Posted by mullycj on 12/6/2020 9:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

You're the developer, how are you gonna sell the most loyal owner at NC State that he cant ever get to his favorite school (North Carolina) despite the fact that the NC coach hasnt made it past the 1st round in 20 seasons? You seem to be forgetting about "the other guy" when making your point.

More fluid job openings at ALL levels if good for the overall game.

I think the idea of a limited span of years, based on your 'age' could fix a lot of issues, New players start at age 25 to 30 in Div-III,

They retire sometime between age 70 and 80. This retirement could be a random event. (and it could be 50 max seasons, etc). Then you start over.

You could make it such that when you complete your 2nd or 3rd playthrough, you can start at Div-II (28 to 32 years old), Max of 40 seasons, retirement.

Maybe finish 4 playthroughs .. you can start at very low Div-1 if you want. maybe 32-35 years old and max 40 years.

Posted by topdogggbm on 12/6/2020 5:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

"Hey guys, this is a competitive game. One that needs to somewhat appear like college basketball in real life. So when new users arrive, the big 6 schools "look" meaningful. And remain to be jobs that people work towards. With that, comes the factor you deal with every single day in your life, if you're not good enough, you will lose your job. But don't worry, we'll pamper it up for you so your little feelings don't get hurt. The criteria won't be impossible to accomplish. Upon leaving your position if you do not meet expectations, you will be allowed to pick from jobs available, with the slightest leg up on the rest of the field. I mean you were just the coach of UK for 30 seasons even if you did suck. What, this doesn't sound pleasing enough for you? Well let's look at your life in detail..... when you made 5 errors in a high school baseball game, what happened to you? When you went to work and failed to meet your goals, what was the outcome? When you failed to live within the laws of the land, where did you end up? That's right..... we all have an understanding of how this works already in everyday life! This isn't the first time any of you will face a circumstance like this. But guess what..... more pampering! We're not terminating you. We're still going to allow you to have one of the other 300 freakin options to keep playing. Maybe we'll even pay for your season in which you lost your job. Best of all, you knew this was coming. So don't blame us! Provided for you was the list of criteria that you've had for 3 REAL LIFE YEARS, that you never even came close to accomplishing! Are you still disappointed? We have one last series of comments to offer you..... Man up, join the real world, wake up and smell the beans. We're competing here. You had years to just be average. Time to try again with a different letterhead and color scheme at the top of your page. Not that different. Not that serious. But thanks for playing!"

Sold. The end.

No, you need to sell this to SportsHub, not to the user you’re kicking out. Firings already happen, rarely. You’re saying they need to be ramped up.

Posted by mullycj on 12/6/2020 9:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

You're the developer, how are you gonna sell the most loyal owner at NC State that he cant ever get to his favorite school (North Carolina) despite the fact that the NC coach hasnt made it past the 1st round in 20 seasons? You seem to be forgetting about "the other guy" when making your point.

More fluid job openings at ALL levels if good for the overall game.

You’re talking about the game as though Big 6 conferences are still full. If/when they’re full again, fluidity is a conversation we can have. Until then, this is a ridiculous discussion, and developers should dismiss it out of hand.

No one needs to sell anything to a user who only wants to play at one school. They can play, or not, like anyone else. Or they can make their own game. There are 10 worlds. If folks can start at D1, chances are good that they will be eligible when their favorite school opens up in a very reasonable amount of time without ramping up firings.

ETA, maybe I wasn’t clear, when I say “owners” I’m talking about the powers that be at SportsHub. I’m not talking about the account owners.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

Not sure I follow — Why are some coaches making them money getting fired allowing for coaches that cost WIS money?

Posted by tkimble on 12/6/2020 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

Not sure I follow — Why are some coaches making them money getting fired allowing for coaches that cost WIS money?

A coach who “sucks” - to use doggg’s word - at an A+ baseline school, and misses the NT 10 seasons in a row, for example, is paying close to full price for the product. That is making WIS money. That is a very loyal customer, a coach willing to pay near full price for the product.

Firing them on the basis of not being good enough, and setting the standard that you must be making x number of postseason appearances - you know, racking up credits - pretty much goes the other way for the bottom line.

Shoe..... I'm just having fun buddy. I do think firings should happen. But I'm not the one that makes the rules. Just throwing my opinion out with everyone else

The current leveling of firings in fine IMO.

Somewhat related to the firings, there should be a shorter leash on AFKs. If someone hasn't logged in for an entire month, they should lose the job before the roster is completely ruined. Maybe the leash could be shorter for higher division/prestige schools.

Until WIS fixes how many credits they dish out to the successful players here who should be funding development, then Shoe is right. This game just doesn't make money off of the most dedicated and typically the most successful coaches. They dug a hole a long time ago that is hard for them to climb out. Their just isn't enough players filling up the worlds to ramp up firings.

Having said that, this is a game after all. The big 6 schools, or more importantly, the top A baseline prestige programs, should be considered the hardest "level" of this game. As long as programs are clear on what they expect from coaches prior to coaches applying, and as long as a program like Kansas has different expectations than Loyola Chicago, then I don't see why this would be a negative thing. A lot of video games out there make a lot of money without coddling their player base. Just go ask the developers of Demon's Souls how a hard game has hurt their bottom line. Games are supposed to be hard at the highest levels.

Posted by hughesjr on 12/6/2020 9:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 12/6/2020 9:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/5/2020 11:15:00 PM (view original):
If you think it “needs to happen,” make the case. You’re the developer. How are you going to sell the owners on the decision to tell loyal customers who pay the most money of anyone on the site - ie, the ones who “suck” - that they can’t keep their spot. Forget about whether they will expect it or not, you’re removing them from a place where they are making WIS money, clearing room for coaches who will presumably cost them money. How are you pitching this?

You're the developer, how are you gonna sell the most loyal owner at NC State that he cant ever get to his favorite school (North Carolina) despite the fact that the NC coach hasnt made it past the 1st round in 20 seasons? You seem to be forgetting about "the other guy" when making your point.

More fluid job openings at ALL levels if good for the overall game.

I think the idea of a limited span of years, based on your 'age' could fix a lot of issues, New players start at age 25 to 30 in Div-III,

They retire sometime between age 70 and 80. This retirement could be a random event. (and it could be 50 max seasons, etc). Then you start over.

You could make it such that when you complete your 2nd or 3rd playthrough, you can start at Div-II (28 to 32 years old), Max of 40 seasons, retirement.

Maybe finish 4 playthroughs .. you can start at very low Div-1 if you want. maybe 32-35 years old and max 40 years.

Very interesting idea, I like this a lot.

Posted by Basketts on 12/6/2020 4:59:00 PM (view original):
Until WIS fixes how many credits they dish out to the successful players here who should be funding development, then Shoe is right. This game just doesn't make money off of the most dedicated and typically the most successful coaches. They dug a hole a long time ago that is hard for them to climb out. Their just isn't enough players filling up the worlds to ramp up firings.

Having said that, this is a game after all. The big 6 schools, or more importantly, the top A baseline prestige programs, should be considered the hardest "level" of this game. As long as programs are clear on what they expect from coaches prior to coaches applying, and as long as a program like Kansas has different expectations than Loyola Chicago, then I don't see why this would be a negative thing. A lot of video games out there make a lot of money without coddling their player base. Just go ask the developers of Demon's Souls how a hard game has hurt their bottom line. Games are supposed to be hard at the highest levels.

“Games are supposed to be hard at the highest levels.”

I absolutely agree; in this case, the details in where the difficulty lies are important. That degree of difficulty is why I’ve never liked baseline prestige for individual teams, and it’s why I am vehemently opposed to changes that would make it easier for teams that lose early entries to replace them with comparable talent. That’s the stuff that should be “hard to master,” IMO.

But if we’re talking about removing longtime paying customers from those positions they’ve invested in, the standards need to be really high. And I think the first one, the one that is clearly not met at present, is a very competitive jobs market; a true scarcity of jobs available at that level. My hope is if they fix jobs the way I would like to see done, over time maybe we get there. If everyone who comes to this game wanting to play a D1 college basketball simulation is able to start at low D1, and is able to compete for those mid-major and power conference jobs after a handful of successful seasons at that level, I think we can get to a level where implementing higher achievement standards for certain jobs makes more sense. But that will be because we have a game that is actually thriving.

I don't feel like the game isn't thriving tho. We talk about half empty worlds all the time. We could use an extra 20 players in each world consistently, sure. But if we had full worlds this game would be entirely different. With different challenges to face. So I don't wanna speculate on "what could or would be better". The game has a lot of quality coaches now. Lots of coaching talent.

But do we really feel like anybody would quit because they lost their job at a school? I just don't see that happening. And do firings even happen at all now? Like how many firings happened in the last 6 months of real life time total? As an estimate..... I don't know the answer to that.

Firing debate... potential solution.

Any job application to A- or higher prestige is accepted on a 3-season contract. Contract states:

Congrats! You’ve been hired at an A+ program and offered a 3-season contract. At the end of your 3rd season, I, Tom Howard the AD at State School will review your job performance. If you have maintained an A- prestige or above, we will negotiate another 3-season offer.

(A prestige must maintain B+ or above. A-, B or above.)

And boom. No one can be that upset at getting fired, it’s known when you apply for the gig.

“But do we really feel like anybody would quit because they lost their job at a school?” Quit the game outright? Some will. Some won’t (if bribed with a free season, or something). Drop the world? That will absolutely happen, and it’s foolish to think it wouldn’t. But even if it didn’t, it’s still kind of beside the point. Replacing customers who pay near full price with customers who do not, when there is no compelling reason (ie, job scarcity) to do so will definitely cost money, one way or another.

Posted by topdogggbm on 12/6/2020 7:58:00 PM (view original):
I don't feel like the game isn't thriving tho. We talk about half empty worlds all the time. We could use an extra 20 players in each world consistently, sure. But if we had full worlds this game would be entirely different. With different challenges to face. So I don't wanna speculate on "what could or would be better". The game has a lot of quality coaches now. Lots of coaching talent.

But do we really feel like anybody would quit because they lost their job at a school? I just don't see that happening. And do firings even happen at all now? Like how many firings happened in the last 6 months of real life time total? As an estimate..... I don't know the answer to that.

As for the rest, I enjoy every conference I’m in. I think the game is mostly fine as is, and although there are things I would change, I certainly don’t think it is on its deathbed. But there is room for growth, at the D1 level for sure. I’ve always said the ideal population for HD 3.0 is about 10 teams in the Big 6 conferences, about 8 in 5-6 “mid-major” conferences (whether or not they’re actually the traditional mid majors originally designed isn't really relevant to me), and about 5 or 6 in the rest. That leaves some degree of mobility, but retains competitiveness. More mid major D1 teams competing for top level talent will help folks get out of the habit of only going after EE level talent, which is really a big part of the problem folks have with EEs in the first place. A healthy D1 also means D2 and D3 teams aren’t getting a bunch of ringers every year for the vets parked down there on credit farms. Fixing the D1 job situation really should help a lot of issues.

And I know that will look like a stretch to most folks, but my basic premise is that this is an open world game, and it’s based primarily on user choices. So my preference is always going to be for the game to, to the extent reasonable, and within the parameters of good gameplay, just get out of the way of the users and mostly let them make choices and experience the rational consequences of those choices.