4/25/2013 9:29 PM
Angmar: "And you still never answered my previous question about why YOU see the need to have more than one ID?  Craigcoug, craigaltonw (and a third one having to do with BYU, no), if you're not going to use them to have more than one team in a world, why the need to have HD teams under different ID's?  Sounds a little shady."

Well, I'll tell you. I did it so that I could cheat. Makes sense, doesn't it? Cheating is made much simpler now that I have multiple IDs. And I mean, we're only talking about the ones I admitted to. I have 24 other usernames. You'd never guess some of the crazy names I've come up with.

Yeah, no. The real reason: I noticed how I could pay $5 to start a new team under a new name instead of the $13 I'd pay starting a new team under the same name. Scandalous!

As for having, fun... Every one of these threads is a complete joke and makes WIS look like a complete joke. If I were running things at WIS, I would change the rules to one team in a world just to end dumb threads like this one. That would seem like a good solution to keep the game fun. Simple rule. Simple enforcement. No grey area. No members with torches and pitch forks rioting at doorsteps of anyone who would dare disagree with their holy and pure opinions of truth and righteousness.

Agreeing to disagree, Angmar... That is something that we adults are required to do in life. Here, let me pour that juice for you. I don't want you to spill. Alright.  Now go join your friends at the kiddie table.
4/25/2013 10:04 PM
"Simple rule. Simple enforcement. No grey area."

So...like the 1000-mile rule?

As of now, we have a simple, easy-to-enforce rule. The problem is finding the infractions. Got news for you, that's going to be the same problem if you go to a one-team-per-user-per-world rule.

The only issue is that you seem to think the game would be better if the latter rule was in effect. But it wouldn't be any easier to enforce the rule, nor would the cheating stop.
4/25/2013 10:09 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 4/25/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wronoj on 4/25/2013 12:19:00 PM (view original):
here's the issue-- i have a team in wooden and a team in naismith, and this means i've got to recruit (easily the most time-consuming thing we do) 10 days out of every 45. now, if I want to add a third team in a third world, i've got to recruit another set of 5 days. this becomes a time suck and burns me out, and i drop 1 or more teams. I know there are people who can handle more teams in more worlds than that, but I'm not one of them. 
Granted I've only got one season of experience recruiting - but I would think this reasoning would be used in favor of NOT wanting multiple teams in a world. Everyone is different, but I'd rather spread the craziness out. Two teams in one world should be twice the amount of work in those 5 days, right? Twice the searches, twice the analysis, twice the clicks. Considering how much of a time suck that is already, I can't imagine wanting to double that. I'd rather try to have that period correspond with a relatively tame period in a different world.
its the whole, having to check in every 3 hours thing, that most of us find so disruptive. if you are going to wake up an 2am or 5am to check something for 1m, it sure would be nice to spend 2m and check 2 things, and get to sleep through the night, another night :)
I don't doubt your reasoning, but I can't relate. If I ever start waking up twice in the middle of the night for an online sim, it will have become work, and no longer worth my time, much less money.

I'll play by whatever rules TPTB see fit to enforce, but I do prefer the rules to be enforced.
4/25/2013 10:24 PM
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 4/25/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wronoj on 4/25/2013 12:19:00 PM (view original):
here's the issue-- i have a team in wooden and a team in naismith, and this means i've got to recruit (easily the most time-consuming thing we do) 10 days out of every 45. now, if I want to add a third team in a third world, i've got to recruit another set of 5 days. this becomes a time suck and burns me out, and i drop 1 or more teams. I know there are people who can handle more teams in more worlds than that, but I'm not one of them. 
Granted I've only got one season of experience recruiting - but I would think this reasoning would be used in favor of NOT wanting multiple teams in a world. Everyone is different, but I'd rather spread the craziness out. Two teams in one world should be twice the amount of work in those 5 days, right? Twice the searches, twice the analysis, twice the clicks. Considering how much of a time suck that is already, I can't imagine wanting to double that. I'd rather try to have that period correspond with a relatively tame period in a different world.
its the whole, having to check in every 3 hours thing, that most of us find so disruptive. if you are going to wake up an 2am or 5am to check something for 1m, it sure would be nice to spend 2m and check 2 things, and get to sleep through the night, another night :)
I don't doubt your reasoning, but I can't relate. If I ever start waking up twice in the middle of the night for an online sim, it will have become work, and no longer worth my time, much less money.

I'll play by whatever rules TPTB see fit to enforce, but I do prefer the rules to be enforced.
yeah, some of us are crazy enough to check in every cycle. pretty many actually. i mean, even now that i put in 10% of the time i once did, to each team i care about (i used to play obsessively, to put it lightly), i still will often check every cycle when its meaningful in tark (and with 2-3 teams, that is often two to three of the first three nights).
4/25/2013 10:27 PM
Posted by tedlukacs on 4/25/2013 10:37:00 AM (view original):
Gee, some of the posters are beginning to sound like junior HS kids. Colonels, you really need to lose the attitude. It is too typical of college football message boards, when Alabama and Auburn kids start dishing the garbage. Said this in another thread that multiple teams in one
World are a minor--and extremely minor--issue compared to collusion. Have heard, for example, that the A10, led by the fabled Lostmyth,
Was a prime offender. Schools working together can be killer effective, and I know of a couple of veteran coaches that left the game because of collusion. That is the elephant. Multiple teams in one world is the flea. It can be used for cheating, mostly in saving some recruiting money, but would guess collusion is very widespread. Deal with that meaningfully, and then maybe I will start to care even a little about people with more than one team in the same world--though a rule is a rule, and we should observe the sainted thousand mile rule, as long as it is in effect.
ive never heard anything bad about the a10, i know they were a ridiculously good conference though - easily the best non big 6 d1 conference of all time (and pretty damn good for a big 6 d1 conference, too). people have many times speculated about cheating in the most dominant conferences, but usually it seems without merit. so, im sort of curious if others who played in d1 there have an opinion on that. not to suggest anyone was cheating, i ask purely from academic curiosity. 
4/26/2013 12:56 AM
Posted by gillispie on 4/25/2013 10:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 4/25/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wronoj on 4/25/2013 12:19:00 PM (view original):
here's the issue-- i have a team in wooden and a team in naismith, and this means i've got to recruit (easily the most time-consuming thing we do) 10 days out of every 45. now, if I want to add a third team in a third world, i've got to recruit another set of 5 days. this becomes a time suck and burns me out, and i drop 1 or more teams. I know there are people who can handle more teams in more worlds than that, but I'm not one of them. 
Granted I've only got one season of experience recruiting - but I would think this reasoning would be used in favor of NOT wanting multiple teams in a world. Everyone is different, but I'd rather spread the craziness out. Two teams in one world should be twice the amount of work in those 5 days, right? Twice the searches, twice the analysis, twice the clicks. Considering how much of a time suck that is already, I can't imagine wanting to double that. I'd rather try to have that period correspond with a relatively tame period in a different world.
its the whole, having to check in every 3 hours thing, that most of us find so disruptive. if you are going to wake up an 2am or 5am to check something for 1m, it sure would be nice to spend 2m and check 2 things, and get to sleep through the night, another night :)
I don't doubt your reasoning, but I can't relate. If I ever start waking up twice in the middle of the night for an online sim, it will have become work, and no longer worth my time, much less money.

I'll play by whatever rules TPTB see fit to enforce, but I do prefer the rules to be enforced.
yeah, some of us are crazy enough to check in every cycle. pretty many actually. i mean, even now that i put in 10% of the time i once did, to each team i care about (i used to play obsessively, to put it lightly), i still will often check every cycle when its meaningful in tark (and with 2-3 teams, that is often two to three of the first three nights).
its not that big a deal really (the getting up for recruiting thing). Go to bed after 11pm, get up at 4:50 am. See what happened at the 2 am cycle, wait for the 5 am to process, go back to bed...
4/26/2013 1:16 AM
Posted by dacj501 on 4/26/2013 12:56:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 4/25/2013 10:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 10:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 4/25/2013 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 4/25/2013 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wronoj on 4/25/2013 12:19:00 PM (view original):
here's the issue-- i have a team in wooden and a team in naismith, and this means i've got to recruit (easily the most time-consuming thing we do) 10 days out of every 45. now, if I want to add a third team in a third world, i've got to recruit another set of 5 days. this becomes a time suck and burns me out, and i drop 1 or more teams. I know there are people who can handle more teams in more worlds than that, but I'm not one of them. 
Granted I've only got one season of experience recruiting - but I would think this reasoning would be used in favor of NOT wanting multiple teams in a world. Everyone is different, but I'd rather spread the craziness out. Two teams in one world should be twice the amount of work in those 5 days, right? Twice the searches, twice the analysis, twice the clicks. Considering how much of a time suck that is already, I can't imagine wanting to double that. I'd rather try to have that period correspond with a relatively tame period in a different world.
its the whole, having to check in every 3 hours thing, that most of us find so disruptive. if you are going to wake up an 2am or 5am to check something for 1m, it sure would be nice to spend 2m and check 2 things, and get to sleep through the night, another night :)
I don't doubt your reasoning, but I can't relate. If I ever start waking up twice in the middle of the night for an online sim, it will have become work, and no longer worth my time, much less money.

I'll play by whatever rules TPTB see fit to enforce, but I do prefer the rules to be enforced.
yeah, some of us are crazy enough to check in every cycle. pretty many actually. i mean, even now that i put in 10% of the time i once did, to each team i care about (i used to play obsessively, to put it lightly), i still will often check every cycle when its meaningful in tark (and with 2-3 teams, that is often two to three of the first three nights).
its not that big a deal really (the getting up for recruiting thing). Go to bed after 11pm, get up at 4:50 am. See what happened at the 2 am cycle, wait for the 5 am to process, go back to bed...
+1
4/28/2013 12:01 PM (edited)
Posted by indiansrck27 on 4/24/2013 9:12:00 PM (view original):
But WHY would the quality of the game improve? Because you think that maybe possibly conceivably, feasibly, by chance, perhaps people cheat?

Just play the game, do you. Dont worry about other people. If maybe possibly conceivably, feasibly, by chance, perhaps someone feels the need to cheat, just be a better coach and beat them.
The quality of the game would improve because 2 teams in the same world is collusion.  And except for the 1000 mile exception (which obviously people break without a second thought) that is written in the rules, would not be allowed.

You can not have 2 teams in the same Hard Ball Dynasty world, or in the same Sim League world ... why should you be allowed to do it in HD or GD.

in HD, if you absolutely want to play only in 2 game a day worlds and there are only 3 of those ... AND ... if you have a team in all 3 already ... AND ... if you publish publicly that you have 2 IDs and follow the 1000 mile rule for your 4th (or 5th or 6th) team, then I could see that as a reason.

Or if you only like 1 game worlds, same for 8th, 9th, or more team since there are 7 worlds.

It is demonstratively collusive to have 2 teams in the same world ... especially in the same division.  And collusive is bad because of perception.

I have 10 teams, one in each world.  There is plenty of competition and you can spend plenty of time doing it .. and it is far from free.  I can win, I have been National Coach of the Year several time, though I have not yet won a National Championship.  I have had several teams in the Final 4 and Championship games in several worlds.

I have never accused anyone of cheating, but I think that with the money I pay I should be able to expect that I can compete on equal terms and not have to worry about a coach having 2 teams in the same world.

I also do not believe in name calling, and I can see why people might have a different opinion.  But it is a good enough rule for all the other SIM games besides GD and HD ... why should those games allow something that is considered cheating in the other games on the WIS site?

4/28/2013 1:34 PM
K, just want to point something out here...HD has 900+ teams, GD has 600-700+ teams in each world...HBD has what 24, 28, 32?  Do you understand context?

4/28/2013 1:52 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 4/28/2013 1:34:00 PM (view original):
K, just want to point something out here...HD has 900+ teams, GD has 600-700+ teams in each world...HBD has what 24, 28, 32?  Do you understand context?

Yes, I understand context.  I also understand that there are more than enough worlds to make it unnecessary.  If there were not, then that would be a different issue.

4/28/2013 2:25 PM (edited)
But like billyg said before, the reason many of the multiple teamers have multiples is because they built up their D2 team into a mega-monster and don't want to leave it to some average boob, but they also want/aspire/yearn to play D1, and I can sympathize with that.

I'm at a crux personally because I would like to play D1 again, I'm only eligible for D1 in Phelan, where I've been at Mount Olive for 30 seasons and have been their only human coach ever, so I have no intention of leaving ever...so I can understand why guys do what they do.  A lot of you guys seem very naive, narrow-minded, and short-sighted to me...it's like you don't see the big picture or "beyond your station"...you hear/see "CHEATING" and you just fixate....you don't attempt to understand why someone might want multiple teams in the same world, you just placidly remain a hardline stickler to the rules, without really weighing the merit of the rule either.  You can say I'm undermining a lot of people here, but ask yourself, have you thought about all of the stuff I've just mentioned here?

4/28/2013 2:29 PM
So, it would take you ALMOST as long to start a second team in that world, win enough games to make sure you could win a good Div-II team if you left it to go to Div-1 ... OR ...  you start a new team and advance it all the way to Div-1.

In the second case, you could have just started that team in a different world.

In the first case, where you win enough Div-3 or Div-2 games at a new school to make sure you will win the Job at your current school so you can move that school's userid up ... If you are a really good userid, it would take a lot of wins to ensure that.  Enough wins/seasons that you could likely have qualified for Div-1 in a new world anyway.

Besides, it only takes 4-5 seasons, MAX, to turn any Div-3 or Div-2 team in to a consistent top 25 team (or certainly a National Tournament team) if you have any idea what you are doing.  At Div-1 it is a lot harder because of baseline prestige and limited openings.

So, it is unnecessary.  If there was some huge issue with number of available teams then fine ... but there is not.
4/28/2013 6:16 PM (edited)
Posted by hughesjr on 4/28/2013 2:30:00 PM (view original):
So, it would take you ALMOST as long to start a second team in that world, win enough games to make sure you could win a good Div-II team if you left it to go to Div-1 ... OR ...  you start a new team and advance it all the way to Div-1.

In the second case, you could have just started that team in a different world.

In the first case, where you win enough Div-3 or Div-2 games at a new school to make sure you will win the Job at your current school so you can move that school's userid up ... If you are a really good userid, it would take a lot of wins to ensure that.  Enough wins/seasons that you could likely have qualified for Div-1 in a new world anyway.

Besides, it only takes 4-5 seasons, MAX, to turn any Div-3 or Div-2 team in to a consistent top 25 team (or certainly a National Tournament team) if you have any idea what you are doing.  At Div-1 it is a lot harder because of baseline prestige and limited openings.

So, it is unnecessary.  If there was some huge issue with number of available teams then fine ... but there is not.
hughes, when i started in tark, i loved my d3 school. when i wanted to move to d2 (it took 3-4 seasons back then), i merely picked up a user name 1 season early, squeaked into the NT, and was safe to get my school back. that took 1 season, it would have taken 3-4 back then. plus, there was ONE 2/day world. then, when i wanted to move to d1, a few months later - i moved up, moved my d3 to d2, and just started a new id, took a bit of a risk on the d3 school, but i got it. that was instant. it would have taken me a good 8 seasons to get to d1 on another id. 8 vs 0 - thats a big difference, dont you think??

its important when considering this issue now, to not only consider how you would get there, now, but how would we have gotten there in the past. a lot of people have asked to make the rule, you CANT pick up a team within 1000 miles now, even in different divisions. but not to go back and make everyone move. people had really legitimate reasons to get multiple teams then, and now if you make someone drop a d1 team, and go start in another world - for them to get back to their A prestige d1 school, that could take multiple years, in real life terms. so i think your characterization of the time issue here, is just WAY off, not even close.

so, even if you think its easy not to need teams in a world now, as someone starting from scratch - that doesnt say anything about how it was in the past, or what it takes for people to get back where they are, if you make them move. THOSE are the two issues that must be considered for people who had multiple teams in the world, before the rule was in place. otherwise, you are comparing apples to oranges.

beyond that, you characterization of colonel's situation today today doesnt make any sense to me. colonels has 30 seasons at mount olive, getting to 200, 300, 400, 500 wins - those are big things for getting to d1. he could probably spend 2-3 seasons in d3, and have a pretty damn good chance of getting mount olive back. or, 1 in d3, and maybe 3 in d2, to be even safer. however, after 4 seasons, hes not going to be *ANYWHERE* close to getting the resume he has on his other ID. that could take him 15-30 seasons, to replicate a 30 season resume. moving up to d- d1 is not the same as moving up to a decent d1 gig, and i dont understand why you would characterize it that way.

for a guy who shows such deep analysis on certain issues (like how to set +/- in that thread, recently), it really feels to me that you are trying to make your point, in the interesting of winning the argument, instead of doing the full analysis to determine the reality of the situation, and to find the truth of the matter. i bet if you put half the analysis into this as you do on some other things, you will see the # of seasons it takes to retake your team is still way less than it is, to replicate that resume for purposes of advancement (even today - and it was more so true in the past, when there was only one 2/day world). even someone at a d3 school for 15 seasons who wants to move up, might not be able to jump to d1, but is WAY closer to getting a solid d1 school, because they probably have a good 300 wins. you can get those back in 15 seasons, or safely retake your school by picking up another d3 team for 1 season. its just not even close. its true that you could spend 1 season in d3, and move to d2, in 1 season instead of 0 - but that doesnt capture the entire picture, you are WAY closer to getting to d1 with the 300 win resume. furthermore, someone who has to drop their long time A prestige d1 team to get compliant today, who picked up teams in accordance with the rules, thats the difference between having a d1 team now, and spending as much as 15-20 seasons in another world to get back up. in 1/day, that could be THREE YEARS. to call these differences small or negligible just makes no sense to me.

4/28/2013 3:57 PM
I recently built a resume in Knight so that when the team I want becomes available I can apply for it. 15-20 seasons to get to D1 team or even a Big 6 team is an over exaggeration. I spent 1 season at a D3 program, then 5 seasons at a D2 program. I stayed longer at D2 than I needed. 4 seasons at a D1 school and I was able to get GT in the ACC. I ended up getting busy and forgot to renew so I lost them after 1 season, but CS put me back to my lower D1 school. I had to rebuild my resume, but after 5 seasons I was qualified for another Big 6 school.

I have just started the process in Phelan so I will have two chances at getting the other D1 team I want. I am a mediocre coach, but I expect to be at a Big 6 school in less than 10 seasons. 
4/28/2013 4:38 PM
Posted by kevin_w64 on 4/28/2013 3:57:00 PM (view original):
I recently built a resume in Knight so that when the team I want becomes available I can apply for it. 15-20 seasons to get to D1 team or even a Big 6 team is an over exaggeration. I spent 1 season at a D3 program, then 5 seasons at a D2 program. I stayed longer at D2 than I needed. 4 seasons at a D1 school and I was able to get GT in the ACC. I ended up getting busy and forgot to renew so I lost them after 1 season, but CS put me back to my lower D1 school. I had to rebuild my resume, but after 5 seasons I was qualified for another Big 6 school.

I have just started the process in Phelan so I will have two chances at getting the other D1 team I want. I am a mediocre coach, but I expect to be at a Big 6 school in less than 10 seasons. 
A mediocre coach?  Ha, I think not.  Humble, yes.  Mediocre, far from it.  Kevin, as I told you before, I'm glad it was you that took over Duke when I finally decided to leave.  I knew then that there would be no drop in performance and if anything, there would be increased performance.  You, sir, are FAR from being a mediocre coach.  Don't disrespect yourself like that.
of 6

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.