I like the changes in regard to scouting and in season recruiting but I'm still wondering why recruit generation isn't on the list of changes?

It seems like the way to add more talent and allow smaller conferences to close the talent gap, (BIG 6 should still get most of the best H.S. players) is to increase the amount of surprise developmental players.  Specifically, players with much lower ratings out of high school but with high long term potential (sometimes visable/sometimes hidden) in their Junior/Senior years.  

This could be executed by adding an element of surprise on the extreme potential players so they couldn't be 100% identified through scouting.  This would mirror real life as well, because once you get past the top 100 players scouts are wrong all the time on players development potential.

Sprinkle a decent amount of late blooming surprise star players on mid majors and all of a sudden you have more parity and competition and some surprise teams you didn't expect actually competing in the tournament; even with the BIG 6 winning the "for sure" big recruits most of the time.

Any thoughts on if this would help/hurt the game?
  

I think that they aren't going to change recruit generation because it would probably require changes to the way the engine acts. It's set up to run a certain way taking in certain factors and changing the types of players would probably require them to change something in there.

Posted by creamcrimson on 9/21/2015 2:30:00 AM (view original):
I like the changes in regard to scouting and in season recruiting but I'm still wondering why recruit generation isn't on the list of changes?

It seems like the way to add more talent and allow smaller conferences to close the talent gap, (BIG 6 should still get most of the best H.S. players) is to increase the amount of surprise developmental players.  Specifically, players with much lower ratings out of high school but with high long term potential (sometimes visable/sometimes hidden) in their Junior/Senior years.  

This could be executed by adding an element of surprise on the extreme potential players so they couldn't be 100% identified through scouting.  This would mirror real life as well, because once you get past the top 100 players scouts are wrong all the time on players development potential.

Sprinkle a decent amount of late blooming surprise star players on mid majors and all of a sudden you have more parity and competition and some surprise teams you didn't expect actually competing in the tournament; even with the BIG 6 winning the "for sure" big recruits most of the time.

Any thoughts on if this would help/hurt the game?
  

yeah, it would help the game, you'll find widespread agreement at least among regular forum users on that point. i don't really agree with like, guys showing low or medium in something, gaining +50, but the high slash high/high range is big enough that surprise players can exist within the confines of stated potential. random surprised are kind of realistic but on both sides, positive and negative surprises, and generally random factors that the players have no impact on, generally upset people. so im against that. with the highs, you know what you are getting into, i sign guys at a+ bcs even who might be like a 50 high high per sf. if he is a +28, hes decent, not great. if hes +40 or so, he can be great for me. its a gamble i am personally and knowingly taking on. if all my players could randomly get good or suck, i would go nuts! i don't want to win the game because i got 10 lucky dice rolls that i had no control over. its funny to say that, because by definition the NT is winning 6 sets of dice rolls... but you have influence, so its different.

anyway, i think many of us want recruit generation fixed at #1 priority, some want jobs though, but really i think its mostly those 2. that said, neither are being worked on and i don't think seble will consider adding either - the current set of changes is already too big as it is.

Posted by mikvitu on 9/22/2015 11:39:00 AM (view original):
I think that they aren't going to change recruit generation because it would probably require changes to the way the engine acts. It's set up to run a certain way taking in certain factors and changing the types of players would probably require them to change something in there.

they aren't going to change it because seble isn't sure what to do, and thinks structural changes are needed to allow him to solve the problems. the sim engine appears to work across the whole gamut of player ratings, i really don't think its a sim engine issue - i mean, we see it work ok at high d1, where players today are so outrageously good, its like an affront to reason to have such good teams on a regular basis - and we see it work in d3. i can't imagine a paradigm of d1 recruit gen between this and d3, in terms of the range of player skills. not that it particularly matters, one way or another, its not being touched at this time :(

Posted by mikvitu on 9/22/2015 11:39:00 AM (view original):
I think that they aren't going to change recruit generation because it would probably require changes to the way the engine acts. It's set up to run a certain way taking in certain factors and changing the types of players would probably require them to change something in there.

I think this is probably why they aren't changing recruit generation at this time:

"This recruiting update wasn't initiated just to fix the imbalance at DI. I've always felt that recruiting could be much more fun and engaging, less stressful, and less frustrating than the current system."

i think it would be best if the high/hihgs werent capped like they seem to be right now.. Maybe make it so speed or ath could increase 50+ like PER and LP do sometimes.
so basiclly it'll give you that diamond in the rough.  right now we now that those can generally on get into the low 30s but if they would max out it would make for some crazy growth  and fun seeing where a player truly ends up. 

Yeah but if you changed the way players are generated then you have to change the equations that run the engine probably I think. So until there's an opportunity to do that I don't see it happening. But I would definitely like it if they just reduced the number of top recruits to make the good schools fight for them more. I think that itself would do a lot to balance things.

Posted by mikvitu on 9/22/2015 6:08:00 PM (view original):
Yeah but if you changed the way players are generated then you have to change the equations that run the engine probably I think. So until there's an opportunity to do that I don't see it happening. But I would definitely like it if they just reduced the number of top recruits to make the good schools fight for them more. I think that itself would do a lot to balance things.

trust me - this is not true. recruit generation can be done independently of the sim engine logic, it has before, its never been a problem -- in that regard. the engine works remarkably well across the gamut of player ratings and has since i started - its one of the most impressive things about HD. 

Given the scope of changes being implemented it probably makes more sense to roll it out for testing and make tweaks to recruit gen thereafter, if necessary, rather than to make tweaks, roll it out for testing and then possibly have to make more tweaks. To your second point, I don't think you will get much argument from most people that tweaking recruit gen would solve some of the balance issues that exist, but that point is moot because their stated aim is more than just balancing the game and, whether you agree with them or not, recruit gen tweaks don't address those other stated goals. 

Posted by possumfiend on 9/22/2015 7:32:00 PM (view original):
Given the scope of changes being implemented it probably makes more sense to roll it out for testing and make tweaks to recruit gen thereafter, if necessary, rather than to make tweaks, roll it out for testing and then possibly have to make more tweaks. To your second point, I don't think you will get much argument from most people that tweaking recruit gen would solve some of the balance issues that exist, but that point is moot because their stated aim is more than just balancing the game and, whether you agree with them or not, recruit gen tweaks don't address those other stated goals. 

agreed. also i think seble is totally against recruit gen here. seble is sort of coming into his own - hes not as much just doing what everyone says. thats good... in the sense that that is what a true game developer should do, and that he's been too willing to follow the advice of anyone without putting in context first, in the past. its bad, in the sense that he doesn't play and lacks critical context as a result. i figure we have to see where hes committed, where there is wiggle room, and focus on the latter. just saying "this is overall a terrible idea", will only get him to stop the conversation sooner. it really is an unfortunate reality on several levels but i think it is the reality nonetheless. 

I would only add that it's not factual to say seble doesn't play HD. He does play.  He currently has a team in Phelan and one in Knight and has played the game for some time.  His teams aren't world beaters but I don't think they can be either because it would raise a lot of eyebrows and complaints if the site admin was fielding teams that were competing for the title every season since he obviously has insights into the inner workings of the game that others don't. But I would imagine that the primary reason he plays is to make sure he has the context of how the game plays out from the users perspective and isn't just making uninformed decisions.  

Posted by possumfiend on 9/22/2015 10:52:00 PM (view original):
I would only add that it's not factual to say seble doesn't play HD. He does play.  He currently has a team in Phelan and one in Knight and has played the game for some time.  His teams aren't world beaters but I don't think they can be either because it would raise a lot of eyebrows and complaints if the site admin was fielding teams that were competing for the title every season since he obviously has insights into the inner workings of the game that others don't. But I would imagine that the primary reason he plays is to make sure he has the context of how the game plays out from the users perspective and isn't just making uninformed decisions.  

Well said!! ????????

Posted by duece_duece on 9/22/2015 11:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by possumfiend on 9/22/2015 10:52:00 PM (view original):
I would only add that it's not factual to say seble doesn't play HD. He does play.  He currently has a team in Phelan and one in Knight and has played the game for some time.  His teams aren't world beaters but I don't think they can be either because it would raise a lot of eyebrows and complaints if the site admin was fielding teams that were competing for the title every season since he obviously has insights into the inner workings of the game that others don't. But I would imagine that the primary reason he plays is to make sure he has the context of how the game plays out from the users perspective and isn't just making uninformed decisions.  

Well said!! ????????

Stupid iPad...the ?'s are supposed to be 2 thumbs up

there is a difference between knowing the mechanics of the game and knowing how to win it. 

Not sure they are interested in realistic equity fixes as much as they want to rework everything punishing good teams and helping bad ones. This would bring some equity while being realistic and still allowing top schools to get top players like in real life. Thus it is pretty much off the table... ??