someone voted yes 4+ worlds? man, and i thought politics was bad ;)

Here's an idea, not sure how this would go over. Close down 2 of the worlds at the D-2 and D-3 level. All D-2 and D-3 coaches in that world would have to move up to D-1 or pick another world. Give everyone in those affecting worlds at least a years notice. Open up a new world with the newly realigned divisions at D-1. Make the new world where all teams start at the same prestige at D-1 and floating prestige would be determined on success.

Posted by thewizard17 on 1/8/2016 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Here's an idea, not sure how this would go over. Close down 2 of the worlds at the D-2 and D-3 level. All D-2 and D-3 coaches in that world would have to move up to D-1 or pick another world. Give everyone in those affecting worlds at least a years notice. Open up a new world with the newly realigned divisions at D-1. Make the new world where all teams start at the same prestige at D-1 and floating prestige would be determined on success.

I could be wrong, but I think it's a major goal for people to set, to get to the major schools in big conferences. I love the idea of a "reset", but I'm not sure that leveling out the prestige and making it a clear and level field is a good move for D1... I like the idea of working towards things, and making it harder to keep a job....etc

Posted by gillispie1 on 1/8/2016 5:37:00 PM (view original):
someone voted yes 4+ worlds? man, and i thought politics was bad ;)

I pUT 4 myself as ideally I'd love an equal number of world's and it sucks that coaches who want only 2x world's cam crrently only have 3 whereas 1x world coaches have the option of 7.

Now realistically adding 4 more 2x worlds is probably impossoble. I think 2 is capable and ideal. So I guess I would really vote for 2 realistically. But it isn't happening so I voted for what I theoretically wanted

Personally, I feel that all the existing worlds are far, far too empty as they are.  I believe opening another world "would" siphon off some coaches from the pre-existing world as those coaches would feel the lure of the race to D1 and the elite schools.  Then, in about 15-18 months, when the same coaches who are at the elites now would be at the elites in this new world, we'd be hearing calls for opening another world as "all the elites are filled and there are never any openings".  Wash, rinse, repeat.  Sure, there would be a couple of new faces at a few of the elite schools but by and large, the same coaches that are at the elites now would win the race to the elites in a new world.  That's just the reality of it.

The existing worlds are way too empty as they are.  I'd be far more agreeable to CONTRACTION of worlds, not EXPANSION.  Adding new worlds would dilute what little competition there is even more. 

When was the most recent world added?  I suppose I could look at number of seasons in the world I play in, but does someone know?  (I know the emails outside of the WIS website refer to world 8 or world 10, but I never read those lol).

I don't forsee them adding a new world ever just based on population.  They'd have to MASSIVELY up the amount of human coaches to do that I think, and I don't forsee that ever happening.

But in such a magical world (where I win PowerBall, buy WIS from Fox and staff it and market the games) I'd like MORE 2x worlds :)  I've been dropping 1 a day worlds, but keeping the 2x

Posted by guyo26 on 1/8/2016 7:47:00 PM (view original):
When was the most recent world added?  I suppose I could look at number of seasons in the world I play in, but does someone know?  (I know the emails outside of the WIS website refer to world 8 or world 10, but I never read those lol).

I don't forsee them adding a new world ever just based on population.  They'd have to MASSIVELY up the amount of human coaches to do that I think, and I don't forsee that ever happening.

But in such a magical world (where I win PowerBall, buy WIS from Fox and staff it and market the games) I'd like MORE 2x worlds :)  I've been dropping 1 a day worlds, but keeping the 2x

Tark was April of 2006
Knight Feb 18, 2008
Phelan was added Wednesday March 12th 2008

Emy again I can only speak for myself, but I'm not for opening the worlds as to race to Elite D1, I guess we can assume some are, for me it's just the speed, similar to how coaches only play 1x speeds because they can't deal with 2x there is only 3 2x worlds for those that the 1x worlds are just a massive pain in the *** for how slow they are.  If I was to be the opposite and be able to only do 1x worlds I'd have the oppertunity to have 7 different teams, whereas if I limited myself to 2x worlds I get only 3. It'd be nice if I didn't have to have 1x worlds to have more than 3 teams as I really enjoy and put much more effort into my 2x worlds because of the faster pace.  It sucks that it takes 6 months for each class to graduate in D1.

My reasoning of this thread was to see if there was enough interest for the possibility of adding 1,2 more 2x worlds without losing a massive amount of coaches to those worlds who didn't keep playing their current worlds.  For me I'd keep all my 2x teams and probably drop all my 1x worlds in the forceable future just because I'm only in the 1x worlds to appease my appetite.

And what you just said confirms what emy said. If they opened more 2X worlds you would drop your 1X teams making those worlds lose players. And even if you would not be one to race to D1 there would be 5X coaches to open big 6 slots racing to get them.

I understand you like the 2X worlds speed but the fact is if they don't do something to bring in more people and fix the firing in D1 this game really won't change much.
Just my 2cents

I think there is no reasons to open new worlds until the ones we got get filled. I'd rather see more owners in the current worlds or less worlds more filled.

In DIII, I want to see a low ATH or low DEF player, with high scoring IQ become relevant. It won't happen until we have more owners... Same in DII or DI.

I can't see Fox/WIS firing coaches at the same rate they do in real life. They would end up losing a lot of customers. That's why I had suggested, create a world where every D-1 team would be on even ground to start. Make the game more balanced, so you can win with other strategies other than Ath+Def. I would also suggest not making the Top D-1 players so dominant. It's hard enough going up against a 90Ath 90Def 90LP guy, but it seems everyone of those guys also have BH and Passing skills as a decent D-3 point guard. I think it would generate a lot more interest.

I think a big thing people are missing is that if it was reversed the amount if world's a lot more people would be ******.

The biggest complaint is the coaches leaving the current world's to join the 2x worlds.

Now say it was 7 2x world's and 3 1x worlds and this was about opening more 1x worlds.

I feel a lot more people would be fine as they would use the argument well I can only play 1x world's during to time constraints and the 2x people would not be down for the new world's because that would affect the 2x population.

So it comes down to the 1x coaches not wanting 2x world's because it affects the population of the words they are in? Lol

But that wasn't the question the question was to add worlds. If you add worlds no mater 1X or 2X I think hurts the pop in existing worlds and all worlds need more people now either 1X or 2X

And to be clear I don't think we need more worlds. I don't care if they are 1X 2X or 10X. There are to many empty conferences now. I don't play D1 but hear a lot of things need to be fixed there. Maybe they need to fix those not add worlds.

Help me out here, someone.  I don't get it.  From reading a lot in the forums, it seems the general feeling is that there are too many worlds for the number of players already, and the worlds aren't full enough.  Guys have to "advertise" and beg for people to enter their conferences.  Fuller conferences are described as more competitive and more enjoyable.

If there are too many sims and too few human coached teams alteady, can't more worlds only make matters worse, not just stretching the present distribution of human coaches thinner than ever, but diluting the impact of new coaches?  More open teams seems like a bad idea, not a good idea.