Posted by cubcub113 on 8/24/2020 7:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/24/2020 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 8/24/2020 7:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/24/2020 6:32:00 PM (view original):
In hindsight, so many of these issues would be gone if I had kept recruiting to one session. I wish I had stuck to my guns on that one.

Its been a while but I dnt remember anyone in BETA asking for the 2 recruiting sessions. From my recollection we all brought up issues it would/has caused.

Lol, are you being serious or trolling me again?

Seble is right here, although I don't think mully is trolling. He had the 1 in-season recruiting session. We convinced him to add a second one after job change so it didn't take so damn long to get a team of our recruits.

edit: saw Benis' link. He does have the phrase "maybe 1 or 2 days after championship game to finish it up" which I guess sounds like a little seed in seble's mind of a second saw. But, I remember a lot of people (including me) pushing for a full-ish second session during beta,

Here are some Beta posts from Mully

Mully1

and he keeps going

Posted by Benis on 8/24/2020 7:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/24/2020 6:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 8/24/2020 6:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/24/2020 6:32:00 PM (view original):
In hindsight, so many of these issues would be gone if I had kept recruiting to one session. I wish I had stuck to my guns on that one.

Omg yes!! 2 sessions has caused so many problems!

I don't recall too many people clammoring for 2 sessions or why it was even done. I did think it was a good idea conceptually because it gave you something to do during the season. I was dead wrong.

In fact many people were loudly clamoring for it. I never even considered it until the beta period.

No way.

EDIT: Real link to first mention of two recruiting sessions on 9/14/15. Beta started Spring 2016

But that came from when you first shared your idea of helping out new people by not asking them to recruit right away - like we did in 2.0.

Your idea was that no one could recruit the first season at a school and everyone hated that we couldn't immediately recruit their own players when changing jobs. So you came up with the proposal to split into two sessions. Read through the thread. A couple liked the idea of in season recruiting and split sessions but most did not. Most just said "well it's better than the first idea". - some like our friend Mully said how bad of an idea it was.

So the clammoring wasn't for two recruiting sessions but just to be able to recruit the 1st season - which we could do already. The two recruiting sessions thing exists ONLY because you didn't want noobs to have to recruit right away.

Bump. First link was messed up. Check it now Cub.

Two recruiting sessions was established about 9 months before Beta even started. Not even close haha

I fail to see how other than making the game more complex, and also fun, by adding a 2nd recruiting session... just because it introduce more points of potential abuse that this is what is being questioned right now. Complexity and decision making is why this game is fun, your recruiting strategies can changed based on the signing preferences of the recruits you are going after.

The reason this thread was lit on fire and is now 14 pages long is because, a polarizing member of the community because of how he plays the game reported another member for similar behavior to what he does, gutting a team and leaving. I think loyalty is an issue for switching jobs but please keep in mind, there will be new players and retention on new players in this game is already miserable because it takes months before you are even coaching teams with your players.

I hope this thread isn't going to turn into a ******* contest as to who said what with the addition of a second recruiting cycle from 4 years ago. I can't tell you guys to stop but I don't think it's worth arguing over. What do you get if you're right and Seble is wrong? Nothing except likely even less communication moving forward. And if Seble was right? He's supposed to be the 'authority' figure and I doubt he's going to stoop down to posting image of old posts. We don't know what goes on behind the scenes; we only get a view into the window of his comments. I've been a moderator on some bigger subreddits and every subreddits' big rule seems to be - we don't tell them who discussed what in the moderator chat and always be as vague as possible.

This whole thread astounds me either way. If you read it front to back like I did and I opened the 10th page a minute or so after Seble's comment at that point.

• Positives - Sports' recruits are being unsigned and Seble communicated that the reputation and loyalty will know be looked into. Sports quoted me earlier and seemingly agreed this is a fine resolution. Another positive is that Seble communicated with us pretty actively.
• Negatives - I'm astounded that Seble really had no idea why everyone's panties were in a knot regarding ab90. I always just assumed somebody kept an eye on the forums and was keeping tabs on everything. I only visit the forums once a month or so and I even knew everything about the guy from the last time thread where he was accused of the <1000 mile rule. To not know anything about the drama that is the HD forums is one thing (although some of those ab90 threads have been longer than 20 pages), but to not know why you'd tank a school your first seasons, why you'd fill up scholarships for your future school's benefit, and general game strategy just strikes me as concerning.

I'm really hoping Seble is cool with more communication going forward. Not "I'll communicate more" and not to be seen again but set times a few months in advance for an HD feedback thread where Seble can listen and respond. It doesn't need to be every week or month. I'd be cool with every 6 months honestly.

But I'd also hope everyone to be mature during it and not use it as a chance to lash out (I know, I know..)

I didn't mean the actual beta testing. I meant the period of feedback and adjustments that happened after my initial proposal. I consider all of that part of the beta.

The problem isn't necessarily the two periods, but it's when job changes happen in the middle. My initial ideas toyed with having two periods, but both would be prior to job changes. Once you have people changing jobs, that's what really introduced these loopholes that Sportsbulls is exploiting. The core of my preference is that I didn't want to force new coaches to recruit right away. The compromise was allowing the job period to happen in the middle, so that existing coaches could recruit some at the new job.

1. Remove the second recruiting session.

2. Modify Elite 3 to 5 star recruits into having fewer eligible seasons (and increasing their initial IQ grades to compensate). Thus you don't have any surprises when you do recruiting (i.e. you know you're recruiting a 1 and done FR). You then only have 3 kinds of Big Board status: Graduating, Declaring, Staying. This solves the EE roulette which dictates who competes the next season or not.

Why not make recruiting take place after job change to start the new season? We recruit for future seasons, not the current one.

Posted by Sportsbulls on 8/24/2020 7:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/24/2020 7:00:00 PM (view original):
Other than jumping to better jobs, what is ab90 doing that is being deemed unfair?

"We've been alerted to you intentionally sabotaging your team in Tarkanian by signing unqualified recruits. Please be aware that this type of behavior is against the rules and is taken very seriously." AB sabotages his teams by not recruiting (which leads to very poor classes even though he is capable of a lot better, like the argument used for me), setting practice plans, or scheduling.

"Behavior that unfairly impedes another coach is prohibited." ABs actions of not recruiting or benefiting the team at all impede the next coach in the same manner mine did.

Seble, did you see this post? Curious on a response here.

"The core of my preference is that I didn't want to force new coaches to recruit right away."
The downside is you force them to play a full season with someone else's players, which can be demotivating. If I'm a new player I think Id rather my team sucked because I didnt know what I was doing yet versus because someone else botched the team.

If you want to close the loophole, just allow new coaches to "cut" the previous signed recruits from RS1 if they so choose.

This thread has exceeded all my expectations

Posted by buddhagamer on 8/24/2020 8:11:00 PM (view original):
1. Remove the second recruiting session.

2. Modify Elite 3 to 5 star recruits into having fewer eligible seasons (and increasing their initial IQ grades to compensate). Thus you don't have any surprises when you do recruiting (i.e. you know you're recruiting a 1 and done FR). You then only have 3 kinds of Big Board status: Graduating, Declaring, Staying. This solves the EE roulette which dictates who competes the next season or not.

I think this is a pretty good approach, and is similar to what I have been looooong advocating for - making pro/academic a scout able preference. The academic preference would be self explanatory. Guys who want to “go pro” will be much more likely to leave early as soon as they are good enough to be considered; and if they’re never considered, may still leave after 2 or 3 years to go play in Europe or wherever (the lower level guys may choose juco at higher rates).

Posted by mullycj on 8/24/2020 8:24:00 PM (view original):
"The core of my preference is that I didn't want to force new coaches to recruit right away."
The downside is you force them to play a full season with someone else's players, which can be demotivating. If I'm a new player I think Id rather my team sucked because I didnt know what I was doing yet versus because someone else botched the team.

This is actually a great point...

Nothing is worse than playing a bad team, only to recruit your first season with horrible recruits anyways.. Might as well let them recruit for the upcoming season, and learn something during the season before recruiting happens again.

Moving recruiting around would eliminate Bulls' nonsense, and also eliminate the clear tanking from AB when he siphons through teams more often than TopDogg does his underwear.

Posted by mullycj on 8/24/2020 8:24:00 PM (view original):
"The core of my preference is that I didn't want to force new coaches to recruit right away."
The downside is you force them to play a full season with someone else's players, which can be demotivating. If I'm a new player I think Id rather my team sucked because I didnt know what I was doing yet versus because someone else botched the team.

To be honest, I disagree, but it's completely an opinion one way or another so you're definitely not wrong.

Now I don't think the current system is great but if I was new - I wouldn't want to recruit right away. Little to no clue as to what to do regarding the recruiting interface, similar to gameplanning, but now add on you have no concept of good or bad players. Recruiting is honestly a lot - it's more time consuming than just game planning. The stuff we fly threw in scouting and recruiting now is honestly kinda difficult to grasp originally. I left the season after 3.0 released (if I have my time periods right) because I didn't get it. The scouting services plus camps plus assistant scouting, the recruiting pool page, preferences, home visit and campus visits having limits, drop downs, understanding budgeting, and after all of this... you could potentially lose a recruit due to a dice roll mechanic that is controversial at best. At least if they stay and get a few wins, they can understand who is good vs. who's not and they're more likely to stumble into the forums for help.

Separate point but something similar that I hope Seble considers if he is looking to alter the recruiting session: I've had 4-5 friends I've discussed coming back to the game. They've come back, take over a D1 team, and without fail I hear something like "wait, what? I have a full budget to recruit but anyone worth a damn is signed or about to be signed. What the heck am I supposed to do?". It's incredibly demotivating and a turnoff in returning.

Posted by buddhagamer on 8/24/2020 8:26:00 PM (view original):
If you want to close the loophole, just allow new coaches to "cut" the previous signed recruits from RS1 if they so choose.

Great solution.