Posted by fd343ny on 7/20/2014 5:26:00 PM (view original):
in my opinion, the simple fix would be to program the evals so they dont repeat a category - with a few evals you are guaranteed full coverage
other changes seem more complex with other possible unintended side effects
That's simple enough, but it would be a tremendous change to the recruiting game. At a certain point, player evaluation and recruitment is going to not mimic RL. For recruiting based upon budget and prestige, valuable information must come at a price. Having a guarantee that you will get the information that you want is just a bit too much of a change. All of a sudden the market for Internationals, Puerto Rico and X'fers would be totally changed. Just send 3 scouting trips and be guaranteed to know everything you need.
That's an unintended consequence.
Having scouting trips call back to user defined player roles to change the likely responses of any scouting trip makes a world of sense. As far as what would appear to the end user, it would be simple. Select Scouting Trip with a dropdown menu that shows only your defined player roles from which you could select (e.g. "PG", "3", whatever). On the programming side, there would need to be some work to get the weighted randomization to work properly (and to avoid having a user be able to absolutely guarantee a response in any particular category), but the end user would just understand that they were instructing the Assistant Coach to look for specific traits over others.
This could perhaps be even more clarified by making the player role selection only available in a new "Head Coach" Scouting Trip. With a modestly high price tag and, potentially, increase recruiting effect.