Posted by pkoopman on 8/22/2016 4:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by zorzii on 8/22/2016 4:41:00 PM (view original):
Stop with the late, early thing. It does not work... Ees need a solution fair to those who lose them.
Define fair. Is fair an expectation to replace an early entry with the same caliber player on the late scholarship? I'd say nah. If you are expecting to lose an elite player early, you should make your first priority to target a similar elite player in the early period. As everyone knows, if you lose more than a couple EEs, you're going to be hurting. Is that unfair because teams are used to a system where EEs don't hurt as much? I tend to think not. Losing an advantage can feel like a penalty if you're accustomed to the advantage. I suspect that's what's going on here.
Gameplay is going to adjust, and I suspect resourceful coaches are going to find ways to get quality, and mitigate damage of EEs pretty fast.
In HD 2.0, EEs still squash team's championship aspirations (you are sent back to the drawing board).
In HD 3.0, they squash your championship hopes if your lucky and only get 1, make it difficult to stay even (i.e. keep your prestige) if you get 2 or 3, and more than 3, you will likely have to try and run with 9 if you're lucky, else you are completely screwed (especially if you still have seniors and will end up with having to recruit 8 or 9 the following season).
All this means is either elite coaches will game the development of their recruits (by slowing development right down) or putting a huge emphasis on battling for lesser recruits (like 2 or 3 stars) and we will avoid battling other A+ prestige schools for elite level talent (as they won't be worth the trouble).