Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 9:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/4/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/4/2017 5:55:00 PM (view original):
I've suggested that last paragraph several times. It gets no footing.

It was suggested a hundred times in Beta but a few potatoes didn't like it so instead Seble gave us the Red Light.

As you know, I don't really care how hard replacing EE is. My opinion may change when I get deep enough into the game to get an EE but, right now, my concern is wasted effort from D2/D3 so that D1 with EE can swoop in late and nab a recruit thus culminating in wasted resources from the lower level.

Having some D1 prospects decline AP from D2 or D3 solves that problem. D1 has a bigger pool and D2/D3 won't be wasting prospects on players they will likely lose.

I know WifS has the technology. It's in HBD coach hiring. Offer a BL coach a AAA job and he'll call you names while threatening to kill your pets. No reason that can't be programmed into HD.

in 2.0 if you reached too high for a recruit you could get a message from the player expressing offense that you would even think he would be interested

same sort of process

"progress - well done Spud, you are moving slowly toward enlightenment."

And you, while still incorrect, seem to be trying to get it right ... not that it really matters.

Is this the repayment I get for saying "If nothing else, spud is commenting on the topic at hand"?

Did you just HAVE to prove me wrong?

I keep coming back to the idea that maybe a make-all-somewhat-happy fix (not just for EEs, but for other recruiting issues) might be fashioned out of the idea to increase (by a LOT) the total amount of attention points and recruiting dollars RELATIVE TO THE MAX for individual recruits. In essence, it would allow any team to get in on lots more coin flips, with the ability to max out on say 15 or 20 recruits, instead of 3-4. DI teams would retain their advantages over D2, and D2 over D3, and prestige advantages would win out over many trials, but if you lost a recruit you invested in significantly, you'd still have options. The way I see it now, if you lose 1 or 2 or 3 "coin flips" you don't really have other options that are workable to keep a team consistently good. This is just my basic idea. I'm sure several could poke holes in it, and I'm not wedded to it or looking to start a fight about it, but I thought I'd throw it out there, in case someone else hasn't already. Reading the forums these days is brutal, and I certainly could've missed it while trying to skim past the shell-holed no-man's-land of Spud sucks - No I don't, but you do - Yes you do "discussions" ;)

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 9:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/4/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/4/2017 5:55:00 PM (view original):
I've suggested that last paragraph several times. It gets no footing.

It was suggested a hundred times in Beta but a few potatoes didn't like it so instead Seble gave us the Red Light.

As you know, I don't really care how hard replacing EE is. My opinion may change when I get deep enough into the game to get an EE but, right now, my concern is wasted effort from D2/D3 so that D1 with EE can swoop in late and nab a recruit thus culminating in wasted resources from the lower level.

Having some D1 prospects decline AP from D2 or D3 solves that problem. D1 has a bigger pool and D2/D3 won't be wasting prospects on players they will likely lose.

I know WifS has the technology. It's in HBD coach hiring. Offer a BL coach a AAA job and he'll call you names while threatening to kill your pets. No reason that can't be programmed into HD.

Actually nothing has changed in HD 3.0 for recruit generation and since everyone in D3 and now all of D2 can now recruit into D1, this has become an issue.

The # of recruits being generated is dependant on the # of opening based on the number of schools in each division. If all D1 schools have N openings then some function of N D1 recruits are being generated (same as it was done in HD 2.0).

Now however, all divisions are typically battling for D1 recruits, some are battling for high end D2 recruits and very few are fighting for low end D2 ones (and its likely nobody is fighting for D3 ones unless they are hidden gems and/or backup options for D3 programs failing at grabbing a higher one).

This is why its so difficult to replace an EE right now as the only way to plan for one is to find a usable recruit that nobody fights you for (either they don't want to battle you or the recruit isn't worth the resources to fight you for him). You can't offer a scholarship unless he's a late signer else they might sign instead of your primary target so its pretty apparent to others who these players are and very easy for any lower prestige team to come in any time they want to and push you off.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Is this the repayment I get for saying "If nothing else, spud is commenting on the topic at hand"?

Did you just HAVE to prove me wrong?

Sorry, Mike. Once in a while I mistakenly talk to the background noise. (One of 'em in particular is trying so hard to be a big man, but so far he isn't even especially relevant). I'll try to do better.

As for the topic of this thread, there is nothing to do about EE's now. Give it a couple or three seasons to de-cluster the EE's fom the few teams with multiples, and see if anything more is necessary. I'm guessing not, but a lot of people are wailing for top D1 to be made easier and easier. We'll all see in a few seasons, if WIS is smart enough to leave it alone for a while.

Posted by buddhagamer on 1/5/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 9:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/4/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/4/2017 5:55:00 PM (view original):
I've suggested that last paragraph several times. It gets no footing.

It was suggested a hundred times in Beta but a few potatoes didn't like it so instead Seble gave us the Red Light.

As you know, I don't really care how hard replacing EE is. My opinion may change when I get deep enough into the game to get an EE but, right now, my concern is wasted effort from D2/D3 so that D1 with EE can swoop in late and nab a recruit thus culminating in wasted resources from the lower level.

Having some D1 prospects decline AP from D2 or D3 solves that problem. D1 has a bigger pool and D2/D3 won't be wasting prospects on players they will likely lose.

I know WifS has the technology. It's in HBD coach hiring. Offer a BL coach a AAA job and he'll call you names while threatening to kill your pets. No reason that can't be programmed into HD.

Actually nothing has changed in HD 3.0 for recruit generation and since everyone in D3 and now all of D2 can now recruit into D1, this has become an issue.

The # of recruits being generated is dependant on the # of opening based on the number of schools in each division. If all D1 schools have N openings then some function of N D1 recruits are being generated (same as it was done in HD 2.0).

Now however, all divisions are typically battling for D1 recruits, some are battling for high end D2 recruits and very few are fighting for low end D2 ones (and its likely nobody is fighting for D3 ones unless they are hidden gems and/or backup options for D3 programs failing at grabbing a higher one).

This is why its so difficult to replace an EE right now as the only way to plan for one is to find a usable recruit that nobody fights you for (either they don't want to battle you or the recruit isn't worth the resources to fight you for him). You can't offer a scholarship unless he's a late signer else they might sign instead of your primary target so its pretty apparent to others who these players are and very easy for any lower prestige team to come in any time they want to and push you off.

Good point.

Success in D1 should be hard. Sustained success in D1 should be even harder.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 3:33:00 PM (view original):
Success in D1 should be hard. Sustained success in D1 should be even harder.

Why is D1 any different than D2/D3 from a game perspective? Last I looked, I got the same reward points/credits winning a NC at D1 as the guy who won in D3 (unlike GD) and we both paid the same amount of money.

Do you think the users at D1 are, in general, better at the game?

But I'll happily jump on the "same reward points/credits winning a NC at D1 as the guy who won in D3 (unlike GD) and we both paid the same amount of money" bandwagon. If that's the case, and it absolutely is, why should the EE problem at D1 be transferred to users are, and well within their rights of gameplay, chasing D1 recruits that D1 schools ignored in the 1st session? The D2/D3 users are using their far more limited resources in hopes of landing a difference-maker and the vast majority of the D1 users believe they should have an immediate win if they decide said player would be a nice back-up for them. After all, rewards points and game cost is the same for D1, D2 or D3, right?

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 8:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by illini326 on 1/4/2017 3:32:00 PM (view original):
I don't know if this has been brought up at all on the forums but wouldn't one very easy fix to people's complaints about EEs be to adjust the distribution so that more recruits have their signing preference be late. I would say roughly half of recruits should be generated as late signers instead of the current quarter.

That is an insightful OP, whether by design or accidentally. It reads "...fix to people's complaints about EEs..." It is indeed the incessant cacophony of complaints that needs fixing. The matter of EE's will iron itself out as the clustering of EE's in a handful of teams naturally abates. The complaints can be expected to continue no matter what WIS does. Hopefully WIS will stay the course so the matter can naturally iron itself out.

It would also be useful if WIS would take some time to remind everyone that enjoying the superior performance of an eventual EE performer for one to several seasons is one side of the coin, and replacing him is merely the other side of the coin. There can be no harm in WIS helping its customers develop a deeper understanding of the game that way. Heads up, WIS!

How did you replace your EE's? Since you seem to have so much experience with 3.0 and losing EE's what did you do? How many did you lose and what players did you get to replace them? How many att pts did you have going into the 1st session and then how many into the 2nd?

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/5/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/5/2017 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Is this the repayment I get for saying "If nothing else, spud is commenting on the topic at hand"?

Did you just HAVE to prove me wrong?

Sorry, Mike. Once in a while I mistakenly talk to the background noise. (One of 'em in particular is trying so hard to be a big man, but so far he isn't even especially relevant). I'll try to do better.

As for the topic of this thread, there is nothing to do about EE's now. Give it a couple or three seasons to de-cluster the EE's fom the few teams with multiples, and see if anything more is necessary. I'm guessing not, but a lot of people are wailing for top D1 to be made easier and easier. We'll all see in a few seasons, if WIS is smart enough to leave it alone for a while.

How did you replace your EE's? Since you seem to have so much experience with 3.0 and losing EE's what did you do? How many did you lose and what players did you get to replace them? How many att pts did you have going into the 1st session and then how many into the 2nd?

I asked him the same exact thing a month or so back. Funny no answer then, and likely no answer now.

I replaced mine with charm, good looks and skill.

But the real question is "SHOULD EE be replaced with more EE?" I can give you a very good reason for "no".

Posted by jpmills3 on 1/5/2017 6:50:00 PM (view original):
I asked him the same exact thing a month or so back. Funny no answer then, and likely no answer now.

SHOCKING!