Scouting is fine...somewhat cumbersome but interesting.

Recruiting is a different matter.

Undecided.

At DI scouting change is irrelevant. I get to the same place I am today, but just with a lot more effort. Once the newness wears off this will be boring as well but more time consuming. Cant speak for the effect on DII/DIII.

I like that it keeps evolving and improving as we go along. It's already very different from when it started.

people who don't like it are just stuck in there old ways

Posted by mullycj on 6/20/2016 9:30:00 AM (view original):
At DI scouting change is irrelevant. I get to the same place I am today, but just with a lot more effort. Once the newness wears off this will be boring as well but more time consuming. Cant speak for the effect on DII/DIII.

yeah, I like the concept of the scouting changes for D2 and D3, but D1 scouting has always been a little pointless.

those are really broad categories. I like some aspects of the new recruiting, others seriously need tweaking

again it pretty much comes down to how long you've been here theres I guess 4 categories we can place people in

• new coaches who think the update is cool without knowing whats going on
• long timers who don't think its going to fix problems and create more
• optimistic long timers who think it has interesting ideas
• waiting to try it out

I think some idea's are really cool like action points, we are pretty much going towards NCAAF 14 recruiting methods and trying to eliminate just who drops the most cash(unfortunately its a game and there is a formula and it will be found out and then people complain it's just who puts in the right formula)

Preferences probably need tweaking thats I guess my biggest gripe that could realistically be fixed, I think play styles, tempo, off/def are poor measures, and would prefer things like GPA of your players would give you an academic prestige rating which adds reason to not just do bare minimum SH minutes.

I liked chapel's idea a lot of having camps be available whenever you want, that way the coaches who want so spread out scouting can do it over a period of time and the coaches who want to get it done quickly like it is can still do it in a day or two, no reason to force people to wait.

I can't remember if they did change scouting levels I remember there was a poll, but eliminating level 1 is a good start it's pointless and adds nothing bt a barrier to withold information. Splitting level 4 into 2 new levels where high +/- and low +/- are the new level 4 actually does something and now you can easily recruit on just level 3 info or go on to level 4 to get the +/- and actually adds an element to make coaching decisions make a impact on scouting instead of making it a time consuming process to get to the necessary level 4. Cutting down the time it takes to scout would also be nice.

Still think the beta should be done longer however its going to rushed out shortly and we won't know the impact of just 2/3 seasons and having coaches/schools not at their respective levels so we don't know how this actually impacts places like ASU K-State or how it impacts D3 Colorado etc which is disappointing.

I think in maybe a year or two it could make scouting/recruiting be pretty fun, but I do not think it will be strong off the bat and will cause some major problems earlier I don't feel like paying to experience.

Seble is still fixing stuff so I am being optimistic, but so far, Scouting and Recruiting are getting worried. I will cut two more teams and get into it with an open mind, but If I see dead worlds, lacking ownerships, I am dropping some more and only staying at Phelan D1 and Naismith D3.

Won't do the polls since it is a work in progress and we know not what affect all the changes made between beta year 1 and beta year 2 will have on what we've already experienced. That said, a few thoughts...

1. I strongly like the five-category breakdown for potential. Losing the repetitive scouting where your AC goes out 8 times and never tells you if your point guard's perimeter potential is low-high or high-high is a thing of the past. This is good.

2. At D2/D3, I like the fact that my list of potential recruits is going to look different from that of a nearby conference school. Yes, at D1 you have enough money to get back to the same spot (with, as mully said, a lot more click work...but we'll get to that...), but at D2/D3 I'm not sure that's as much the case, especially D3. There are enough different routes for spending money and enough randomization points in the process that two teams in the same city could have a different base list of recruits. Yes, they'll still heavily overlap, but there will also be some uniqueness, which I like.

3. I guess I like the fact that players I could never access before are now available for me to sign to my team from a "let's see what sort of monster program I can craft" standpoint. I'm not convinced this is a "like" for what it will do to the overall health of the game, however. Particularly in D3 where it will give experienced coaches an even larger advantage over the incoming folks.

4. Dislike -- the number of clicks needed to get information. I have to click on each individual state I want to FSS...for each DIVISION of talent I want to FSS from that state. The good of this is that I don't pay to scout kids who play below the level I'd ever consider looking at (so I don't have to scout D3 kids at D2, for instance). But what used to be "click on these five dots and then hit okay" has now become "Click on Missouri, click ok...Click on Illinois, click ok...Click on Arkansas...click ok...etc.....Change to the D1 filter and repeat all of it again..."

5. Scouting -- depending on how well your initial scout goes, to get the most detailed information means opening up individual player cards and then clicking on them from 1-3 times if you didn't get all the way out to Level 4 to begin with. This only changes the information on the card. To see it on the recruit pool page means having to constantly refresh that screen as well as it doesn't automatically load stuff in. To call this tedious is an understatement. To call it annoying is more accurate. Maddening is even closer. Definite dislike.

6. Scouting/Recruiting -- Once you're at the Level 4 (maximum) information, you have no easy way to sort the players. Under the current system, I can input something like "Search for all players with a WE greater than 30, Def greater than 45, Spd greater than 50 and Per higher than 50" and get a short list of players who fulfill that criteria set. That ability is gone, so even after getting all the information my scouting budget can afford, I have no way to neatly and tidily filter it to efficiently make decisions. Again, major dislike -- I'm playing a game here for fun, not wanting to feel like an accountant poring over a spreadsheet during an audit.

7. The recruiting process -- Lots of changes here, so hard to eval what it has become in year 2. In year 1 though, it was pretty easy. I signed kids for just a scholarship offer. Can't speak to the player battles, which I know had a lot of randomization to them, which some people liked and others did not depending on which side of the coin toss you fell on for a given stud player...

8. Levels of interest in the recruiting process...unless I missed it, the joy of Word on the Street vanished. So you know now that a recruit is "Very High" on you. And you know you're in the lead. But you also know that said recruit is "Very High" on School B and School C. What you do NOT know is just how much of a lead you have on B or C like the language of the Word on the Street used to give you. (and even if you're in the lead, it isn't a guarantee you get said player....) This creates an awkward "do I put more resources into the kid or not" plateau and we really haven't been given an explanation for just how the random selection works to let us know if its worthwhile to keep actively recruiting someone once you're at "very high" or if the key is just to maintain that level of interest. Dislike on both levels.

9. Time commitment -- I'm clocking my time spent recruiting in beta year 2. I'm at just shy of 4 hours right now and actual recruiting hasn't begun. That's just how long it has taken me to assemble my list of recruits, locate the strongest ones and assemble them into a hierarchy. There's no way I could do this for, say, 8 teams. we'd be talking a part-time job, not a game. This is my single biggest complaint about the new system -- it is staggering just how cumbersome the process has become in terms of the number of clicks needed to get back to where you were in the current system and the level of time it takes to arrive there as well.

10. Different signing times -- I like the stagger, but the general consensus I was hearing was that not enough good players at D1 remained to adequately fill in the gaps that EE's left and for the folks who lost the randomization coin flip for recruits they were in the lead on during the first signing period. Call me undecided here, leaning toward liking it if tweaked enough.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/20/2016 8:41:00 AM (view original):
Scouting is fine...somewhat cumbersome but interesting.

Recruiting is a different matter.

yeah scouting is fine but recruiting sucks

Posted by rednu on 6/20/2016 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Won't do the polls since it is a work in progress and we know not what affect all the changes made between beta year 1 and beta year 2 will have on what we've already experienced. That said, a few thoughts...

1. I strongly like the five-category breakdown for potential. Losing the repetitive scouting where your AC goes out 8 times and never tells you if your point guard's perimeter potential is low-high or high-high is a thing of the past. This is good.

2. At D2/D3, I like the fact that my list of potential recruits is going to look different from that of a nearby conference school. Yes, at D1 you have enough money to get back to the same spot (with, as mully said, a lot more click work...but we'll get to that...), but at D2/D3 I'm not sure that's as much the case, especially D3. There are enough different routes for spending money and enough randomization points in the process that two teams in the same city could have a different base list of recruits. Yes, they'll still heavily overlap, but there will also be some uniqueness, which I like.

3. I guess I like the fact that players I could never access before are now available for me to sign to my team from a "let's see what sort of monster program I can craft" standpoint. I'm not convinced this is a "like" for what it will do to the overall health of the game, however. Particularly in D3 where it will give experienced coaches an even larger advantage over the incoming folks.

4. Dislike -- the number of clicks needed to get information. I have to click on each individual state I want to FSS...for each DIVISION of talent I want to FSS from that state. The good of this is that I don't pay to scout kids who play below the level I'd ever consider looking at (so I don't have to scout D3 kids at D2, for instance). But what used to be "click on these five dots and then hit okay" has now become "Click on Missouri, click ok...Click on Illinois, click ok...Click on Arkansas...click ok...etc.....Change to the D1 filter and repeat all of it again..."

5. Scouting -- depending on how well your initial scout goes, to get the most detailed information means opening up individual player cards and then clicking on them from 1-3 times if you didn't get all the way out to Level 4 to begin with. This only changes the information on the card. To see it on the recruit pool page means having to constantly refresh that screen as well as it doesn't automatically load stuff in. To call this tedious is an understatement. To call it annoying is more accurate. Maddening is even closer. Definite dislike.

6. Scouting/Recruiting -- Once you're at the Level 4 (maximum) information, you have no easy way to sort the players. Under the current system, I can input something like "Search for all players with a WE greater than 30, Def greater than 45, Spd greater than 50 and Per higher than 50" and get a short list of players who fulfill that criteria set. That ability is gone, so even after getting all the information my scouting budget can afford, I have no way to neatly and tidily filter it to efficiently make decisions. Again, major dislike -- I'm playing a game here for fun, not wanting to feel like an accountant poring over a spreadsheet during an audit.

7. The recruiting process -- Lots of changes here, so hard to eval what it has become in year 2. In year 1 though, it was pretty easy. I signed kids for just a scholarship offer. Can't speak to the player battles, which I know had a lot of randomization to them, which some people liked and others did not depending on which side of the coin toss you fell on for a given stud player...

8. Levels of interest in the recruiting process...unless I missed it, the joy of Word on the Street vanished. So you know now that a recruit is "Very High" on you. And you know you're in the lead. But you also know that said recruit is "Very High" on School B and School C. What you do NOT know is just how much of a lead you have on B or C like the language of the Word on the Street used to give you. (and even if you're in the lead, it isn't a guarantee you get said player....) This creates an awkward "do I put more resources into the kid or not" plateau and we really haven't been given an explanation for just how the random selection works to let us know if its worthwhile to keep actively recruiting someone once you're at "very high" or if the key is just to maintain that level of interest. Dislike on both levels.

9. Time commitment -- I'm clocking my time spent recruiting in beta year 2. I'm at just shy of 4 hours right now and actual recruiting hasn't begun. That's just how long it has taken me to assemble my list of recruits, locate the strongest ones and assemble them into a hierarchy. There's no way I could do this for, say, 8 teams. we'd be talking a part-time job, not a game. This is my single biggest complaint about the new system -- it is staggering just how cumbersome the process has become in terms of the number of clicks needed to get back to where you were in the current system and the level of time it takes to arrive there as well.

10. Different signing times -- I like the stagger, but the general consensus I was hearing was that not enough good players at D1 remained to adequately fill in the gaps that EE's left and for the folks who lost the randomization coin flip for recruits they were in the lead on during the first signing period. Call me undecided here, leaning toward liking it if tweaked enough.

Thanks for the detailed analysis Rednu. What I can get from all of that is that (1) it's unnecessarily cumbersome with all the extra clicks to get to where we are with one or two clicks in the "old/current" system. (2) Because of having to go around your elbow to reach your ***, it is far more time consuming in this "new" system than it is with what we currently have. Like, way, way more. At one point I had a team in all 10 worlds under this ID. From what it sounds like, that would realistically no longer be possible, resulting in coaches similar to me having to cut several teams out of necessity, simply because it's far too time consuming. How is that a "good" thing again? How is having "fewer" teams in a world a better idea, especially given the dire straits that most worlds are in now anyway. So the sparsely populated worlds turn into more ghost towns than they already are?

I know that some of the people "in charge" are extremely stubborn in regards to certain things, but I have to question whether this whole thing was "really" thought through because it seems painfully obvious that the unintended consequences of instituting this new update are going to be pretty severe and an overall result of LESS coaches than we currently have. Which, in case, you haven't been paying attention is probably not going to be a good thing.

I guess what I'm thinking is that this new update could be the best addition to HD that has ever been, but if there isn't anyone here to play (not meant to be taken literally, but you get the idea) then what's the point? I also agree that we may see some Dynasties (with a capital D) in D2 and D3 when players who have no business being at those levels end up on those teams. I know there was a big discussion when the #17 or something PF ended up signed by a D3 team. Now apparently the guys ratings were pretty bad and he was nowhere near being the 17th best PF but that's missing the point. The fact that a D3 team could even sign a player ranked in the top 20 of his position is a problem. A big problem Rednu documented that the D2 team he was at in the beat, with something like a C or C- prestige, was able to assemble a class far better than anything he has ever been able to assemble at his A+ prestige team in the normal worlds. This is a problem. I can already envision what is going to happen. Coaches now are chiming in saying that they like the fact that D2/D3 teams can sign those type studs because in "their" minds, THEY are going to be the ones assembling those badass teams. What they AREN'T thinking about is what happens when "they" don't but two other teams in their conference do and having to try to play against stacked squads like that. And I can Guar-roan-tee that they will end up being the FIRST ones to ***** about it when it happens. Just grab your popcorn, sit back, and watch.

I may be in the minority here but I can already see that this will create (at D2 and D3 anyway) an even bigger gap between the good teams, the great teams, and the elite powerhouse teams. Why? Because the best coaches and recruiters will still be the best coaches and recruiters, only now you're giving them access to even BETTER players than they do now. And if prestige becomes more important as I thought I read somewhere then those coaches will end up with these monster teams, their prestige will never suffer because each year it'll be the same thing, and you may just end up seeing a divide in D2 and D3 like you see in D1 now. Seble can change it around as much as he wants, but the best coaches will still be the best coaches, will always be the best coaches, and ultimately the only thing that REALLY changes is the pretty colors on the screens and the total number of clicks that it takes for those coaches to load up their monster teams every season. I'm really going to hate to say "I told you so" three or four seasons from now but it's going to happen, like it or not.

Just something to think about as those Mount Rushmore coaches are already thinking about how to crush the competition in this new update. For what its worth, I was at the foothills of HD's Mount Rushmore at one point, but lack of interest and apathy in general have seen me displaced and moved to the slums, ha ha!!