Prefer Incentives or No Incentives in Online Leagues?

kq76 · 02-02-2005, 04:19 AM

If you wanted to join an online league and there were 2 that you liked the best and they were exactly the same in every conceivable way except A had incentives while B did not, which would you choose, and why?

Also, what leagues (preferrably with links) do you know of have incentives? If you have been or are in the league in your opinion have they helped or hurt that league, and why?

disposableheros · 02-02-2005, 05:05 AM

incentives to do what? vote in award/AS polls, write articles, and generally participate?

or incentives for players, ie. stat production?

kq76 · 02-02-2005, 05:19 AM

I was more thinking for member participation in general (article writing, export submission, rules/awards voting, trading, whatever), but you can take it in whatever direction you like.

Bluenoser · 02-02-2005, 06:39 AM

Personally I don't care for incentives. I realize the Commish's intentions are good and they're trying to boost participation, but there are other ways to do that. I have seen leagues where you can "cash in" your incentive points for talent or rating boosts. This is a big turn off to me and will immediately steer me away from a league. I am just a firm believer that players should be left to develop based on their own natural (game given) talents, and not have outside enhancement to aid them. Even using them to add cash or fan interest is a turn off simply because it's not realistic. Your team rewards in a league should come from team performance.

sporr · 02-02-2005, 09:36 AM

I like incentives as long as they aren't too unbalancing. You have to keep in mind that the people who are most active in the league will tend to have better teams without any boosts to ratings, etc. We have incentives, but they don't have a huge impact on players (only affecting durability for a season). Most of them are for stadium stuff and the college league. But we make it easy enough to have access to the college league (and thus the ability to scout 12-15 of the top prospects entering the draft) that anyone can view it with a minimum of participation.

Ford Prefect · 02-02-2005, 10:45 AM

I think incentives can help a league a lot its true that sometime its not very realistic, but 4. Player with above 75% Potenial overall developing not a bit is also not realistic. I like the chance to increase the market the most because that can help small Teams to built and not sell every Year ( if you not choose equal markets).

disposableheros · 02-02-2005, 02:20 PM

i think incentives to participate are aimed at the middle of the pack owners. some people will regularly submit articles without incentives and some will never submit articles even with incentives. the incentives push the on-the-fencers over the edge and thus create more activity in the league. i dont think incentives should be tied to the things that, IMO, should be expected of owners, ie. voting in award/AS polls, submitting lineups, drafting on time, etc.

the incentives i see most often are cash. but in the CLB, the incentive is a bonus to your owner score, which in turn decides CEO of the Year. i think if the incentive is a bump in a players ratings, it should be kept to a minimum, difficult to obtain, or both.

2 leagues im in that use incentives are the Corporate League and Western Hemisphere League in my sig. they both have incentives for writing articles with CLB using a bonus to your owner score and WHBL using cash thats added at season's end (IIRC, $50,000 per article but im not positive because i dont write the articles for the money).

Aussie Mark · 02-02-2005, 04:59 PM

The ORB is a writing league, so there are incentives for articles. The incentive points can be spend on a whole raft of things, ranging from market size to player talent and ratings. Link is in sig, details of incentives are on the rules page.

Dagrims · 02-02-2005, 08:56 PM

I'm not a huge fan of incentives, but I have seen leagues where they work well. The owners that participate already benefit more than those that do not, because they're more likely to be trading to improve the team, and will be more knowledgeable about their own team and the league as a whole. It's somewhat easy to tell which owners are submitting articles because they've been "encouraged" to do so, and which ones are doing it because they love the league and their team.

LivnLegend · 02-02-2005, 10:23 PM

I like incentives. If the USBA was beginning anew, I'd have incentives of some sort built in.
In Maelstrom, as spoor mentioned, we have incentives for articles and voting and lineups. However, the incentives are not alluring enough, n my opinion, to make a huge difference. I wrote articles for my team with or without incentives and I've probably written more about my team in the 12 seasons Maelstrom has been around than some divisions combined. However, I've barely spent any of the "incentives" earned during that time. Maybe 10%, if that. It's not enough to make a difference and it certainly has not helped or hindered staying competitive. It's like getting a free turkey from the grocery store at Thanksgiving for buying $100 in groceries. I was going to buy the food anyway so the turkey is nice but not worth extra shopping.

Someday I am going to join a league where incentives make a huge difference (if one ever comes along).

Jeremy Weimer · 02-02-2005, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LivnLegend

Someday I am going to join a league where incentives make a huge difference (if one ever comes along).

Make one, LL.

LivnLegend · 02-03-2005, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Weimer

Make one, LL.

Believe me, I've considered it. I have a league that's been in my head for some time based on an old fictional league I made in a computer game many, many years ago (before some of you were born!).

Lack of time of course...

rudel.dietrich · 02-03-2005, 12:24 AM

I don't like them.

I find that inactive and non dedicated owners eventualy weed themselves out of your league anyways.

rem · 02-03-2005, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallschirmjager

I don't like them.

I find that inactive and non dedicated owners eventualy weed themselves out of your league anyways.

Just curious, how long have you been playing in online leagues?

rudel.dietrich · 02-03-2005, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by remangiii

Just curious, how long have you been playing in online leagues?

In OOTP leagues, not all that long. In other tex sim leagues, several years.

Jeremy Weimer · 02-03-2005, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LivnLegend

Believe me, I've considered it. I have a league that's been in my head for some time based on an old fictional league I made in a computer game many, many years ago (before some of you were born!).

Lack of time of course...

Have someone help you run it.

truthserum · 02-03-2005, 12:56 AM

We are just about ready to start a new 24 team fictional league called the NABF. It was started because the UBN was shut down by the commish because of inactivity by it's owners. With the new league came participation points to hopefully counter some inactivity. While I'm not a big proponent of using participation points to increase player ratings, the commish added several different aspects in which to use the participation points, which I like. You can use them, along with cash, to adjust park ratings, adding seats, increase tv revenue, increase fan interest, increase fan loyalty, increase market size, etc. Quite a few points have to be attained to be able to do this, but it's an added aspect, that everyone can attain, when and if they choose to take an active part in the league.

woody5254 · 02-03-2005, 01:07 AM

I don't mind incentives as long as they don't involve talent or rating changes.

WWBL Commissioner · 02-03-2005, 01:38 AM

I don't use them in the WWBL but I can see them working for certain leagues. The only thing I track is exports and will use not exporting to remove inactive owners.

MogulChamp · 02-03-2005, 02:10 AM

Bah! Who needs incentives. If the players aren't active, then maybe they should be playing solo leagues. Kick'em out!

View Poll Results: Do you prefer incentives or no incentives in online leagues?
Incentives	16	32.65%
No Incentives	33	67.35%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

02-02-2005, 04:19 AM	#1
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,022	Prefer Incentives or No Incentives in Online Leagues? If you wanted to join an online league and there were 2 that you liked the best and they were exactly the same in every conceivable way except A had incentives while B did not, which would you choose, and why? Also, what leagues (preferrably with links) do you know of have incentives? If you have been or are in the league in your opinion have they helped or hurt that league, and why? __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

02-02-2005, 05:05 AM	#2
disposableheros Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,332	incentives to do what? vote in award/AS polls, write articles, and generally participate? or incentives for players, ie. stat production? __________________ 2 Wild Cards, 11 Division Champs, 4 League Champs, 3 World Champs, and 3 Best GM awards Baseball Maelstrom - New York Mets - 180-149 .547 Corporate League Baseball - Coke Buzz - 889-649 .578 Western Hemisphere Baseball League - Santiago Saints - 672-793 .459 Record - 2428-2271 .517

02-02-2005, 05:19 AM	#3
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,022	I was more thinking for member participation in general (article writing, export submission, rules/awards voting, trading, whatever), but you can take it in whatever direction you like. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

02-02-2005, 10:45 AM	#6
Ford Prefect Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Hamburg Posts: 470	I think incentives can help a league a lot its true that sometime its not very realistic, but 4. Player with above 75% Potenial overall developing not a bit is also not realistic. I like the chance to increase the market the most because that can help small Teams to built and not sell every Year ( if you not choose equal markets). __________________ I would pay 50 Dollars for BM 2006, if everybody does. Lets campain for higher but equal pricing, support a good product Last edited by Ford Prefect; 02-02-2005 at 10:47 AM.

02-02-2005, 06:39 AM	#4
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,483	Personally I don't care for incentives. I realize the Commish's intentions are good and they're trying to boost participation, but there are other ways to do that. I have seen leagues where you can "cash in" your incentive points for talent or rating boosts. This is a big turn off to me and will immediately steer me away from a league. I am just a firm believer that players should be left to develop based on their own natural (game given) talents, and not have outside enhancement to aid them. Even using them to add cash or fan interest is a turn off simply because it's not realistic. Your team rewards in a league should come from team performance.

02-02-2005, 09:36 AM	#5
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	I like incentives as long as they aren't too unbalancing. You have to keep in mind that the people who are most active in the league will tend to have better teams without any boosts to ratings, etc. We have incentives, but they don't have a huge impact on players (only affecting durability for a season). Most of them are for stadium stuff and the college league. But we make it easy enough to have access to the college league (and thus the ability to scout 12-15 of the top prospects entering the draft) that anyone can view it with a minimum of participation.

02-02-2005, 02:20 PM	#7
disposableheros Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 4,332	i think incentives to participate are aimed at the middle of the pack owners. some people will regularly submit articles without incentives and some will never submit articles even with incentives. the incentives push the on-the-fencers over the edge and thus create more activity in the league. i dont think incentives should be tied to the things that, IMO, should be expected of owners, ie. voting in award/AS polls, submitting lineups, drafting on time, etc. the incentives i see most often are cash. but in the CLB, the incentive is a bonus to your owner score, which in turn decides CEO of the Year. i think if the incentive is a bump in a players ratings, it should be kept to a minimum, difficult to obtain, or both. 2 leagues im in that use incentives are the Corporate League and Western Hemisphere League in my sig. they both have incentives for writing articles with CLB using a bonus to your owner score and WHBL using cash thats added at season's end (IIRC, $50,000 per article but im not positive because i dont write the articles for the money). __________________ 2 Wild Cards, 11 Division Champs, 4 League Champs, 3 World Champs, and 3 Best GM awards Baseball Maelstrom - New York Mets - 180-149 .547 Corporate League Baseball - Coke Buzz - 889-649 .578 Western Hemisphere Baseball League - Santiago Saints - 672-793 .459 Record - 2428-2271 .517

02-02-2005, 04:59 PM	#8
Aussie Mark Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Downunder Posts: 489	The ORB is a writing league, so there are incentives for articles. The incentive points can be spend on a whole raft of things, ranging from market size to player talent and ratings. Link is in sig, details of incentives are on the rules page. __________________ Cheers Mark

02-02-2005, 08:56 PM	#9
Dagrims Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 3,827	I'm not a huge fan of incentives, but I have seen leagues where they work well. The owners that participate already benefit more than those that do not, because they're more likely to be trading to improve the team, and will be more knowledgeable about their own team and the league as a whole. It's somewhat easy to tell which owners are submitting articles because they've been "encouraged" to do so, and which ones are doing it because they love the league and their team. __________________ "Read books, get brain."

02-02-2005, 10:23 PM	#10
LivnLegend Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: 100% pure adrenaline! Posts: 5,624	I like incentives. If the USBA was beginning anew, I'd have incentives of some sort built in. In Maelstrom, as spoor mentioned, we have incentives for articles and voting and lineups. However, the incentives are not alluring enough, n my opinion, to make a huge difference. I wrote articles for my team with or without incentives and I've probably written more about my team in the 12 seasons Maelstrom has been around than some divisions combined. However, I've barely spent any of the "incentives" earned during that time. Maybe 10%, if that. It's not enough to make a difference and it certainly has not helped or hindered staying competitive. It's like getting a free turkey from the grocery store at Thanksgiving for buying $100 in groceries. I was going to buy the food anyway so the turkey is nice but not worth extra shopping. Someday I am going to join a league where incentives make a huge difference (if one ever comes along). __________________ Excess ain't rebellion. You're drinking what they're selling.

02-03-2005, 12:24 AM	#13
rudel.dietrich Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Zürich, Switzerland Posts: 8,608	I don't like them. I find that inactive and non dedicated owners eventualy weed themselves out of your league anyways.

02-03-2005, 12:56 AM	#17
truthserum All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,725	We are just about ready to start a new 24 team fictional league called the NABF. It was started because the UBN was shut down by the commish because of inactivity by it's owners. With the new league came participation points to hopefully counter some inactivity. While I'm not a big proponent of using participation points to increase player ratings, the commish added several different aspects in which to use the participation points, which I like. You can use them, along with cash, to adjust park ratings, adding seats, increase tv revenue, increase fan interest, increase fan loyalty, increase market size, etc. Quite a few points have to be attained to be able to do this, but it's an added aspect, that everyone can attain, when and if they choose to take an active part in the league.

02-03-2005, 01:07 AM	#18
woody5254 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hector, NY Posts: 6,130	I don't mind incentives as long as they don't involve talent or rating changes. __________________ Check out: You Pick Tourney Version 2.0 Standings Thread You Pick The Teams Tourney: Main Thread The Colossal 20th Century Tourney:Main Thread Chicago White Sox(Original Owner:2001-) Baseball Maelstrom -2001,2011,2013 World Series Champions -2002,2010 Maelstrom Tourney Champs Arizona Diamondbacks(2003-) NAHHBL Indianapolis Racers(Expansion Team:1993-)ABC

02-03-2005, 01:38 AM	#19
WWBL Commissioner All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Hawaii Posts: 887	I don't use them in the WWBL but I can see them working for certain leagues. The only thing I track is exports and will use not exporting to remove inactive owners. __________________ Offey WWBL Commissioner(2004-2014 real life years) WWBL: Hawaii Island Warriors 2005 Pacific League Champion 2006 Pacific League Champion 2007 Pacific League Champion 2008 WWBL WORLD CHAMPION 2010 WWBL WORLD CHAMPION 2019 WWBL WORLD CHAMPION 2029 WWBL WORLD CHAMPION The Island Warriors are 21-23 in World Series play. BadAssBaseball: Boston Red Sox 1906 American League Champion 1907 WORLD CHAMPION

02-03-2005, 02:10 AM	#20
MogulChamp All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 656	Bah! Who needs incentives. If the players aren't active, then maybe they should be playing solo leagues. Kick'em out!