Posted by adlorenz on 4/15/2021 3:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tlowster on 4/15/2021 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Seventy_77 on 4/15/2021 12:27:00 PM (view original):
$5 million is a start but still not good enough. Needs to be $8 million for budgets. Still ridiculously low. Shouldn't take 4-5 seasons to get from one end to the other. Dots aren't showing up as different colors as of yet. All new dots look like baseballs?

Based on forum posts, I dont think we'll have a consensus on this topic. In fact, I'll bet that some won't be happy it was touched at all.

I'm fine with 5, but I was also fine with four. I think 8 or more would be too much. It would be unrealistic and cause downstream problems like new players allocating 18 million to advanced scouting in their first year. If they're lucky enough to realize the mistake by the end of their first year, they can move it back down to 10, but by then, they already waisted 28 million in their first two seasons.

I would be for upping it to 8 or more on the downside, but not on the upside. You can't hire an elite scouting staff over night in real life, but you can certainly reduce staff in real life.

The change really had nothing to do about transitioning teams. You should now be able to get your budget where you want it in 2 seasons from joining a squad. Making it so you can go from $10 to $20 million in 2 seasons rather than 3 was the primary goal of the adjustment. If you want to go from 20 to 0 in a category in the offseason, leave your team, rejoin and grab the default budget.

There are work arounds.

Sincerely,

Adam

If you join a new league and happen to have the first pick in the draft, YOU WILL NOT GET THE BEST PLAYER with 15 in scouting. 5 is TOO LOW.

Thanks for closing loopholes, making changes. The game needs to be transparent for everyone to enjoy. It's supposed to be a sports simulation game to enjoy, not some kind of computer challenge to find loopholes to help you have an advantage over others.

• Fixed issued where informing a player of Redshirt was not is a permanent WE hit, we have added a warning when you choose to redshirt a player

Huh? Can someone clarify what this means?

Posted by coleslaw8 on 4/16/2021 1:05:00 AM (view original):

• Fixed issued where informing a player of Redshirt was not is a permanent WE hit, we have added a warning when you choose to redshirt a player

Huh? Can someone clarify what this means?

I think it means it going to tell you that redshirting this player will perm affect the w/e

I am really excited to see the effort being put into the game. For so long, there would be long pauses between updates. I think this is the third one in like the last 6 months or less. I am good with the change forcing me too honor starts for ineligibles I have recruited, even though I did not know this was going to be the case when I recruited him. It's not like I will not get the player. I just have to adjust, and it's really not a huge deal in the big scheme of things when so many improvements are being made. GREAT JOB BY ADAM AND COMPANY!

I personally don't think they're attacking the REAL Problems. 100% Pass Offense (Receivers catching 20-30 passes per game), 100% Run Offense (RB with 45-50 Carries per game), NO Injuries (This is what would affect recruiting), Coaches not filling their Scholarships and Cutting Players EVERY Season (Just another angle to get around the $ issue and there should be a BIGGER Penalty)! How about if you don't go to a Bowl or Playoff you don't share in the Conference Bowl/PO Money? How about ANY Team not finishing in the Top 25 Losing Top Players? How about a Tampering Penalty for Coaches who poach GREEN Recruits? How about ONLY ONE Elite per ID? There are 2 guys with 6 Elites, 2 guys with 5, 2 with 4 and 13 with 3! I figured out that 45% of ALL Elites (69 of 154; doesn't count those with only 2) are controlled by about 1% of the Total Coaches in ALL Worlds. VENT Complete!

Since we can't comment on this
https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=526787

I will comment here. Good. Fix the loopholes that keep new players from sticking around.

I just want to clarify one thing. If I promise a player 75% playing time and never play him at all. Is that loophole still available or do I have to play him 75% in one game?

I agree that notice should have been offered.

I am one who is getting shafted in Rockne. It won't make a difference to me because the players I am recruiting will not be seniors by the time I leave.

I was shafted once before in Rockne, when the first half of the first round of playoffs was replayed without notice.

I quit then until things settled down.

I hate the uncertainty that making changes on the fly cause, and I am going to quit again, as soon as I use up my last seasons.

Real software development has beta testers and QA. Nothing like that here. So sad.

The greatest thing to fix the game would be to populate the worlds.

I won't live long enough to see that. Alas.

why not

It would take real courage to do a total reboot of the worlds, and I don't think the PTBs have it.

As far as warning those who exploited the loopholes in GD, that would have been wrong. It would merely have aided and abetted the miscreants in protecting their ill-gotten gains.

Nice to know you St. CoachSpud.

From another thread on this.
WIS guidelines.

Cheating
All owners must play by the rules and requirements set forth by each game on our site. If an owner discovers a loophole, a way to cheat, or any other method of giving himself an unfair advantage, WhatIfSports reserves the right to take the necessary steps to correct the issue at any time without prior notification. Refunds or roster changes will not be given to any owner in this situation.

Good stuff right there ??

Just because they can does not mean they should.