I know this should probably go in the beta forums, but there is too much going on there, and everything seems to be reporting bugs.

So just curious, how do people feel about the letter grades in recruiting so far?

It just seems like a real stretch to me that this is an improvement. A player could be listed as a D for Offensive skills because he low LP, PER, but great BH and PA, and that would make him a great PG. Or guys with a low defensive score because they can't block shots but with potential could be a great defender. It just seems too random. That you can't actually know what a players potential or even current ratings are, until you scout to level 4, and then it's the same thing as the old way just with spending more money to get that info. With the new system, I would never feel comfortable signing players until I see there full numbers and potentials, and that's expensive to do for individual players. Just seems like a waste. I'm already annoyed by it, and I'm having a hard time seeing new players having the patience to figure it out.

What does everyone else think?

I think the point is making it harder to find the initial rankings, which is designed to spread the talent around (because the best teams can't just gank all the best talent all over the country.

I could certainly stand seeing the letter grades tweaked a little bit (maybe so A+ is 85+ or 90+ rather than 70+), but I think that level 2 does a decent job of showing starting ratings, and level 3 does a decent job of showing potential. At D2 and D3, I would definitely be comfortable signing someone scouted only to level 3. The fact that it's a bit tougher to get to that point is something I would tentatively call a positive. I'd like to go through some recruiting and see for sure, but I don't hate it.

I see both your points. I am in between , i would like to see one less level.

Posted by tarvolon on 6/1/2016 5:47:00 PM (view original):
I think the point is making it harder to find the initial rankings, which is designed to spread the talent around (because the best teams can't just gank all the best talent all over the country.

I could certainly stand seeing the letter grades tweaked a little bit (maybe so A+ is 85+ or 90+ rather than 70+), but I think that level 2 does a decent job of showing starting ratings, and level 3 does a decent job of showing potential. At D2 and D3, I would definitely be comfortable signing someone scouted only to level 3. The fact that it's a bit tougher to get to that point is something I would tentatively call a positive. I'd like to go through some recruiting and see for sure, but I don't hate it.

I'm generally in agreement with this. I think it's an overall positive with some things that potentially need some tweaking.

Posted by zorzii on 6/1/2016 6:04:00 PM (view original):
I see both your points. I am in between , i would like to see one less level.

My only objection to one less level is that I think it would make it entirely too easy to obtain that precise potential level and once you do that then tarv's first point goes completely out the window.. And that really was one of the primary stated goals of this overhaul.

A middle ground would be to make level 1 more useful. Have it give more info.

So level 3 is actually pretty much what you get with FSS. It's slightly less precise because you have A- instead of 63, but once you sort out what letter grades lead to what ratings (not too difficult), level 3 is pretty much FSS. You can get to that level pretty easily too--FSS + camps + some assistant searches. You really don't need to do many individual scouts to get pretty much what you get now from FSS.

I think the mistake a lot of people are making is doing a whole lot of individual scouting before all the camps have run. Understandable, something new and shiny, we're all eager to press all the buttons. Moving forward, I think the strategy is going to be 1) FSS states within whatever radius, 2) run camps, see what you get 3) hold off on asst coach until all camps are done and you have a feel for what you already have. Get to level 4 too fast, and you're going to waste a lot of money. No value in knowing level 3 and 4 stuff until after camps run.

Posted by tarvolon on 6/1/2016 5:47:00 PM (view original):
I think the point is making it harder to find the initial rankings, which is designed to spread the talent around (because the best teams can't just gank all the best talent all over the country.

I could certainly stand seeing the letter grades tweaked a little bit (maybe so A+ is 85+ or 90+ rather than 70+), but I think that level 2 does a decent job of showing starting ratings, and level 3 does a decent job of showing potential. At D2 and D3, I would definitely be comfortable signing someone scouted only to level 3. The fact that it's a bit tougher to get to that point is something I would tentatively call a positive. I'd like to go through some recruiting and see for sure, but I don't hate it.

I guess as someone who has has success at this game, I don't want it to be harder for me and easier for inferior coaches. But the idea of that makes sense I guess.

Posted by dan2044 on 6/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tarvolon on 6/1/2016 5:47:00 PM (view original):
I think the point is making it harder to find the initial rankings, which is designed to spread the talent around (because the best teams can't just gank all the best talent all over the country.

I could certainly stand seeing the letter grades tweaked a little bit (maybe so A+ is 85+ or 90+ rather than 70+), but I think that level 2 does a decent job of showing starting ratings, and level 3 does a decent job of showing potential. At D2 and D3, I would definitely be comfortable signing someone scouted only to level 3. The fact that it's a bit tougher to get to that point is something I would tentatively call a positive. I'd like to go through some recruiting and see for sure, but I don't hate it.

I guess as someone who has has success at this game, I don't want it to be harder for me and easier for inferior coaches. But the idea of that makes sense I guess.

I don't see it as harder for good coaches and easier for inferior coaches so much as an attempt to smooth out the massive advantage that coaches with lots of scholarships have.

I am seriously considering quitting D2 for good because of the proliferation of the 6-6-0-0 teams. It's hard enough to beat a team with 12 upperclassmen on the court, but recruiting against a team with two years of carryover plus a budget that's twice the size of yours (if you have, for instance, a three-man class) is a total exercise in futility.

Obviously, there are a lot of factors at play, but I support making it easier to recruit with only a couple openings to fill. I think making it tougher to scout (while at the same time giving a base scouting budget + a budget per opening rather than just a budget per opening) does that.

Posted by dan2044 on 6/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tarvolon on 6/1/2016 5:47:00 PM (view original):
I think the point is making it harder to find the initial rankings, which is designed to spread the talent around (because the best teams can't just gank all the best talent all over the country.

I could certainly stand seeing the letter grades tweaked a little bit (maybe so A+ is 85+ or 90+ rather than 70+), but I think that level 2 does a decent job of showing starting ratings, and level 3 does a decent job of showing potential. At D2 and D3, I would definitely be comfortable signing someone scouted only to level 3. The fact that it's a bit tougher to get to that point is something I would tentatively call a positive. I'd like to go through some recruiting and see for sure, but I don't hate it.

I guess as someone who has has success at this game, I don't want it to be harder for me and easier for inferior coaches. But the idea of that makes sense I guess.

Having also had success in this game is the exact reason why I favor spreading the talent around more. If I'm really that good then I should be able to prove it every season. It should be as hard for me to stay at or near the top as it was for me to get there and right now it's not.

Posted by shoe3 on 6/1/2016 6:50:00 PM (view original):
I think the mistake a lot of people are making is doing a whole lot of individual scouting before all the camps have run. Understandable, something new and shiny, we're all eager to press all the buttons. Moving forward, I think the strategy is going to be 1) FSS states within whatever radius, 2) run camps, see what you get 3) hold off on asst coach until all camps are done and you have a feel for what you already have. Get to level 4 too fast, and you're going to waste a lot of money. No value in knowing level 3 and 4 stuff until after camps run.

I don't think users can make mistakes with the beta. It should be used to learn and enhance. No one should care who the beta NT champ is (unless it's me )

I agree with tarvolon. I don't think it is harder.. Just different.

I also think it is more like real Scouting / Recruiting. In that to uncover everything it takes a process. And you get to scout decide how in depth you want to go.

I would like letter grades to be a bit higher at the top end. 85 or 90 for A+, etc.

Posted by therewas47 on 6/1/2016 7:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/1/2016 6:50:00 PM (view original):
I think the mistake a lot of people are making is doing a whole lot of individual scouting before all the camps have run. Understandable, something new and shiny, we're all eager to press all the buttons. Moving forward, I think the strategy is going to be 1) FSS states within whatever radius, 2) run camps, see what you get 3) hold off on asst coach until all camps are done and you have a feel for what you already have. Get to level 4 too fast, and you're going to waste a lot of money. No value in knowing level 3 and 4 stuff until after camps run.

I don't think users can make mistakes with the beta. It should be used to learn and enhance. No one should care who the beta NT champ is (unless it's me )

Obviously, as I've said elsewhere, beta is the place to try things and fail. I think at least some of the dissatisfaction is related to people just not figuring out best practices yet. Going one step at a time and having some patience next time around will certainly change how I feel about these levels, and how the letter grades are used.

Posted by hughesjr on 6/1/2016 7:49:00 PM (view original):
I agree with tarvolon. I don't think it is harder.. Just different.

I also think it is more like real Scouting / Recruiting. In that to uncover everything it takes a process. And you get to scout decide how in depth you want to go.

I would like letter grades to be a bit higher at the top end. 85 or 90 for A+, etc.

+1 (or +2, I guess)