchandise revenue (winning + player ability being the factors)... media revenue (presuming TV/Radio coverage based on winning and market media factor)... it can get as simple or as complicated as a GM wanted.

2.) Market data examples
Loyalty - fast fans react to changes at a financial level (ex. ticket price or winning).
Interest - a ratio of the number of fans in a market per population
Competition - factor to draw fans away from a ticket.
Economy - show the price point for the population (ex. Medium means 50% of the population can afford a GA ticket; 40% a club seat; 10% a club seat... or whatever)
Population - Number of people in the city.
Media - how much media exposure is associated to the market.
Size - sets a range for the starting budget of a created team.

RATIONALE: Some markets are large, some small. Some large markets like Phoenix are not the media powerhouses that LA or New York might be. Some huge cities have a ton of other things to do while, in others, the team is the biggest thing in town. Some markets might have a massive population but not have any interest in the team as happened in LA with the Clippers for the longest time during the Lakers' prominence.

3.) Owner Attributes
Patience - How much tolerance they have for a GM success/failure reflected in the magnitude of budget increase/decrease.
Greed - How much money the owner expects the team to make.
Pride - How far the owner expects the team to progress in the season.

--------------------------

With these three points, you've established finances and it can be as robust as the other options in this sim. Demand is set by the number of possible fans in a city, desirability of a ticket, and what they are willing to pay for a ticket, and supply is set by how many of those tickets are available at what price. It'll be up to the GM to ensure their stadium is the appropriate size and price for their demand.

Owner expectations already seem to be a part of the sim based on how pleased/displeased they are at the off season call so just expand a bit on that system of owner expectations for GM performance. At season end, the GM has "the call" with the owner and the owner evaluates them. Now, if the GM can't be fired, what's the ramification? Budget. Owners hand down the increased/decreased budget. GM's say whether they are going to spend close to the cap or over... you have a prediction how far the GM thinks they will go... each of these can impact the owner's patience. GMs who want a more consistent owner experience should focus on making reasonable predictions... however, an owner's pride/greed might not reflect in the budget computations with that. Heck, you could add in complexity for some kind of plead for patience option in the call that will stay a decrease in budget but erodes patience for future season's review. There are lots of simple options for that interaction.

Most of this review is already baked into the sim so it'd be a matter of just establishing the supply/demand factors and then it's just straight math. From there, all that's needed is to layout a page in the application and a check box in the Commissioner options page to use this kind of finances or not.

[mpleague]

You're right, GM firing is turned off. The main reason for that is that typically, there aren't a ton of people waiting to join online leagues, and being fired from a team that you've worked so hard to build is the kind of thing that kills activity. The main focus of an online league is cultivating an active environment, a place where people want to come to and spend time at and interact with each other. That's why so many online leagues (and almost all of the long-lasting successful ones) are so media driven. Having GMs write articles about their team, about the league, keeps them invested and gives them a reason to come to the website and interact. Otherwise, it's just the same as a solo league, but one that moves slower and not at your discretion.

We equalize finances across the league because it makes things equal amongst GMs. When a new person joins the league, there are rarely options for them to choose from in terms of team availability. In fact, often times there is only one choice. Having finances not be equalized makes things unfair across the league, as someone with a bigger budget will have an easier time creating the team to compete at the highest level than someone who doesn't have the same budget. And we don't want to deter people from joining the league. If someone is interested in joining an online league, and they come to our league and the only team available has a small budget, they may choose to not join at that time. But they still wanted to join an online league, so they go find another one, and then our league has lost a potentially solid GM because we turned him off with the inherent unfairness of the league.

I agree with you that all of those financial functions are interesting and add layers of complexity to the sim. DDS:PB is one of the best on the market because of how well-rounded and immersive the game is. However, in a league with 30 humans who all want to compete at the highest level, there are certain things you have to sacrifice in order to make that a reality, and for it to be fair for everyone. The two biggest things online league commissioners focus on is activity, and retention. Once you start complicating things, then people leave the league, and it's not easy to replace them. Especially since activity is so important, losing GMs can have a real adverse affect on the league's activity.

[estelle11151972]

You're right, GM firing is turned off. The main reason for that is that typically, there aren't a ton of people waiting to join online leagues, and being fired from a team that you've worked so hard to build is the kind of thing that kills activity. The main focus of an online league is cultivating an active environment, a place where people want to come to and spend time at and interact with each other. That's why so many online leagues (and almost all of the long-lasting successful ones) are so media driven. Having GMs write articles about their team, about the league, keeps them invested and gives them a reason to come to the website and interact. Otherwise, it's just the same as a solo league, but one that moves slower and not at your discretion.

Yep. FWIW, I'm in a long standing league that's been going I think almost 20 years. We started in JSB and when Frank had his health issues, we transitioned to the Fast Break series. Now, Brian has had some issues as well so I'm looking into a software that has some support but still gives the same GM experience. This sim is damn near perfect but just glosses over the finances which is disappointing. This was the reason we didn't convert to it back when we left JSB.

I agree that media is critical in those leagues. I always say, "If the computer can give me what you're giving me, why do I need you? I'll just run a home league and not have to deal with web hosting and the time invested in making a league tick. That's aside the point though.

If GM firing is turned off (rightly so IMO) then there is no real consequence in the DDSPB system unless I just make one up external to the sim and maintain it. That's my whole problem here. In a sim so incredibly robust in so many other ways, finances are under developed beyond a salary cap. I mean, you have other aspects of finances like the CBA in place... why stop there?

We equalize finances across the league because it makes things equal amongst GMs. When a new person joins the league, there are rarely options for them to choose from in terms of team availability. In fact, often times there is only one choice. Having finances not be equalized makes things unfair across the league, as someone with a bigger budget will have an easier time creating the team to compete at the highest level than someone who doesn't have the same budget. And we don't want to deter people from joining the league. If someone is interested in joining an online league, and they come to our league and the only team available has a small budget, they may choose to not join at that time. But they still wanted to join an online league, so they go find another one, and then our league has lost a potentially solid GM because we turned him off with the inherent unfairness of the league.

This is where we have a difference in philosophy I guess. With cookie cutter markets, there is never an underdog to root for. You'll never have a 2011 Western Conference Memphis team upset the juggernaut Spurs. You'll lack the pride derived from a small market putting scrapping with a squad of home grown players (because draft picks are cheap labor after all) and nuggets mined off the waiver wire. Taking them to the playoffs (unless one of your cookie cutter franchises decides to tank it up I guess) is a great feeling. Winning it all... even better.

Keep in mind that when I say "small market" I'm not talking about the Middlesmall Nobodies who can't afford to field a team... I'm talking about the difference usually between a 65 million budget and a 100 million budget. Sure, you might think "big budget has it all" but it's not like that money can be instantly accessed on demand due to the salary cap and exceptions the CBA provide. All teams are equal there... in fact, you might say that larger markets are more boring because all that budget really helps you do is keep what you manage to acquire.

But I like the NBA's diversity... you have the Lakers and Bulls (large markets) and then you have the Grizzlies and the Jazz (much smaller markets). That diversity provides a complex ecosystem within the league.

I agree with you that all of those financial functions are interesting and add layers of complexity to the sim. DDS:PB is one of the best on the market because of how well-rounded and immersive the game is. However, in a league with 30 humans who all want to compete at the highest level, there are certain things you have to sacrifice in order to make that a reality, and for it to be fair for everyone. The two biggest things online league commissioners focus on is activity, and retention. Once you start complicating things, then people leave the league, and it's not easy to replace them. Especially since activity is so important, losing GMs can have a real adverse affect on the league's activity.

Again, we differ in approach but agree on a few things (retention is important as is activity).

I've been in both situations. I've been Little Rock and I've been LA. It takes more skill to compete with a smaller market and some of our GMs derive a sense of pride from that. Some get a charge out of being in that small market and sticking it to the larger markets. I definitely know that was the case when St. Louis ( puts the larger Los Angeles market out of the playoffs, that victory is sweeter and can feel like an upset even if the St. Louis team had a better record.

Larger markets present their own challenges but can also be kind of... mindless. Well maybe not mindless but maybe lazy is a better term. They don't have to have as many worries as they often overpay just to retain assets only to be laden with useless, long, bloated contracts on players who can't play anymore. Frankly, our small and medium market operators are some of the best operators in the league.

Ultimately, you and I differ in approach and that's fine. That's honestly not what I'm trying to get into here. I've managed to keep a 28 team league populated with humans for nearly 20 years and currently have feeder leagues with anywhere from 8-10 humans in it as well. Maybe I'm just lucky though.

But from a league management standpoint, now I (as Commissioner) have to mcguffin up rules to govern spending. Then I have to monitor every team's transactions for rules violations and address them when they come up. This makes management of a larger online leagues harder and that's the exact opposite of that is what I'm after. The option to have an "in app" system of financial checks and balances allows the commissioner to spend less time policing and rules lawyering the mcguffins and more time on things that build communities that allow these leagues to endure. Also, on a minor note, it also breaks immersion for me when I'm in app and have to take things outside the application. I mean, can you imagine OOTP with the kind of financial system DDSPB has?

There is a way it can be done pretty easily and I think this game would only benefit from that detail. I mean, there's a reason that OOTP is the crown jewel of baseball sims and that is just one of many but it's so important as it sets the competitive tone for an online league.

[Gary Gorski]

If GM firing is turned off (rightly so IMO) then there is no real consequence in the DDSPB system unless I just make one up external to the sim and maintain it. That's my whole problem here. In a sim so incredibly robust in so many other ways, finances are under developed beyond a salary cap. I mean, you have other aspects of finances like the CBA in place... why stop there?

First off, I thank you for your input and kind words about the game. The game has only gotten to the stage it is because of people like yourself over the years who have become involved and taken a passionate interest in making the game better with their suggestions and ideas.

I can tell you why the game stops there and its because people didn't like those things being in the game. Many, many moons ago (back in the Total Pro Basketball days) the game did have an additional financial component to it - ticket sales, arena sizes, even marketing ploys like which night would be bobblehead night to increase attendance for some games. Running what I call the "basketball/facility operations" had nothing to do with the GMing aspect of the game and people found it an unwelcomed hassle to deal with so I took it out and focused much more on the things like making players dynamic with individual traits and relationships and the stuff that really focused on building a basketball team.

The other aspect is that it in my opinion it would make the game unattractive from a multiplayer standpoint because if you start building in things like market size then to be accurate we need to look at the revenue sharing model and things like which states don't have income tax and therefore would be an added bonus as would a large city and much more focus would have to be put on running a profitable team than just making the best basketball team you can.

Now, with that said, maybe it should be an option to play the game that way and maybe that is something that can be added next year after some careful thought about how much would go into it and how it would work. I certainly would welcome a dialogue on what specifically you would like to see in this area and if I can figure out a way to weave it into the code while not forcing it onto people who don't want a business/basketball sim then I definitely will consider it.

[estelle11151972]

Now, with that said, maybe it should be an option to play the game that way and maybe that is something that can be added next year after some careful thought about how much would go into it and how it would work. I certainly would welcome a dialogue on what specifically you would like to see in this area and if I can figure out a way to weave it into the code while not forcing it onto people who don't want a business/basketball sim then I definitely will consider it.

I would definitely endorse at least having that be an option.

I'm sure some users would find it a hassle if the sim required it but, if it's at least a clickable option (or something), then it's a choice. As the user mpleague mentioned, they have to make something up external to the sim and runs counter to your full immersion GM experience that seems to be the objective of the application.

I've seen in other topics that things like the salary cap and other financial objects need work so there seems to be at least some concern for the financial game. Sure, some might not want any limitations on what they do in the course of managing their teams and that's a personal preference. Some players like playing on godmode on games and enjoy that... to each their own.

You mention quite a few things in your post and I'll touch on a few:

• Revenue Sharing - Yes, this would require a market size value. Heck, if that were editable, you could enable teams in a global type of community. Want to add a London team to the NBA type league you have? Great! Just edit the DB, add the city name, and add the size. It doesn't even have to be as granular as a number if you don't want. You could use generic values like Large, Medium, Small to simplify. Of course, basing it on actual population would allow enterprising commissioners to pop in the current population figures with just a quick google search. That could make for interesting global architecture in leagues.
• Taxes - if you wanted this level of detail, sure! That's things that would make general managers think about it when considering a city's viability for their franchise. If they have a greedy owner who just wants a team to be an ATM machine, then moving to a market with tax breaks might wind up generating more revenue than a larger market that has tax consequences. That would be an interesting break from the "move city to Chicago, NY, or LA" model where those are the largest markets so GMs want their team in there.
• Promotions - Fundamentally, a promotions system would work like the praise system for players. If you want to have bobble head night, it increases attendance (for low draw teams) but if your GA ticket prices don't offset the cost of it, it's not worth it. Other promotions like corporate box seat promotions and others could be choices that have consequences... a team that feels too corporate might take a hit in terms of GA ticket sales (49ers anyone?).
• Additional player complexity - Some players want to "get their brand out" and can't do that in small markets. You see that when a player thinks they are a star and want to go to LA which is a large market with a very involved media value. Then again, over time, a player might get tired of the media and go full Meta World Peace as they have multiple interview requests that the GM does not shield them from. Heck, smaller franchises could also benefit from offering on a big ticket player that player a contract because they boost merchandise sales, bolster media coverage, and ticket draw. This player popularity would ebb and flow with things like All Star Awards, MVPs, championships. Again, if you wanted, you can get real complex with it or just keep it simple.
• I could go on and on.

Ultimately, you've got the market feedback from your players and have to invest time into your game that will make it desirable for purchase. I completely get that; however, should a day come that you'd like to have a dialog about a financial model, I would be glad to have this with you. Any time. My 40ish player (between pro and development level) league that would embrace your sim should that day ever arrive.

[Gary Gorski]

I appreciate the feedback and have bookmarked this thread to come back to when designing the features for 2019