Posted by kmasonbx1 on 2/13/2014 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by fd343ny on 2/13/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
I think some randomness is good, but I think the scouting reports should be set so that each report covers skills not covered in prior reports. It may take 2 or 3 evals to learn what you want, but you should get all skills with a few evals.
Yea, seriously. How quickly would a head coach fire his scout if he went to watch a guard play 5 times and not get any comment about how he handles the basketball?
This was the subject of the thread, no? I disagree, but not on the grounds of realism precisely.
I have no idea how long that takes to decide whether a player has the potential to improve greatly. Famously, Bill Guthridge scouted out a kid named Jordan to Dean Smith and said "he's unmilked". It seems to me that a lot of recruits get missed and a great many that are guaranteed 5 star recruits with scouts at every high school game are just unable to compete in college, let alone the NBA. How do you simulate results that are hailed in over-priced magazines as certainties and turn out, in reality, to be anything but?
It would be fair to say that the game would be improved by having some scouting tool that gave a better likelihood of getting the results that you want to know, but I don't think that it should guaranteed in just 3 scouting trips (each scouting trip referring back to any previous ones and eliminating redundant responses). At some point, the way scouting works in this game is going to separate from reality. Speaking only of the way that recruiting competition works in this game, having 3 or 4 trips absolutely guarantee responses in all categories would completely eliminate the, probably unintentional, similarity to reality in scouting recruits; that you don't get a certain answer with a certain amount of scouting effort.
I've made a suggestion that would go halfway from the current system to what is suggested here. The response has been...well...damn crickets! So let me offer an even less popular suggestion: the real problem with recruiting is that FSS is TOO accurate! I would suggest implementing competing scouting services: vague, competent, identical to the current FSS, FSS PLUS (including some or all HH or LL). To keep the recruiting game from collapsing completely, those different levels would need to have wildly different cost structures. In general, though, IMO standard FSS itself should be more expensive than it is...or more vague.
What say ye crickets?