Name	% to HV	AP	PT	DIST	Success	Play Style	OFf	Def	Conference strength
xx	47	25		Good	BAd				good
xx	49	25		Very Good
xx	70	25			Good	Good		Very Good	good
xx	65	25				Good	Very Good	Very Good

I can't draw any real strong conclusions on this.
I can tell that the a good in success and a good in conference strength is worth more than a very good in Offense.

There are 2 issues.

1. The amount of effort to unlock is different for players even within a division. Better players take more to unlock.
2. Preferences are granular for some items. The distance one in particular is hard to judge. That VG on distance may not be the same as VG on defense just for the fact that you could be on the very top end for distance and very bottom end for defense. So that could be the reason why one appears to be more impactful than the other.

I am pretty sure that your APs are adjusted for Prestige before they are applied as well. At least I think they are :)

Posted by hughesjr on 10/17/2016 6:35:00 PM (view original):
I am pretty sure that your APs are adjusted for Prestige before they are applied as well. At least I think they are :)

They are.

Some players are RANDOMLY easier to unlock.

Oh god. Not the R word!

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/17/2016 7:03:00 PM (view original):
Some players are RANDOMLY easier to unlock.

That runs counter to everything observed. Do you have a citation for that?

if it doesnt have a random element, with what do you think your observations suggest the unlock effort varies?

If one replaced the word random with the word idiosyncratic would you agree?

if you think there is some linear and predictable relationship, what is it with?

is it ranking?

number of stars?

some other factor or factors?

Posted by fd343ny on 10/18/2016 12:26:00 AM (view original):
if it doesnt have a random element, with what do you think your observations suggest the unlock effort varies?

If one replaced the word random with the word idiosyncratic would you agree?

if you think there is some linear and predictable relationship, what is it with?

is it ranking?

number of stars?

some other factor or factors?

if it doesnt have a random element, with what do you think your observations suggest the unlock effort varies?
I am not sure it is random.

If one replaced the word random with the word idiosyncratic would you agree? Not sure.

if you think there is some linear and predictable relationship, what is it with? One thing is Division of recruit. Projected D1 players take longer to unlock than projected D2 players. There are others, I think, as well .. as indicated below.

is it ranking? Yes, probably

number of stars? Yes, Probably. This is also based on Ranking though, so the same effect.

some other factor or factors? One factor is your prestige, another is how well you match up with preferences .. because, all effort (including APs) is modified based on prestige and preferences, before being applied.

=====

Some other thoughts:

Your other effort MIGHT be modified by the same amounts to an individual recruit (since all effort is modified based on Prestige and Preferences. So, if I do 1 CV and 20 HVs .. and you do 1 CV and 20 HVs .. your effort might count more or less than mine .. and the amount more or less that it counts, those ratios in unlocking things may be a good indicator of who will give you the most bang for your effort.

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/17/2016 7:03:00 PM (view original):
Some players are RANDOMLY easier to unlock.

I doubt it. It's a preferences, overall rating and AP you spend thing. I have noticed that the bad preferences slow things down.

I mentioned it in my first post guys. Better players are harder to unlock- Seble said this in Beta.

Not sure if this means better overall rating or what. But not all guys at same division, same preferences with same prestige will be the same.

I agree with zorzii that your APs must be modified by the preferences, because I unlock guys I match up really well with faster than similar players I do not match up well with.

Would the group also agree that there may be a "multiplication" effect on positive preferences rather then linear? Seems that the more positive preferences without negatives offsetting them really shortens the time to unlock ( perhaps only D2/D3 because that is where I observed).

Posted by wvufan76 on 10/18/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):
Would the group also agree that there may be a "multiplication" effect on positive preferences rather then linear? Seems that the more positive preferences without negatives offsetting them really shortens the time to unlock ( perhaps only D2/D3 because that is where I observed).

Well .. I do think that each effort is multiplied by a factor for each preference and for prestige .. but I think the end result is linear. But .. if the guy wants playing time (and you give him minutes), that one factor gets better every turn .. which is non linear for that one preference.