Posted by zhawks on 1/3/2017 12:36:00 PM (view original):
That's why I really didn't want to open up the rabbit hole, we all come down on slightly differing ideas on it but I think it really needs to be looked at from multiple angles and clearly needs involvement from not only WIS but also coaches. The structure is here to stay and I'm fine with that, but there can be tweaks to it for sure.

One easy tweak is making the baseline AP each school gets higher, there are other consequences that has though as well. I think an increase in baseline AP is probably needed across the board to increase battles a bit but I'm not really sure what the right direction is it's just a gut feeling. I think making the min AP each school gets equal to the max you can put on one target makes sense but until I saw it in practice (i.e. in a Beta) it would be difficult to know if that really was the right direction.

I don't think more APs is the answer. Then everyone gets more, and it's just the same arms race with more arms. This isn't related to the OP, because tarvolon is in a different situation, but much of the frustration over not being able to quickly recruit guys in RS2 stems from people being resistant to the idea that their gameplay can actually change. You don't need to absolutely maximize your chances with your primary targets. But that's what people want to do. So increasing baseline AP just means bigger arms races for the primaries, and the same problem (actually worse, because those second tier guys will be even more locked up by teams who have them as their primaries, because they get more APs as well) for backups.

I go go back to 3 small tweaks that I think would ultimately find that balance between fun, competitiveness, and realism.

1. Diminishing returns on APs after unlocking recruiting actions; negative credit after unlocking actions with a poor prestige/preference match.
2. Make players with the late preference start signing 2 cycles later, giving coaches changing jobs and dealing with unexpected EEs a chance to get their intended effort considered.
3. Increase the instance of late and whenever preference among starred players to 40% each, such that for starred players, 10% will sign early, 10% will sign BEOP1, 40% whenever, and 40% late.

Then you have a rational number of elite recruits who are open to receive effort from elite teams, who haven't been locked up by lower level teams reaching up.

I think it's a false premise to think that people want more battles. Losing battles is what causes the ripple effect from the top of D1 to the D3 dregs.

I like the tweak of adding the one more preference field for D1 players if they will drop to lower division or not. Makes perfect sense to me.

Just out of curiosity. In real Life, on average, how many Early Entries try the NBA every year?

Posted by wvufan76 on 1/3/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
I like the tweak of adding the one more preference field for D1 players if they will drop to lower division or not. Makes perfect sense to me.

This is probably the simplest solution. Same with D2.

I found this. Maybe, this one aspect of real life would be better left out of HD all together.


http://www.nba.com/2016/news/04/26/early-entry-candidates-2016-draft/

NEW YORK — The National Basketball Association announced today that 162 players -- 117 players from colleges/post-graduate institutions and 45 international players - have filed as early entry candidates for the 2016 NBA Draft presented by State Farm.
Players wishing to enter the 2016 NBA Draft were required to submit a letter to the NBA to be received no later than Sunday, April 24. Players who have applied for early entry have the right to withdraw their names from consideration for the Draft by notifying the NBA of their decision in writing no later than 5 p.m. ET on Monday, June 13. Under NCAA rules, in order to retain college basketball eligibility, underclassmen that have entered the 2016 Draft must withdraw by Wednesday, May 25.

The administrators keep telling us "stop treating this as real life", so skinndogg has hit the nail on the head....STOP TRYING to imitate real life, and remove all EE's. Perfect sense.

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Congratulations on your NT, tarv. You may have already realized this, but you will actually have NINE scholarship players, because the Sim no longer allows taking more than 3 walkons, and as session 2 completes, the Sim will autosign 4 DI players for you. You'll have no input in the players signed, and you won't be able to release any of those players to free up recruiting spots for next season's recruiting until AFTER recruiting is over. This has been my experience at Naismith Duke in one recruiting session so far, and it's actually noted in the 3.0 rules. Only way I've seen so far to avoid this is to sign Sr transfers, but those are rare now, and as 3.0 knowledge matures, I can imagine them becoming practically non-existent. Good luck this season and as you go forward.

I didn't realize this. That makes it even worse.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/3/2017 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I think it's a false premise to think that people want more battles. Losing battles is what causes the ripple effect from the top of D1 to the D3 dregs.

I don't know how many people want more battles. But the game needs battles for the elite commodities. The farther down you go, the more interchangeable they are, which is why we will probably never see many D3 battles over D2 projected players. That's fine. But elite commodities, the kind you need at least a few of to compete for D1 championships, the game needs teams to battle for them.

Posted by wvufan76 on 1/3/2017 2:53:00 PM (view original):
The administrators keep telling us "stop treating this as real life", so skinndogg has hit the nail on the head....STOP TRYING to imitate real life, and remove all EE's. Perfect sense.

Disagree. Keep EEs

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 4:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/3/2017 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I think it's a false premise to think that people want more battles. Losing battles is what causes the ripple effect from the top of D1 to the D3 dregs.

I don't know how many people want more battles. But the game needs battles for the elite commodities. The farther down you go, the more interchangeable they are, which is why we will probably never see many D3 battles over D2 projected players. That's fine. But elite commodities, the kind you need at least a few of to compete for D1 championships, the game needs teams to battle for them.

I agree. I keep saying success shouldn't be easy. Especially at the top.

Posted by zorzii on 1/3/2017 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wvufan76 on 1/3/2017 2:53:00 PM (view original):
The administrators keep telling us "stop treating this as real life", so skinndogg has hit the nail on the head....STOP TRYING to imitate real life, and remove all EE's. Perfect sense.

Disagree. Keep EEs

I'd rather have them eliminate injuries than EE's... Daalter where are ya?

Posted by carl3298 on 1/3/2017 3:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Congratulations on your NT, tarv. You may have already realized this, but you will actually have NINE scholarship players, because the Sim no longer allows taking more than 3 walkons, and as session 2 completes, the Sim will autosign 4 DI players for you. You'll have no input in the players signed, and you won't be able to release any of those players to free up recruiting spots for next season's recruiting until AFTER recruiting is over. This has been my experience at Naismith Duke in one recruiting session so far, and it's actually noted in the 3.0 rules. Only way I've seen so far to avoid this is to sign Sr transfers, but those are rare now, and as 3.0 knowledge matures, I can imagine them becoming practically non-existent. Good luck this season and as you go forward.

I didn't realize this. That makes it even worse.

Carl, I should clarify to say that you DO have power to pick from the late period leftovers and sign as many as needed to get to 9 scholarships. If seniors aren't available, you can go after juniors if you want to keep them until they graduate, or you can drop them the first chance you get, but this won't be in time to avoid "recruiting for x+y openings with only x spots worth of attention pts and dollars." In short, you can get sort of stuck playing catch up every year, which happened to me at Duke in the first 2 seasons I've been there. I was able to jump out of this frying pan by moving into grantducks great Oregon program when he left after losing in this years Championship. But I landed in a fire, since even though he signed 3 great recruits, EEs left the squad with only 3 vets, and what could've likely become a 7th scholarship player (leaving need to sign only 2 or even 1 leftover, if I was able to find and sign another decent player) was torched when I lost ALL period 1 recruiting effort on him by what is listed as "new coach reduction" in the recruiting history. This effort included 5 home visits, a cv, a 10 minute promise and the scholarship offer. When I applied for the Oregon job, the school was listed as VH with no other school above Moderate. Once I was accepted, Oregon was no longer listed in the considering tab, and Cal and the other schools had changed to VH, simply by me taking over for the sim. Sorry to go on so long, but I thought my experience might spread some insight to coaches who haven't switched jobs in 3.0.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/3/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wvufan76 on 1/3/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
I like the tweak of adding the one more preference field for D1 players if they will drop to lower division or not. Makes perfect sense to me.

This is probably the simplest solution. Same with D2.

Seems simple, depends on how they coded it too though.

Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.