Posted by mlitney on 3/17/2021 1:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/17/2021 1:29:00 PM (view original):
I am really not concerned. I am also unconcerned by the way folks like ab90 change jobs, and I don’t understand why people care - if WIS doesn’t mind, why should we?

You can have some valid discussion about balance in terms of what qualifications look like when the system is comparing a resume, but previously it was *heavily* weighted toward “experience” ie number of seasons put in. What this change has done, in reality, is bring us closer to balance - we are simply in the adjustment phase. It will normalize after a few seasons in each world, as we get used to it, I think. The important part is that we know we can apply for the jobs we want. As long as there are consequences to the choices we make, and there are, then there is no problem with a game that presents us with plenty of rational choices and paths.

I actually think the new logic takes away choices and paths. There is really only one path that makes sense now. Why would anyone put 3-4 bad seasons on their resume when they can hop jobs and keep a strong resume until UCLA opens up?

I had no problem with ab90's methods. For the most part, no one else was applying for the jobs that he took, and it was in D2/D3 where baseline prestige doesn't exist. Imagine taking over a D1 program that already has the type of kids to make the NT for the next 2 seasons. Then you leave and take over a similar program once again getting a brand new budget for RS2. You would never actually need to build a program and still out-qualify most coaches when that high baseline program comes open.

Sure that coach will probably struggle once they finally get their dream job, but without firings, it won't really matter. And what of the coaches who lose out on their dream job because they spent some seasons in lower D1 and learned the hard lessons about roster management and recruiting? It doesn't make sense to do that anymore.

I'm all for some changes to the job process, but this was a very drastic change. All I'm asking is that we consider any repercussions that might come along with it.

Some possible balance changes:
1. No new budget for RS2 if you haven't spent at least 3 seasons at your prior school.
2. Drop the prestige of the new school when a coach takes over. Maybe just 1/3 letter grade below baseline. The coach still gets his program but has to earn his success there.

Take away paths? No. This path literally wasn’t open before. You can still do what you’ve always done, if that’s how you want to play. If the coach at UCLA sticks around, you’re still going to have to wait for them to leave. When they leave, you’re still going to have to compete against other coaches for the job. You now have multiple paths open for you as to how you want to build your career.

At this point, we don’t need a balance change, this is the balance change. No one changes jobs for the RS2 budget, RS2 recruiting is so lean as it is, most good recruits are either gone or so heavily invested in, they are very difficult to even compete for. And the prestige already drops when new users take over, unless the new user has a very long and well established resume.

I am all for fully thinking about and discussing repercussions. I just think you’re overreacting a bit here. So let’s put this in concrete harm and benefit terms. This is all a little abstract. Who do you think exactly is harmed (potentially) by this change? And who exactly do you think is benefitting unfairly, beyond the normal complaints we have now, as I said earlier, with discussions revolving around which resumes get preference when there is competition?

Posted by courtmagic on 3/17/2021 10:45:00 AM (view original):
Good thoughts Mlitney and I understand your concerns.

My biggest concern/problem is the ability of coaches at A prestige schools (whether the coach is experienced or not) having the ability in/during Recruiting to offer up a scholarship on say the 2nd/3rd cycle of day 1 and only get to Moderate on the recruits Considering List, do absolutely fckn nothing for 3 whole days after that, and than come in at the Final cycle before Signings start (11AM cycle the day of signings) Drop the House with 10 Home Visits, a Campus Visit and maybe playing time, and automatically jump up to Very High on the recruits Considering List and completely knock one or two schools down to Moderate or Low who have been battling for 3 whole days, have put in the work, the time, the effort, and the visits, and whom for 3 days were sitting at Very High or High on the recruits Considering List. It's TOTAL BULLSCHITT!!

I understand the A prestige team/s have an advantage over a B prestige team and A prestige carries a lot of clout, but to totally flip upside-down the Considering List in one cycle is not right. I think all teams should go to High and than you have a 3 team race instead of a 2 team race. The work and effort the original 2 teams put in over the course of 3 days should count for something. IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT.

Fellow Veterans and Hall of Famers, share your opinions.

This is where D1 experience comes into play. D1 recruiting is 85% targeting the right players to match your prestige. the other 15% is monitoring what everyone else is doing and expecting the A prestiges to jump on the guys they can get. You don't learn how to deal with this at d2 or d3 so I'm excited to see the new d1 coaches learn. Theres tons of different approaches you can take going after a recruit and the snake job is one to always be ready for.

My rule is dont recruit vs a team with more than a full letter grade above you. Example if im a B prestige i will battle an A- school but almost never battle a A prestige unless i crush on prefs.

Moral of the story recruit smarter not better.

I love this change. Of course I wish I knew that I could apply for higher prestige jobs before taking D- prestige Loyola MD in Knight, lol.

But seriously, the reason I picked up this game was to inevitably play at the DI level. I’ve got a DII team I’m fond of in Tark, and I’ve learned a lot at the DII level, but ultimately my reason for joining/staying is to try and make a go of it at the mid-major level in DI and then in a big name school or school I’m a fan of in real life.

I get the concerns about DII being a better place to learn the game than DI, I pretty much agree with that assessment. But at the same time I think having more full DI worlds Is going to make for a lot of fun. It’s of course going to make it even harder for a small school to win a title, but I’m okay with that. Right now at Loyola MD my goal is essentially try and not be a basement dweller — and I’m fine with that. If I can make a S16 run in a few years I’ll be ecstatic.

Finally, I do think the idea of contracts/firing that others have mentioned does need to be implemented in some capacity — especially at the higher prestige jobs. OOTP has this feature where the Owner gives you a set of goals each year, I think something like that could be very good for HD.

For example if you’re HC at North Carolina and they’re coming of a rough patch maybe Year 1 goal is to bring in a top 100 recruit and make the NT, and then the next year the goal would be to win a game in NT. And so on to the point where coaches at these great schools can’t just sit around and be mediocre for a dozen seasons while users who have UNC as their dream job are twiddling their thumbs at another lesser school. And I don’t really think users will be upset about a firing system IF the goals of the program are laid out clearly before each season. If I pick up UNC and proceed to make the NIT 4 years in a row, I think I’d understand if I got canned — and I’d go try and get better at the game at a lower DI school or DII.

anyways, those are my thoughts and ramblings. Overall, I love the changes to jobs so far — I think it’ll be so much better for user retention in the long run. I understand why the old heads are nervous, but nothing is stopping anyone from staying down in lower divisions if they don’t want to move up. I know I won’t be leaving my DII Tark dynasty even knowing I could go get a top job now.

I think the one misnomer here is that jumping around in D2 is going to lead to D2 coaches getting elite jobs over D1 coaches.

Yes in this situation a D2 coach got a job over a D1 coach, but this coach had a NC and a NC runner up in the last 4 years of their coaching resume and barely... got the job over the D1 coach. When you jump around in D2 the likelihood for a coach jumping school to school and winning multiple NT games I don't feel is sustainable. As a D2 coach you are going to need a couple deep runs to beat out D1 coaches.

So yes, elite D2 coaches may get jobs over middle of the road D1 coaches, but above average coaches won't. Ultimately, we have the ability to tweak things, other than the issues with the UI and qualifying for jobs I think the desired result is being achieved by this change.

Hopefully that reassures some.

so if you apply for a job and dont get rejected the next time a cycle runs - are you in contention for that job regardless of the site saying you are qualified or not?

The bug is you will be qualified for jobs that the site says you are not. If the game processes the job applications and you get a rejection it means you are not qualified for that job.

Hopefully that clears it up.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/17/2021 1:29:00 PM (view original):
I am really not concerned. I am also unconcerned by the way folks like ab90 change jobs, and I don’t understand why people care - if WIS doesn’t mind, why should we?

You can have some valid discussion about balance in terms of what qualifications look like when the system is comparing a resume, but previously it was *heavily* weighted toward “experience” ie number of seasons put in. What this change has done, in reality, is bring us closer to balance - we are simply in the adjustment phase. It will normalize after a few seasons in each world, as we get used to it, I think. The important part is that we know we can apply for the jobs we want. As long as there are consequences to the choices we make, and there are, then there is no problem with a game that presents us with plenty of rational choices and paths.

WifS does care. And should care. Its been stated from CS that the "ab90 stuff" is considered playing the game in a manner in which it wasn't intended to be played.

Making it easier to get to D1 is a terrible idea. I'm strongly against these changes. And others are voicing that here now as well. Not only are we making it easier to get there, we're basically buying their path to D1 now. Not a fan of this one bit. Adam stated "not going to make someone wait around 10-20 seasons to get to D1"..... why not?! It's how you hook a coach. EVERY last one of us here love the game for what it is. This game is a marathon, not a race. No one plays for 6 months and quits, that was going to be a part of our great community anyways. If you love HD you love HD and you're going to be here. Handing out D1 jobs like candy isn't the right way in my opinion. Getting to an elite program gives you something to strive for. Firings would help, I agree. But you can't do one without the other. Firings need to start immediately if we're handing out participation trophies now days.

I'm a fan of effort, I'm a fan of change, I'm a fan of improvements.

I'm not a fan of this new job logic at all.

I don't want to open Pandora's box but it *feels* like the job requirements were loosened a tad too much here. I cannot link the team for some reason, but look at the move the coach from Fitchburg St (D3, Crum) just made. In 32 seasons they've never been past the S16 in D3 and they just took over A prestige Clemson. This has nothing to do with the particular coach involved (I'm not sure I've ever coached against this person in the past) but that seems like a GIANT leap. Maybe this is just the "new norm" we'll all have to get used to but again, this leap seems astronomical.

Posted by darnoc29099 on 3/17/2021 9:34:00 PM (view original):
I don't want to open Pandora's box here but it *feels* like the job requirements were loosened a tad too much here. I cannot link the team for some reason, but look at the move the coach from Fitchburg St (D3, Crum) just made. In 32 seasons they've never been past the S16 in D3 and they just took over A prestige Clemson. This has nothing to do with the particular coach involved (I'm not sure I've ever coached against this person in the past) but that seems like a GIANT leap. Maybe this is just the "new norm" we'll all have to get used to but again, this leap seems astronomical.

Agreed

I get that folks who put in the time would be upset. I also admit, I'm a gluten for punishment, not looking to go Topdog conference/team, etc. But I am also willing to stick it out. Many are not and the game feels like it's bleeding players. Not a good thing for ANY of us.

Most of us sign up to play at D1 schools, schools we recognize. Whether your goal is Duke, Dayton or DePaul, most are not here to play at Ferrum, or Pittsburgh St. (no offense to these schools). I've got patience but I almost quit once.

As an example, A group of former Wake students/fans (approx 12) used to play and discuss a game called Drive the Lane. A few years back the poor game had a server hack/crash that effectively killed the game. Warak and I have tried for a year+ now to get those folks to join us here in HD as this game is far better than what DTL ever was (IMO). The two things they all seem hesitant to play for is Cost, and more importantly the time it takes to get to D1. Yes D1 might not be perfect and I've seen some folks prefer D2, but the point is. New players goals initially is D1. Seeing that it takes 6-10 years to get there is a huge turnoff especially at $13 a season... Let alone that 6-10 years might only get you to Jax St.

I personally think this is a much needed change to keep D1 and HD lively and full of players.

As to the Clemson coach, I guess I'm not as attached to certain teams having to stay at certain prestige levels. The guy has put in 32 seasons, nearly $420. He's put in time, the Clemson job stayed open for a few cycles without others jumping on it, he took a shot got it. Good for him. If he tanks the team, it can happen in RL. Maybe he'll surprise you. He is certainly not the first nor the last surprise coaching hire. You get that even in RL.

I think it makes sense that HD would want human coaches over CPU coaches. I'd bet $ he'll be way better than the AI whom I've seen destroy 3-4 solid rosters that I wished I could have jumped on while I was locked in at D2 or Jax state because "Not Qualified"...

It feels like this argument boils down to being upset it took you longer to get there than it's taking them. I feel a bit of that myself, but if you take that out of the equation this is better for the game. I've refused to do a 2nd world because of how long it'd take me to get to D1. This change, maybe I'll do a 2nd world after all.

my 2 cents...

I was a little bitter that I spent 12 seasons rebuilding a D1 team in a tough P6 conference, which effectively allowed a D2 coach to leapfrog me (who didn't have to deal with baseline prestiges or EE's in a division with quite a few less humans). But I get it. I wouldn't have qualified for that job without the changes anyways. I did want the trip to D1 to be easier for new coaches.

Everyone keeps mentioning ab90 and jumping around D2, and I don't think you all realize what is now possible. Jumping around D2 is mostly harmless and I never had a problem with it. Now you can jump around D1 and D2. There are more opportunities to do this because the pool of teams is much larger now. Its like a hyper-ab90. And it won't be just a strategy to farm credits. Now you can use this method to build a resume that beats 99% of any coach that attempts a D1 rebuild. Why would anyone rebuild a lower or mid-major D1 team now? Why have 3-4 seasons of no success when you can stay in D2/D3 and make the S16 every season? Did this change kill lower D1? These are the questions that I'm asking. I feel like everyone is so focused on past problems (ab90 and D2 job hopping) that they're failing to look forward at what these changes actually mean.

If someone uses this method and can find an A- D1 team every 3-4 seasons, they'll get an entirely new RS2 budget. And as shoe mentioned, the late recruits are usually thin and heavily contested, but they'll still be able to bully those C+ rebuild teams within 1-2 cycles. They'll at least get a roll no matter how much effort the C+ team built. Another potential pitfall for D1 rebuilds.

We'll see how it plays out. Maybe this won't be an issue going forward, and everything will be just fine. Maybe it will kill lower D1, but nobody will care. I'm just trying to talk about the possibilities.

“WifS does care. And should care. Its been stated from CS that the "ab90 stuff" is considered playing the game in a manner in which it wasn't intended to be played.”

An ambiguous partial paraphrase in response to an unidentified CS ticket to demonstrate that WIS has an interest in stopping people from changing jobs in a game that is literally a coach career simulator, in which people change jobs all the time in real life? That’s a stretch, doggg.

“No one plays for 6 months and quits, that was going to be a part of our great community anyways.”

This is completely false. You have no way to know how many, or what kinds of people have said “no thanks” over the years due to the steep time and cost of getting to D1, not to mention the bait-and-switch feel of the buy-in season. You should not presume to think that only people who play like you, and for the same reasons as you are really part of the “great community”. This is really myopic thinking.

”This game is a marathon, not a race.”

Well. Marathons ARE races of course, but I know what you mean. It’s not a sprint. It’s fine and good to encourage folks to take their time and enjoy the scenery and get to know the game. As I said in the other thread, folks are only new one time. Encouraging something and forcing it are two very different things.

“It's how you hook a coach.... Handing out D1 jobs like candy isn't the right way in my opinion.”

I am a consumer, not an addict. I don’t want WIS to treat me like an addict, and the point at which they do, I will become their biggest critic, and will loudly encourage folks to spend their money elsewhere immediately. If the product is good enough, I will continue to use it, and eventually might get “addicted” to it anyway. But treating me like an addict is a good way to never see another dime of my money.

In the end, as adlorenz says, the worlds are 1/3 full. Let folks play where they want to play. WIS doesn’t need to play nanny. A few seasons down the line, if there is some kind of logjam problem at D1, you can start to think about program requirements and firings, if there actually is some identifiable gameplay problem, more than some nebulous feeling of resentment.

You may be right mlitney: "Now you can use this method to build a resume that beats 99% of any coach that attempts a D1 rebuild. Why would anyone rebuild a lower or mid-major D1 team now? "

I don't pretend to be an expert at HD, quite the opposite. I also don't know that I'm like other coaches. I can answer this though.

Some, maybe most want to compete for National Titles, sweet 16s etc. Warak and I both discussed this at length when we got started with HD and felt like, at least for now we simply wanted the pleasure of rebuilding mid-majors that might surprise in the tourney from time to time. While I love that there are Hardcore conferences that have 10-12 humans in them, I just don't want the time/stress of game planning 20-25 nights in a row. We also really enjoy that we took Belmont and DePaul who were bottom of their conference to teams that get to the post season on occasion and off our hard work. Not someone elses.

So that's one reason someone would play smaller / mid-majors.

We also happen to really enjoy recruiting, despite the many pains of failures. :) Others, I could see might hate recruiting and want to jump around as their JR/SR graduate. You have this even in real life where some coaches ride the coattails of other coaches recruiting efforts, have some success and move on to the new job.

One thing I would like to see though is recruits who have signed with a team having at least a chance to uncommit if the coach moves during job changes. This would add a level of thought to jumping to some teams and would give a bit more depth to recruiting phase 2. Might even develop some additional recruiting strategies/options.

Another case study of the potential issues with the new job logic. Look at the guy who just took over Auburn in Crum. It looks like he's a returning user with 4 seasons of D3 and 5 seasons of D2. He hasn't been in an HD postseason since season 28, which is like 2008?

The SEC is now full with 11 veteran coaches and 1 completely new guy. How many games do you think the Auburn coach is going to win over the next 5 seasons? 10 seasons? I mean, it could be an alternate account and this guy is actually really good. Or maybe he picks up the game really quickly and his rebuild only lasts 5 seasons.

But if he's actually a returning user with 9 total seasons of experience. He's not going to have a fun time. I guarantee winning a total of 15 games over the next 8 seasons is going to be a bigger waste of time than getting a job in lower D1 where he can beat up on some sims, ask questions in the forums/discord, and maybe make a few trips to the NT.

And you can say "well people should be able to play the game any way they want." I'm just thinking that allowing new D2/D3 coaches to go directly into a full P6 conference is not a good plan for long-term user retention. Something to think about.

"Jumping back and forth between divisions to farm credits?"

AB over here licking his lips