Dropping teams as nu game approaches Topic

In the last couple of months, I have dropped Grambling in Iba and Seton Hall in Crum

Just unchecked renewal for Harvard in Phelan. For a long time, I had been at six teams.

No way I would have left except that the new game is coming. Postseason more than 20 seasons in a row. NT six seasons in a row - four of those at large bids. 25 or more wins six seasons in a row. 20+ wins every season for ages.

Leaves me with 3 teams to use up credits before the new game

Who else has dropped or is dropping teams?
7/29/2016 6:27 AM (edited)
I am down to One team...and used credits for two more seasons and then I am gone.
7/29/2016 4:01 AM
I have dropped from 6 teams to 2 teams. I will use up my credits and then leave HD. I used to read the forums all the time and this has just taken the fun out of it for me. I am not interested in learning a new game and learning the new nuances. I think there was more important things to fix (job hiring/firing logic). This was just kind of the thing that pushed me over the edge of not being that into HD anymore.

I am sure there will be people who counter and say it isn't learning a new game, etc. or don't be lazy. Honestly I have two kids who are under 3 and HD was a nice getaway for me, but now it is becoming much more time consuming.
7/29/2016 7:24 AM (edited)
Went from 15 to 4
7/29/2016 7:25 AM
I went from 8 to 5, will get to beta at 4. I would like some worlds to remain with the old system, say Naismith and Tark. And I wish BETA started with a new world and IBA, Smith got merged. And Crum, Rupp merged. Then move to BETa.
7/29/2016 8:19 AM
merging worlds is the dumbest ******* idea ever
7/29/2016 8:29 AM
i've been in the beta for a few days, and it's taking me a massive amount of time and I'm not really enjoying the scouting experience. i think there are some really cool ideas in there (levels of scouting could have just been applied to FSS as is, preferences are cool!). BUT i just don't like the look/feel/interface, and i cannot imagine new users getting into this. all this data thrown up on your screen in ways that don't seem very intuitive to me. perhaps i'll get used to it and change my mind, but i'll probably drop my 4 teams down to 1 or 2 so I'm not wasting renewals figuring it out. it may end up being a great game, but so far, i just find the interface intimidating and scouting alone is taking too much time to have multiple teams. i'm skeptical but hopefully they do advertise more and people come in and aren't totally scared off by the new scouting interface alone.

regardless, you all have to admit that having a tiny user base with 10 teams each is not a very good long-term business model anyway. this game is kind of dying without marketing, update or not.
7/29/2016 8:35 AM
Dropped 1 team. Too much invested to drop DVC and still rewriting billyg's record book at Southwestern so I'm waiting those out until they likely go too when the change roles out. 99% sure I'm retiring. To play the new game I have to want to play it and put simply I don't, so unless I get a major itch to want to learn and play a new HD in a year I'm probably done. :(
7/29/2016 8:58 AM
I've actually done the opposite. I have added teams while the game is still the same, but may retire completely when these changes come. I didn't love the BETA
7/29/2016 9:39 AM
"I am sure there will be people who counter and say it isn't learning a new game, etc. or don't be lazy. Honestly I have two kids who are under 3 and HD was a nice getaway for me, but now it is becoming much more time consuming."


I think it is a new game, at least recruiting which is most of the game is new. To say otherwise would be disingenuous. It also takes more time ( albeit spread over weeks).

I think, me personally, the recruiting experience is richer. It does take more time, it does involve more mouse clicks, but I like the fact that I can spend a couple hours over a couple of weeks finding and scouting players.

It's different, it will take some time to learn the nuances. It's also pretty far away, IMO. Seble is still experimenting with it.
7/29/2016 9:45 AM
Posted by Trentonjoe on 7/29/2016 9:45:00 AM (view original):
"I am sure there will be people who counter and say it isn't learning a new game, etc. or don't be lazy. Honestly I have two kids who are under 3 and HD was a nice getaway for me, but now it is becoming much more time consuming."


I think it is a new game, at least recruiting which is most of the game is new. To say otherwise would be disingenuous. It also takes more time ( albeit spread over weeks).

I think, me personally, the recruiting experience is richer. It does take more time, it does involve more mouse clicks, but I like the fact that I can spend a couple hours over a couple of weeks finding and scouting players.

It's different, it will take some time to learn the nuances. It's also pretty far away, IMO. Seble is still experimenting with it.
Pretty far away, like how far in your own personal estimate TJ? To answer the OP, I'm at 10 from 16 headed towards 0.
7/29/2016 10:06 AM
Only : Merging is the best idea. There are too many worlds, not enough owners. Worlds should not open unless there is enough owners playing in them... It's as simple as that.

I don't get the fun of playing in D3 with 70 owners... nor 100 owners. So just make some sort of draft, keep owners on team where they are the only one on it and merge.

This game got diluted because of the hurry to open worlds. Now, it's dying because it's too sparse everywhere. Naismith D3 is fun because we still have a good group of owners... But I'd like to even get more. I'd say 150 owners is right perfect in D3 and D1, 130 in D2. Merging would get you close to that.

7/29/2016 10:08 AM
explain how the hell you manage that? with all the double teams, who was the NC season 72 who was the coach then who is the coach now what prestige do we use.

oh a draft lol you got to be kidding me im not going to even say why thats a bad idea, if you think thats a good idea you're dumb to think thats anything but a logistical nightmare and a bigger shot to the face than the beta

merging is absolutely terrible and stop trying to suggest it its honestly a worse idea than anything seble has ever come up with
7/29/2016 10:24 AM (edited)
I will always keep my 2 main teams, in Crum Div-1 and Naismith Div-3.
I added a 3rd team this past May, and plan on staying there a while, at Div-2 Hawaii Pacific.
For most of my 3 years here, I've only had 2 teams.
.
7/29/2016 10:19 AM
Posted by zorzii on 7/29/2016 10:08:00 AM (view original):
Only : Merging is the best idea. There are too many worlds, not enough owners. Worlds should not open unless there is enough owners playing in them... It's as simple as that.

I don't get the fun of playing in D3 with 70 owners... nor 100 owners. So just make some sort of draft, keep owners on team where they are the only one on it and merge.

This game got diluted because of the hurry to open worlds. Now, it's dying because it's too sparse everywhere. Naismith D3 is fun because we still have a good group of owners... But I'd like to even get more. I'd say 150 owners is right perfect in D3 and D1, 130 in D2. Merging would get you close to that.

If world populations really go down, I agree that merging some worlds would be a good idea.

Actually, since Crum is my primary world, I wouldn't mind turning Crum into a HD Beta World, and keep the other Worlds as HD Classic.
I wonder if an idea like that is completely off the table.
7/29/2016 10:26 AM (edited)
1|2|3...8 Next ▸
Dropping teams as nu game approaches Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.