Posted by johnsensing on 9/15/2015 7:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by seble on 9/15/2015 3:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by fd343ny on 9/15/2015 3:50:00 PM (view original):
these are interesting plans - it might help people react to them if one could explain - just a few bullets - what the primary goals of these changes are. Fixing recognized problems/issues? Enhancing game play? other?
Some of them - like the greater texture of preferences - seem to me like improvements that should help long known issues - like the ability of non elites to recruit reasonably good players.
Others seem like nice ideas in search of a problem.
The overriding reason for this update is to make the game more fun and realistic. A secondary reason is to level the playing field more at DI, to give lower prestige schools a chance to get some better players.
seble, your two sentences seem contradictory -- you can either make the game more realistic, or you can give lower prestige schools the chance to get better players, but I don't think you can do both. In real life, South Carolina's not taking a kid from UNC that UNC really wants -- Northwestern's not taking a kid from Kentucky. I am leery of a lot of these changes -- seems to me the issues people complain about can be fixed by adding preferences (which Iooks good to me), tweaking conference cash, tweaking the "jumps" in recruiting, and (in my view, most importantly) fixing recruit generation. I am very concerned about unintended consequences here.
It's true that in real life, elite programs are going to usually win recruiting battles, and I think that's how HD should work as well. But right now, elite programs don't just usually win, they
always win. That's not realistic, especially when it comes to non-elite recruits - if a 2- or 3-star player is deciding between Duke and a mid-major, he very well may choose the mid-major because he could play right away there, he likes the offense they run, they just seem to want him more, et cetera. HD needs to model that better.
Seble, I like your ideas here, except for the tempo/style of play preferences. I tend to shift my tempo to fit the opponent, and my style of play to fit my roster, and I think most other experienced coaches do the same; I don't like the idea of my gameplanning strategies costing me points with a recruit.
9/15/2015 7:49 PM (edited)