All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > international frustration
9/3/2013 10:31 PM
don't you just love it when you are 6 scouting trips into an international recruit...on a div 2 budget...and still have not learned the players potential in ATH, SPD or DEF!?
9/3/2013 11:12 PM
Syriasly!
9/4/2013 8:34 AM
It depends how far away the international player is. If the guy is really far away, then yeah that might bother me. If it's not so far, I don't worry about it and probably send more scouting trips.

Then again I'm not really into using internationals. I think I have a grand total of one of my five teams right now.

9/4/2013 12:20 PM
I brought this up to CS some years back and they said they had thought about adding a targeted scouting trip option. Really wish they would, it's ridiculous that your scout would go watch a big man play and give you 5 scouting reports and not tell you anything about his rebounding or low post play. Even if these cost a bit more they would be valuable. 
9/4/2013 12:35 PM
Posted by kmasonbx1 on 9/4/2013 12:20:00 PM (view original):
I brought this up to CS some years back and they said they had thought about adding a targeted scouting trip option. Really wish they would, it's ridiculous that your scout would go watch a big man play and give you 5 scouting reports and not tell you anything about his rebounding or low post play. Even if these cost a bit more they would be valuable. 
Because I'm so very sure that when Calipari or Bill Self send an assistant out to watch a kid --- a kid they've targeted for his shooting or his rebounding -- they'd just say "grab some burgers, schmooze with the coaches, and let us know about his FT shooting".

It ought to be a feature and I'm with you, I don't care if it's an extra cost.

9/4/2013 1:38 PM
I know, imagine Cal sending a coach to watch a big man prospect and then asking his feedback and gets told "he can't really shoot, he's really athletic, good shoot blocker, and has good stamina, but oh I didn't really pay attention to his rebounding. Should I?" 
9/4/2013 4:32 PM
I'm still convinced that my old suggestion of a "player roles" Scouting Trip should be implemented.  The idea is this:

There are 12 possible categories of responses to a scouting trip.  Each trip now gets you 4 - presumably randomly selected by even weight.  At, say, a 25% cost increase over a regular scouting trip (with no greater award of recruiting effort), you would select one of your own designated player roles in a new Player Roles Scouting Trip using a drop-down menu within the recruiting tab (using the same layout as the old booster gift arrangement).  Your settings in the selected player role would be used to determine the likelihood of getting a response in each particular category.   There would only need to be a minimum percentage likelihood of, say, 5% for each category as a floor.

As an example, if you create a PG player role that puts 25% into each SPD, PER, BH, & P, then all the other 8 categories would get a 5% likelihood and those 4 categories would get a 15% likelihood of a response.  Since this behaves as a weighted combination, the odds of receiving a response in the more heavily weighted categories is much better than 15%.   As another example, a defined C role could have 100% REB.  That would provide odds of 45% REB & 5% in the other 11 categories.  That would not quite assure a response to REB in the scouting trip, but it would be awfully close.

This would provide a clear purpose for the player roles tool and would improve the results for those actually trying to use scouting trips to select recruits (rather than for the recruiting effort itself).   Since this randomization is done already, I don't expect that it would be so burdensome on server capacity, but I'm not a programmer.
9/4/2013 4:50 PM
yes!  i am the coach, you are the scout ... get what I want, or you're fired with a quick swift kick to the nuts!!!  However, we have no power and are left to the forces of randomization ... I think it's stupid
9/4/2013 5:42 PM
Posted by hogstench on 9/4/2013 4:50:00 PM (view original):
yes!  i am the coach, you are the scout ... get what I want, or you're fired with a quick swift kick to the nuts!!!  However, we have no power and are left to the forces of randomization ... I think it's stupid
If you're commenting on my suggestion, I don't think you are thinking it all the way through.  As I pointed out, you could virtually assure a response in a single category and make it exceedingly likely that you would get a response in up to 2 or 3 if you weighted them highly enough in your assigned player roles.

If the game were to just add a "select any 4 categories scouting report", then the whole scouting portion of the game would be completely ruined unless that type of trip cost 4 or 5 times as much as a regular scouting report.   Just think of the expense report your assistant coach would return in an effort to avoid a kick in the nuts! 
9/4/2013 5:52 PM
Posted by rogelio on 9/4/2013 5:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hogstench on 9/4/2013 4:50:00 PM (view original):
yes!  i am the coach, you are the scout ... get what I want, or you're fired with a quick swift kick to the nuts!!!  However, we have no power and are left to the forces of randomization ... I think it's stupid
If you're commenting on my suggestion, I don't think you are thinking it all the way through.  As I pointed out, you could virtually assure a response in a single category and make it exceedingly likely that you would get a response in up to 2 or 3 if you weighted them highly enough in your assigned player roles.

If the game were to just add a "select any 4 categories scouting report", then the whole scouting portion of the game would be completely ruined unless that type of trip cost 4 or 5 times as much as a regular scouting report.   Just think of the expense report your assistant coach would return in an effort to avoid a kick in the nuts! 
oh, no, sorry man - I was just venting my own frustrations after reading the OP.  I'm just super sick of sending a couple ST's and then getting the exact same response in all of them, then sending more, and gettin the exact same thing. 

You know I'd be all for your idea Rog, it would be glorious
9/4/2013 8:41 PM
Posted by kmasonbx1 on 9/4/2013 1:38:00 PM (view original):
I know, imagine Cal sending a coach to watch a big man prospect and then asking his feedback and gets told "he can't really shoot, he's really athletic, good shoot blocker, and has good stamina, but oh I didn't really pay attention to his rebounding. Should I?" 
A counterpoint could be that the scouting information that we do get is always correct. In real life, different scouts may evaluate differently and are not always accurate. Everything you get here you can count on. No worries about the scouting report being wrong. That trade-off kind of evens things out IMO.
9/4/2013 11:44 PM
They're off base with this, you send someone to scout a player and you should get a full report.  There is no rationale that can possibly explain why you're assistant goes to check out a player and doesn't give a full report on his skills or lack thereof.
9/5/2013 2:29 AM
Yeah, I used to do some advanced scouting as an assistant coach. If I'd have come back with a half-assed scouting report like the ones we get, I'd have been fired. The STs should be more expensive (probably at least as much as a CV) and they should cover all of the major areas in which a player is evaluated in WIS. I don't really see the reasoning for why they shouldn't.
9/5/2013 11:11 AM
Posted by TRrrr on 9/4/2013 8:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by kmasonbx1 on 9/4/2013 1:38:00 PM (view original):
I know, imagine Cal sending a coach to watch a big man prospect and then asking his feedback and gets told "he can't really shoot, he's really athletic, good shoot blocker, and has good stamina, but oh I didn't really pay attention to his rebounding. Should I?" 
A counterpoint could be that the scouting information that we do get is always correct. In real life, different scouts may evaluate differently and are not always accurate. Everything you get here you can count on. No worries about the scouting report being wrong. That trade-off kind of evens things out IMO.
This is true to an extent. No way anybody can make a 100% accurate judgement on 1 visit. But I used to scout high school basketball (had my own report I sold to college coaches) and you'd be surprised how accurate you can be after seeing a player a few times. For the most part when you do scouting trips you are doing a few, so you can just assume at that point your scout will be close to 100%. You also get a lot more detail about the player's character by scouting, you talk to coaches, family members, friends, teammates, anybody that can give you insight into their personal life and work ethic. All things considered you get a very good idea on where a player will end up. 
9/5/2013 11:23 AM
I think if you got a full report then you'd only need one scouting trip for each kid, so the cost would have to be enormous or it wouldn't affect the game the same way it does now.
of 2
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > international frustration

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.