The problem is that what you described could've been accomplished in several much better ways that wouldn't involve a silly, limiting hard cap, per halfastros' excellent post in the current "Is there really a hard cap?" thread.

But then again, pre potential you could "choose" to build a player like that, post potential HD makes that choice for you.

I agree with your point fmschwab...I don't like hard caps, and I think that they can come up with a better solution. Mully, you are definitely correct that it's harder to choose what you want your players to turn into once they're on your team. I think that that element is just part of recruiting now. I agree that there have to be some significant changes, but I love the direction it has taken the game at D3 for no other reason than it has created a greater variance in D3 players.

That said after reading halfastros' post, I also recognize the need for options and user control...if potential is inherently limiting to this, which I'm assuming you would argue, I am wrong, since the point of the game is to give the users options.

Maybe there could be a system without any hard caps where practice minutes are the only thing affected. These potentials would just indicate a different growth rate for that skill. A low potential player with 40 low post could still conceivably reach 90, it might just take more practice time since the minutes would be "worth" less . Some type of adjustment would need to be made to the practice minutes system so that if you had a low potential C with 40 LP you might need to devote 40 minutes into your practice plan for his low post to have him grow the same amount as a normal potential C with 20 minutes would. Maybe you would still get the same gains that you used to get in a skill under the old system if the player had average potential (20 minutes being the diminishing returns cap), high potential players could practice the same skill but not see diminishing returns until a higher number (maybe 30), and low potential players would see diminishing returns earlier (maybe 15). Has this been suggested / is it not practical or workable? I haven't thought it through enough to know if it is a good idea.

I'm certainly not sure what the solution is, and like I said, I respect and understand your point if the argument is that potential removes options from the coaches.

Yea i'm not a fan of potential but hard caps are dumb! If I go out and shoot 2000 threes a day, it has to get better eventually. Even if it takes a while. They could definitely find something better than that to do about it!

It's sad that an important thread like this devolves into whining about potential. Since potential was introduced, the numbers have held or decreased Sim AI in Smith and Naismith. There may, of course, be seasonal influences, but potential is not driving away customers as the louder complainers have predicted. You might consider the possibility that the silent majority actually likes it.

cbriese - I'll give it one more season in each before I agree with you. I know some coaches are just waiting for their free seasons to run out before dropping teams, so we will see.

Naismith update soon?

Quote: Originally posted by mullycj on 3/01/2009cbriese - I'll give it one more season in each before I agree with you. I know some coaches are just waiting for their free seasons to run out before dropping teams, so we will see.

This is probably my last season at Tennessee, especially since I now have an HBD team to burn out any reward points with.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

IMO DIII and FreeHD is being used to help recruit and cheat. If these were legitimate coaches, we would see the effects trickle up to DII and DI. Both those divisions remain stagnant as ever.

Since FreeHD does not make WIS any money, it's truly confusing why they continue to let it exist.

The discontinuation of FreeHD gives us our 1st real look at what WIS and potential has done to the new user base. I guess WIS got what they deserved.

Naismith
DIV III - Total teams =	384
Season	SIMS	%	Change	%
17	160	41.7%
35	71	18.5%	(11)	-2.9%
36	6	1.6%	(65)	-16.9%
37	196	51.0%	190	49.5%
DIV II - Total teams =	276
Season	SIMS	%	Change	%
17	86	31.2%
35	55	19.9%	(11)	-4.0%
36	60	21.7%	5	1.8%
37	60	21.7%	0	0.0%
DIV I - Total teams =	324
Season	SIMS	%	Change	%
17	121	37.3%
35	127	39.2%	2	0.6%
36	133	41.0%	6	1.9%
37	136	42.0%	3	0.9%
Total World #1 =	984
Season	SIMS	%	Change	%
* 17	367	37.3%	(1st year)
35	253	25.7%	(20)	-2.0%
36	199	20.2%	(54)	-5.5%
37	392	39.8%	193	19.6%

I knew FreeHD was an issue, but did we really have that many scammers running around?

Not everyone who used Free-Hd was abusing it. I have had several Free teams... and have never scouted anyplace in DIII ever. I have used them to recruit a small line-up to see how they would play out over time. I have used them to keep a good team in a good conference from falling into the hands of Simmie after I had moved to DII.

A free team that I recruited for was better for it down the road 100% of the time. Granted this was probably not the norm,,, but not every free-hd user was ruining the game.

Let me get this straight, zags. It's not abuse if FreeHD was used to perform experiments to benefit your "real" team (without really caring or having any interest in how the free team performed)? Seems to me that that falls in the same boat---alias' using freehd for their real teams' benefit.

If you say it long enough, eventually people might believe it.