Posted by moy23 on 9/4/2010 11:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/4/2010 11:03:00 PM (view original):
Why can't you appease both sides?  Have one world run with the way "5 or 10" of us want it to be like and the other worlds can be the way they are now.  If that one world is unprofitable, shut it down.  Most companies offer variations of the same product line to appeal to as broad a consumer base as possible.  Imagine GM offering one vehicle - take it or leave it.  The one size fits all that WIS employs for HD really should be re-evaluated.

Because opening a new world of any kind will further dilute the existing worlds. see knight and phelan in hd or you may recall wis having to recall some hbd worlds about a year ago because they had too many.

Posted by Lizak on 9/5/2010 10:07:00 AM (view original):
There's nothing wrong with turnover in a customer base if that's your strategy.  If you base your moves on knowing that you are being smart.  Often, though, turnover is an indicator that you are failing to satisfy people who are initially attracted to you.  For most companies, that's a problem as it's much easier to keep a customer than it is to gain a new customer.  If there were associated extra costs with some customers, those might be the ones that it would be good to lose but I don't think that idea applies to a product like WIS.  I really doubt WIS thinks losing paying customers is a part of their overall strategy.  You have to be very good at marketing your product to make that deal work.

While you can sometimes see a mass exodus (if you can agree on the definition), things usually go downhill (fail) at a slow rate.  The Romans didn't sit around thinking "We are done as a civilization" even though in hindsight, it's easy to see the gradual decline.  So what I'd like to know is how the number of paying teams looks.  Is it staying level?  On a decline?  That's way more important to know than anyone's opinions as to whether coaches are leaving or staying. 

Specifically, I agree that the recruiting changes have made it tough on non-top BCS schools.  I coach Virginia in Smith and it's disheatening to see the few good players already "claimed" by UNC, Maryland, Duke, etc. after the first recruiting cycle.  I'm already a letter grade down in prestige, I have the same conference money as they do, and if I have more money due to open scollies, that only means I have more holes to fill and can't afford the top guys anyway.  It feels like a battle I won't win very often and is always extremely risky.  At least, if I'm in a non-BCS conference, I feel like I'm in the same boat as the rest of my mates and can still compete to win the conference.  Is that situation realistic?  Sure.  Is it fun?  Definitely not.

In the past, I had my issues with baseline prestige.  I finally accepted that if I wanted to play their game, I had to change my approach and move to a BCS school.  This time around, it feels like now I have to change again and go for a top BCS school.  That might actually be impossible.  So what choice do I have?  Drop to a non-BCS and be happy with winning my conference?  Drop even farther down the ladder to D2 and play against a lot of sim teams and beginner coaches on their way up to the "big time"?  (I know there are top coaches in D2 and intend no disrespect to them, I just don't think D2 has the same level of coaching talent overall).

I'm not going to say the game is better or worse.  It's just less fun for me.  That's the bottom line for all of us.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/5/2010 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/4/2010 11:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/4/2010 11:03:00 PM (view original):
Why can't you appease both sides?  Have one world run with the way "5 or 10" of us want it to be like and the other worlds can be the way they are now.  If that one world is unprofitable, shut it down.  Most companies offer variations of the same product line to appeal to as broad a consumer base as possible.  Imagine GM offering one vehicle - take it or leave it.  The one size fits all that WIS employs for HD really should be re-evaluated.

Because opening a new world of any kind will further dilute the existing worlds. see knight and phelan in hd or you may recall wis having to recall some hbd worlds about a year ago because they had too many.

I'm not promoting the opening of a new world.  Use one of the existing worlds.  If that upsets some established coaches in that particular world, who cares?  That's the WIS philosophy is it not?  Continually changing the game so that it's not fun for some and fun for others.

Posted by moy23 on 9/5/2010 12:38:00 PM (view original):
Personally I think the recruit generation will be fine in the grand scheme of things. Seble can make a small tweak if needed and I'm sure he's following the change. I'd prefer putting this threads effort into fixing the job process and possibly developing a "coach prestige" that coincides with school prestige.

Posted by hughesjr on 9/5/2010 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I tire of the "you have no D-i experience" ... guess what, neither to you with the new engine.  And the D-I experience you do have in the new engine, you don't like ... because you want it to be exactly like it was.

I do not need "OLD" DI experience ... that is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

You have probably never been arrested for prostitution in Bangkok (or maybe you have) ... how is that relevant to playing HD with this engine.

Posted by Lizak on 9/5/2010 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Your numbers aren't really useful in isolation.  I'm not even sure your opinion about the health of WIS is valid unless you have insight into management's expectations.  We don't know the real level of profitability and we don't know if management is happy with the amount of return on the resources devoted even if they are profitable.  Companies divest themselves of profitable lines and divisions all the time.  Especially when they are such a small part of the big picture. 

A company like Fox could easily decided they want to do something completely different with the product.  They could decide that they want to shut down the whole thing but hold on to the code for the next phase of where they want to go.  So they wouldn't even sell it to someone else.

I'm not saying you are wrong, just that you paint a picture that is still just based on your opinion of the few facts that are listed.  Those facts don't really allow us to make a solid assesment of the real situation. 

We'll never really know the truth but I still would like to see the curve of HD human coached teams to see if it's going up or down.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/5/2010 12:57:00 PM (view original):
We have both been playing this game a long time.  I disagree but I do respect your opinion, moy.

Posted by daalter on 9/5/2010 1:20:00 PM (view original):
Moy, I appreciate your attempts there, but I don't think that's really the issue we're talking about. I don't think WIS as a whole is going to go out of business due to this change. (Maybe someone else suggested that and I missed it, not sure.) It's just simply if the change has an overall negative effect on HD.

Posted by hughesjr on 9/5/2010 6:59:00 AM (view original):
I tire of the "you have no D-i experience" ... guess what, neither to you with the new engine.  And the D-I experience you do have in the new engine, you don't like ... because you want it to be exactly like it was.

I do not need "OLD" DI experience ... that is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

You have probably never been arrested for prostitution in Bangkok (or maybe you have) ... how is that relevant to playing HD with this engine.

I agree that's the question because really, it's the only thing that is relevant to the discussion.  Even WIS can't control whether they go out of business or not but they can make changes that make the game more popular or less.  If they move in the "right" direction to make more people happy with it, that's a good thing for them although we all must understand, it could be detrimental to our individual enjoyment.