Help us - what would you like to see in Barnstormers 2017 ?

First, tip of the cap to Moose and the crew that runs this.

To me bonus points are necessary as its about qualifying for postseason and winning championships, so I'd advocate for keeping it that the way it is.

How about condensing the time from tourney 1 to the finals? So a bit of overlapping similar to but not as prominent as the Mystery Tournament so we can finish 2017 in 2017.

The 24 team idea for the Finals/Playoffs is interesting if that's the direction you guys decide to go I'd suggest having a regular season event at 24 teams as well. The player pool obviously changes and getting a crack at it before the finals would be a good experience for those that haven't played in that arena before.

$200 is a different kind of fun and does lend itself to more strategy then I first thought but if push came to shove I'd like to see 6 events across 60, 80, 100, 120, 140 with the appropriate DH mixed in. And maybe instead of locking in the high end caps with a DH maybe at the beginning of each Barnstorming Tournament you randomly assign three caps as DH.

Thanks for the opportunity to share my thoughts
Cheers
Rosie

What if all barn storming leagues were 24 teams?

Do away with $200 million. To much of a luck of the dice.

I would keep it at 5 rounds. Pick a lesser amount

Also lessen the pts for division and playoff winners like BruceF said

And expanded playoffs sure would increase the interest for the lower teams. LIKE MYSELF!!!!

mditka891

First , thanks for the "publicity" . If anyone knows how to build a team for the playoffs, I'm sure open to suggestions. I tend to believe that all you can build for is run differential, anything else is luck.

I had a guy in a league a few years ago, after winning with a negative run differential, that his team was "built to win 1 run games". Personally I think that statement is BS, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

In my opinion, 200M leagues are great, but must be dealt with a live draft. It offers a different set of strategies, and it is truly different than the 20XX format. Maybe offer either live draft 200M or automatic 140 M??

1. Only 5 leagues-60,80,100,140,200 Keep all five scores.
2. Give one point for each regular season, division and WS win. Give 5 points for making playoffs and 5 more points for winning championship.
3. Keep a 12 team championship league arrived at the same way it was for 2016.

First thx to Moose and all who work to make this tourney happen.

I would vote to keep the 200 cap but change it to a 24 team league. 24 team leagues spread out the talent with less chance for 1 player to put together a team of all stars. I see 24 team leagues as a part of the ATG/Strat experience so a 24 team league should be included in the rotation.

To the players who say too much luck dictates drafts I say this. In the world of total chaos, AKA HAL's gaming engine, luck is involved in every aspect of the game. If 10 players in a 24 team league all rank Bonds #1 on their draft board luck determines who gets him. Luck plays a part in every bad beat, miraculous win and and all game engine decisions that are made in the game. Luck can take a team with negative run differential to a championship. You can put together a great team and watch them miss the playoffs by 10 games. Luck is what it is, a part of the game.

Just 2 cents worth from a future barnstormer...

24-team 200m leagues can be brutal...it's very easy to have a bad auto-draft that you can't recover from. I don't think it makes sense in a tournament setting. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the 200m cap in any setting and would rather see the tournament across the 60-80-100-140 caps.

Thanks,
Bill

I also want to lead off with thanks to Moose and his team. Great job all around.

Second, I'd like to counsel against making radical changes. The tournament is basically working very well. There is a lot of participation, and most players stay in until the end. It's great competition.

Also, if changes are made, don't make too many changes at once. Each change might have potentially significant unintended consequences. Making a lot of changes simultaneously could multiply the risk of creating a lot of outcomes that are individually unpopular and that result in a really massive cumulative effect. In general, each year till now has been marked by one or two modest tweaks, and that's the way I'd go for the next season.

I think post-season results need to count. The primary goal of a baseball season, real or simulated, is to win a championship. If we don't count championships, that overlooks this primary goal. If a wildcard team wins the championship in real baseball, they're the champs. Why not here as well? And wins are rewarded. A 100 win team gets 100 points for the season, plus 5 for making the playoffs. That's 105 points even if they're out in the semi's. But this 100 win team has the possibility of getting 120 points--a much higher ceiling than the 85 win team. So winning games does matter. Also, to win the tournament overall, or make the final round from the 10-45 group, you have to win a championship. So why reward championships only at the end?

I think the points system rewarding a championship makes basic sense. An 85 win wildcard team that wins a championship gets 105 points. As mentioned, 100 win team knocked out in the first round also gets 105 points, but it's upper limit of 120 points is much greater. All of this seems reasonable to me. You could tweak it and make the championship worth 15 points, say, but that doesn't fundamentally change anything, and then you need to figure out how many points to give someone who makes the finals.

I personally favor keeping 200M on the theory that Barnstormers is meant to challenge a player in all aspects of the game. We have to manage successfully in six of seven of the different kinds of parks. And we have to manage at a range of salary levels. So I'm in favor of including all the standard salary levels. A manager who can succeed at both the 60M and 200M levels has shown an extensive mastery of the game. I do like the idea of live draft at 200M. I'm not sure about requiring it, but it should remain an option.

One thought for an interesting tweak would be to randomize the salary level of the final round. We could play through all five of the standard levels in the first five rounds. Then the sixth round would be a randomly chosen level (one of the five standards) that everyone would have to play. And we'd have to play it choosing one of the two remaining park types still open to us. That would introduce an interesting level of uncertainty going into the final round. Just a thought, though.

Anyway, my main idea is: if it aint broke, don't fix it. Approach change cautiously. Watch out for unintended consequences. And avoid making too many changes in a single year. Thanks again to Moose for keeping this tourney going!

. If a wildcard team wins the championship in real baseball, they're the champs.

Not in my book they're not. Never were and never will be