When I started in 2.0 I asked several players what it took to win. The formula for winning was:
80% Recruiting
15% Gameplanning
5% Scheduling

This formula was more or less consistent between all the players I talked too in 2.0 about what it takes for being successful. I was wondering if this formula is changed in 3.0 or if it is still the same. Thoughts?

Interesting question... those percentages don't seem that unreasonable. I think scheduling may be a little less important than it was in 2.0, as fewer users means having the optimal schedule isn't necessarily as important to making the tourney or getting a high seed just due to less competition. From what I've seen, good game planning can be worth about 5 points a game as compared to standard Sim AI game planning, with elite game planners able to get as much as a 7.5 point per game edge. Recruiting, however, still dominates in terms of importance. That being said, I only had a little experience in 2.0 before the 3.0 switch, and haven't even tried DI, yet, so my ratings are more specifically limited to my experience in DII/DIII in 3.0.

I take the exact same approach I did in 2.0 in 3.0 and am seeing pretty much the exact same level of success, fwiw.

I think if you're including lineup in game planning, that percentage increases (both 2.0 and 3.0)... the right depth chart can be big in game outcome. Most coaches set their depth chart and leave it that way all season.

Posted by craigaltonw on 9/27/2017 6:18:00 PM (view original):
I think if you're including lineup in game planning, that percentage increases (both 2.0 and 3.0)... the right depth chart can be big in game outcome. Most coaches set their depth chart and leave it that way all season.

Ding ding ding!

Yeah, team structure is super important. If you only recruit stud bigs but have no one to pass or shoot then you're gonna have a bad time.

Or you run FB/Press but have terrible stamina with no depth then you're gonna have a bad time