Broken Bat - Suggestions: Increase draft pool size

Forum >> Suggestions >> Increase draft pool size

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#57604	03/09/2018 6:28:36 am	Apr 7th, 2035
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	Ok, say we all had access to the types of pitching staffs that Seca and I had when we promoted, due to there being a LOT more talent than currently. What does that achieve other than to highlight the randomness in the game engine vs the randomness in player acquisition? With more active owners if they have similar personnel it just means that it will come down to the luck of who drives in runs instead of the luck of who lands the few superstars. Is it more fair? Maybe, but not necessarily. Some teams seem to get all the breaks in close game situations, while others get screwed constantly. Some people try to attribute that to being good or settings, but the truth is you were proven good by keeping great offenses to low scores and scoring on great defenses. Close games consistently going in favor of one team are decided on luck, whether that luck is a hidden clutch trait or pure RNG favoritism it ultimately has less to do with actual strategy and more to do with how the numbers roll. With owners controlling every team for every winner there is a loser, we aren't playing against AIs here.

#57611	03/09/2018 7:26:56 am	Apr 7th, 2035
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4	Newt, I believe there is a LOT more common ground between our views than differences. I don't want what I would consider a large infusion of talent. I'd like to see 10% more and see what that does. And then tweak it from there. Since I've started, let's say there are are least 20% more active owners vying for talent. I would speculate that there are at least 30%+ more who have a good handle on talent evaluation thanks to a free education in the forums. Yes, my numbers are very rough guesses. The argument about talent levels can be made effectively from either side. I dont want to dilute my message by getting off track and arguing nuances. I see my side and I see the other side. The game will be good either way. But simply, I would like to see the size of the draft pool tied to the number of active or human owners.

#57632	03/09/2018 3:17:11 pm	Apr 8th, 2035
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9600 Haverhill Halflings III.1	The main thing an infusion of talent would achieve is getting people to ask for another infusion of talent. Once the precedent is set it can't be taken back. I find the whole discussion rather humorous. Talent is relative. Sure we could stock the draft pool with a bunch of POT 15s and 16s. Would just make everyone's 12s and 13s useless and the 14s would be the new minimum talent. And when you draft a POT 14 player in the third round you will be upset at the C&R pick. End of the day, some teams will have more talent than others. Regardless of where the "average" is set, that isn't going to be effected. There is tons of talent in the draft. The only reason you don't think a POT 10 guy is good, is because Steve set the average higher than that. Steve could just as easily decrease the talent in the draft pool and it would have the same effect (none).

#57633	03/09/2018 3:23:02 pm	Apr 8th, 2035
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9600 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Increasing the draft pool does nothing. If you want better/fairer distribution of players, you need to increase the number of picks we choose from each week. The more options we have, the more distributed the talent. But better distribution also means the talent runs out quicker. So you need to decide if you want fair distribution, or exciting late rounds. Those are conflicting priorities.

#57637	03/09/2018 10:26:39 pm	Apr 10th, 2035
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	The top teams in Broken Bat aren't there because they got lucky drafting once or twice. We can adjust draft pool size or draft selection...but there are negative trade-offs to both. Right? Over time, random luck evens out and superior strategy wins out. Steve Updated Friday, March 9 2018 @ 10:33:08 pm PST

#57640	03/10/2018 7:06:35 am	Apr 10th, 2035
Dan6176 Joined: 04/30/2016 Posts: 254 Inactive	I think the draft pool is fine the way it is, though I would like to see a bigger roster. Maybe 10 more players which would give us the ability to take more chances on players who are longshots.

#57644	03/10/2018 10:08:57 am	Apr 10th, 2035
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4	Aw heck, Steve could add 10% to the draft pool without telling us and no one would even be able to tell the difference.

#57659	03/11/2018 1:12:40 am	Apr 14th, 2035
JJNZ Joined: 12/09/2014 Posts: 1580 Yakima Monster III.3	I'm of the opinion that generally they should stay as is, but each time a new country is added to BB, that draft pool should increase accordingly. For example Denmark was the latest country added, I don't know whether the draft pool became larger, but it seems to be (could well just be my imagination) that less New Zealanders are appearing now that more international countries are out there.

#57667	03/11/2018 1:01:37 pm	Apr 14th, 2035
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	I agree with JJNZ. If any pools should be expanded, it should be the International one because we keep adding countries for players to come from, but it is resulting in the International teams becoming less competitive since it is spread among so many different countries.

#57984	04/02/2018 9:27:32 pm	Jul 9th, 2035
ephenssta Joined: 06/29/2016 Posts: 196 Inactive	It would be interesting to see a small increase in the international pool with the addition of every new nation. Aside from that, I agree with most of the people saying that the pools should remain as-is. If there's a change I want to the draft pool, I would like to be able to select whether I'm looking at more pitchers or hitters. I get a little frustrated when I want to spend my first rounds on pitchers and I end up seeing very few pitchers in the first 3 rounds.