Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

Fun to see the "let's just dismiss and belittle everyone who disagrees with us" attitude drifting out of politics and into general society.

You are to be applauded, sir. You've taken social jackassery into your paid leisure activities. Now you can truly find ways to be unpleasant to nearly everyone!

Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

If this is sarcasm, I wasn't certain and disregard my statement. Otherwise, your assessment that continued participation and silent vast majority of defenders means that 3.0 is better, is one of the most shortsighted statements I've heard in some time here. The "small percentage of whiners" were the majority of this game's population. I'll counter that more than half of the game's population left upon the transition for whatever reason, whether it be they didn't want to learn a new system, didn't like the changes or anything else. Another portion of the population adjusted, because despite disliking the changes, they still liked the game. It's like one group banishing the other groups and then saying "see, our way is better and noone complains". Of course it is, because the only viewpoints left are either positive towards the changes or remain positive towards the game as a whole.

At the end of the day, this is a business. More people = a better game and more revenue for the developers to work on the game. It doesn't matter how great the changes may be if noone wanted them and you don't have the ability to replace those who left. Those that left mostly did so, because there was no working with the developer after a certain point and realized the game was not acceptable to them in it's current format. The truth is somewhere in the middle. there is good and bad to 3.0, but most of the current coach still plunking down $100 can't be that good and therefore most likely haven't been here long enough to know the difference, while the rest skate by on their credits for taking advantage of low populations, and a lengthy and confusing system to a newcomer.

2.0 easy. I have had better success in 3.0, but that is due to elite coaches clearing out of the way and leaving the game. The lack of competition has allowed me to field the same quality of teams as 2.0. If the worlds were full, then it would be another story entirely - I think that is something 3.0 defenders miss.

3.0 falls short of 2.0 for a couple major reasons. EE’s at high D1 - it is incredibly hard to overcome unexpected EE’s (and even some expected EE situations) in the second session. In 2.0, EEs still hurt, but you had a chance in recruiting to even things out.

another thing is that these coin flips are still super annoying when you lose as like a 76% favorite. If a rule were put in place that would have to be within 20% of the leader to sign a guy (so 60-40 at min for a heads up, or say like 50, 30, 10 (10 can’t sign him) in a 3 way), that would also be more palatable.

lastly, I find less strategy in the current game. My prestige and location are so good, that I can routinely pick out my targets, max them out, and aside from the occasional ridiculous upset, reload every year.

2.0 did not have recruiting effort caps. I lost battles when I spent 100k of my recruiting money on a guy - it was a game of math and chicken, and it was “higher stakes.” The current engine saves people from themselves I suppose, but I would rather be in control of my direction. Nobody tells Coach Cal when he is maxed out on his “effort” for a kid.

Posted by poncho2799 on 5/4/2020 1:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

If this is sarcasm, I wasn't certain and disregard my statement. Otherwise, your assessment that continued participation and silent vast majority of defenders means that 3.0 is better, is one of the most shortsighted statements I've heard in some time here. The "small percentage of whiners" were the majority of this game's population. I'll counter that more than half of the game's population left upon the transition for whatever reason, whether it be they didn't want to learn a new system, didn't like the changes or anything else. Another portion of the population adjusted, because despite disliking the changes, they still liked the game. It's like one group banishing the other groups and then saying "see, our way is better and noone complains". Of course it is, because the only viewpoints left are either positive towards the changes or remain positive towards the game as a whole.

At the end of the day, this is a business. More people = a better game and more revenue for the developers to work on the game. It doesn't matter how great the changes may be if noone wanted them and you don't have the ability to replace those who left. Those that left mostly did so, because there was no working with the developer after a certain point and realized the game was not acceptable to them in it's current format. The truth is somewhere in the middle. there is good and bad to 3.0, but most of the current coach still plunking down $100 can't be that good and therefore most likely haven't been here long enough to know the difference, while the rest skate by on their credits for taking advantage of low populations, and a lengthy and confusing system to a newcomer.

i don't think more than half of the people left - forum folks perhaps, but the human pop in the worlds didn't drop by half, as best i can tell. i wonder what the actual drop was - i think we'd kinda want to start 6-12 mo before 3.0 release, because a lot of people saw the writing on the wall and didn't wait to bail.

Posted by cubcub113 on 5/3/2020 2:02:00 PM (view original):
3.0 is slightly better IMO. The pull-down thing in 2.0 was pretty ridiculous. But 3.0 has some glaring problems.

Is it really good for the game that EEs don't declare before RS1? Does anyone think that would be either (a) a bad change or (b) hard to program?

Is it really good for the game that people can lose rolls 80-20? Do you guys know what loss aversion is? People hate losing rolls 80-20 much more than people like winning rolls 20-80; it just makes people in the userbase less happy.

Yeah, given effort/resource allocation model of recruiting, it is good for the game that EEs don’t declare until after the season. That’s one of the prime ways of maintaining competitive balance (note, this is not the same as “parity” or “participation trophies”, before mully stumbles back here) in the effort/resource allocation model. If recruiting was just prestige/preferences/promises, then it would make sense to just have everyone have a constant, unchanging base of attention attention points unlocking the different actions, and then players can declare whenever, without destroying the competitive balance. But that isn’t the game that exists.

And yes, it’s good that individual recruit battles exist on a spectrum. 80-20 is fine (keeping in mind those are the stretched odds, and do not reflect the actual recruiting credit accrued by the teams involved, which doesn’t get any more wide than ~63-37). The big problem is showing the odds. That was easily the worst decision made in the post-rollout execution, and I think it’s notable that the decision was made while the guy who actually built the new version and ran the beta process was away from the wheel.

Totally agree with Poncho on his points about the success of the game being important. I also totally agree with jpmills and his points about the recruiting cap - not a fan. Dice rolls are okay but need to be tightened up.

There are definitely some good things about 3.0 and there are some bad things. Absolutely the #1 worst thing about 3.0 is the split recruiting sessions followed by removing the recruiting level cap - especially at D3.

I get why having two recruiting sessions might have been a good idea (giving the players something to do during the season) but it has caused way too many problems.
1) new players can't recruit and stuck with horrible players. They also have no emotional investment if they were their OWN horrible players.
2) Taking over new teams and moving up sucks since recruiting in the 2nd session you are behind the 8 ball and even rebuilding D1 teams struggle with knocking of entrenched D2 teams (not realistic if that's what you're going for)
3) Even for vets picking up a new team sucks with not being able to recruit your own guys right away. Connected with point 1 and 2, rebuilds take longer now.
4) "The EE Problem"

But I will never understand why they needed to remove the recruiting cap at D3. Absolutely no reason to do that as there was never a problem at D3 of people wanting to recruit D1 projected players and how the game suffered that you couldn't. That was never a complaint.

Things I miss about 2.0-
1) D3 being fun (subjective, I know)
2) The funny recruiting emails. Yeah they got old but reading "Coach the only reason I'm giving you a shot is because your secretary is hot" is a hell of a lot better than "I'm interested in a scholarship offer, hit me up!"
3) Not looking at a D2/D3 wasteland devoid of human coached teams

Changes that were good
1) Removing rollover and conf cash was probably good. Although I wish they just changed the conf cash bonus to just scouting money or something.
2) The idea of preferences adds a new twist and is for the most part, a great addition. But I think some of the preferences could be different/better.

The EE system that selects which players stay sucks in both versions but it's obviously much worse in 3.0.

Posted by gillispie1 on 5/4/2020 1:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho2799 on 5/4/2020 1:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

If this is sarcasm, I wasn't certain and disregard my statement. Otherwise, your assessment that continued participation and silent vast majority of defenders means that 3.0 is better, is one of the most shortsighted statements I've heard in some time here. The "small percentage of whiners" were the majority of this game's population. I'll counter that more than half of the game's population left upon the transition for whatever reason, whether it be they didn't want to learn a new system, didn't like the changes or anything else. Another portion of the population adjusted, because despite disliking the changes, they still liked the game. It's like one group banishing the other groups and then saying "see, our way is better and noone complains". Of course it is, because the only viewpoints left are either positive towards the changes or remain positive towards the game as a whole.

At the end of the day, this is a business. More people = a better game and more revenue for the developers to work on the game. It doesn't matter how great the changes may be if noone wanted them and you don't have the ability to replace those who left. Those that left mostly did so, because there was no working with the developer after a certain point and realized the game was not acceptable to them in it's current format. The truth is somewhere in the middle. there is good and bad to 3.0, but most of the current coach still plunking down $100 can't be that good and therefore most likely haven't been here long enough to know the difference, while the rest skate by on their credits for taking advantage of low populations, and a lengthy and confusing system to a newcomer.

i don't think more than half of the people left - forum folks perhaps, but the human pop in the worlds didn't drop by half, as best i can tell. i wonder what the actual drop was - i think we'd kinda want to start 6-12 mo before 3.0 release, because a lot of people saw the writing on the wall and didn't wait to bail.

Did someone ask for population data???

	D1	D2	D3	Total
~9/27/15	1357	1206	1156	3719	1 year before 3.0
7/13/16	1247	1023	1059	3329	2 months before 3.0
4/22/17	986	805	871	2662	7 months after 3.0
9/30/17	1048	712	641	2401	1 year after 3.0
6/18/18	1105	694	684	2483	21 months after 3.0
10/17/18	1076	587	624	2287	2 years after 3.0
1/30/19	1075	568	611	2254	2.5 years after 3.0
1/9/20	1051	614	542	2207	3.5 years after 3.0
Reduction	23%	49%	53%	41%

So yeah, it's about 40% total reduction from right before 3.0 was announced until about now. But if you are someone who plays d2/d3 exclusively then yeah you're seeing about half as many coaches playing than back in 2.0.

D3 is on a steady decline cause it sucks. D2 is allright. D1 with Ees and not having control over resources, always going to a dice roll is annoying.

Dahs and JP summed up my thoughts very well.

Benis-In 2.0 I was all for capping post-season cash for D1 but IMO the extra recruiting money from a stacked conference made D2 and D3 more enjoyable.

Preferences make the whole 3.0 experience even more random, IMO. If you don't get kids within 400 miles that line up well with your school preferences it's even tougher to recruit in this version. At high D1, where I pay attention to preferences the most, it also feels like one season all the high school kids want triangle, motion the next, flex the year after, etc. I have no real data to back this up but roughly once every 4 seasons it *seems* like everyone within 500 miles of me runs my offense then crickets for the next 3 seasons. Wash, rinse, repeat.

“If a rule were put in place that would have to be within 20% of the leader to sign a guy (so 60-40 at min for a heads up, or say like 50, 30, 10 (10 can’t sign him) in a 3 way), that would also be more palatable.”

Unfortunately, we’re 3+ years in, and many people still don’t seem to understand this is already basically true. You currently need to be within ~60% of the recruiting credit of the leader (63-37) to be in signing range. On that extreme end, the final odds look like 80-20 instead of 63-37, because they are stretched to favor the team that is in the lead. So the system requires a team be relatively close to have a shot, and then the probability is adjusted to even further reduce their shot. This is why it was such a terrible mistake to show those final odds. It basically ensures people continue to suffer frustration and misunderstanding in perpetuity. A ton of the dissatisfaction that exists could have been mitigated by better framing and messaging.

Shoe I have had this many times in different parallel worlds or different dimiensions world or reality simulations. When I first met Harry he was exactly like this and little did I know somebody else was suppose to play in his spot "imposter is always a word I use for Credibility" Emma was also a imposter for the movie. This is little significants to their lives. This is most common by people who makes mistakes and or says the complete opinion by the opposite general few. I do recognize that this is not a good situation and needs to be handled in some sort of way. Shoe your talking about bringing down the house with CubCub in every implied sentence. But that's cool you get your money first you get to leave first by the way please do not respond without some sort of Credibility source.

Posted by Benis on 5/4/2020 2:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 5/4/2020 1:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho2799 on 5/4/2020 1:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

If this is sarcasm, I wasn't certain and disregard my statement. Otherwise, your assessment that continued participation and silent vast majority of defenders means that 3.0 is better, is one of the most shortsighted statements I've heard in some time here. The "small percentage of whiners" were the majority of this game's population. I'll counter that more than half of the game's population left upon the transition for whatever reason, whether it be they didn't want to learn a new system, didn't like the changes or anything else. Another portion of the population adjusted, because despite disliking the changes, they still liked the game. It's like one group banishing the other groups and then saying "see, our way is better and noone complains". Of course it is, because the only viewpoints left are either positive towards the changes or remain positive towards the game as a whole.

At the end of the day, this is a business. More people = a better game and more revenue for the developers to work on the game. It doesn't matter how great the changes may be if noone wanted them and you don't have the ability to replace those who left. Those that left mostly did so, because there was no working with the developer after a certain point and realized the game was not acceptable to them in it's current format. The truth is somewhere in the middle. there is good and bad to 3.0, but most of the current coach still plunking down $100 can't be that good and therefore most likely haven't been here long enough to know the difference, while the rest skate by on their credits for taking advantage of low populations, and a lengthy and confusing system to a newcomer.

i don't think more than half of the people left - forum folks perhaps, but the human pop in the worlds didn't drop by half, as best i can tell. i wonder what the actual drop was - i think we'd kinda want to start 6-12 mo before 3.0 release, because a lot of people saw the writing on the wall and didn't wait to bail.

Did someone ask for population data???

	D1	D2	D3	Total
~9/27/15	1357	1206	1156	3719	1 year before 3.0
7/13/16	1247	1023	1059	3329	2 months before 3.0
4/22/17	986	805	871	2662	7 months after 3.0
9/30/17	1048	712	641	2401	1 year after 3.0
6/18/18	1105	694	684	2483	21 months after 3.0
10/17/18	1076	587	624	2287	2 years after 3.0
1/30/19	1075	568	611	2254	2.5 years after 3.0
1/9/20	1051	614	542	2207	3.5 years after 3.0
Reduction	23%	49%	53%	41%

So yeah, it's about 40% total reduction from right before 3.0 was announced until about now. But if you are someone who plays d2/d3 exclusively then yeah you're seeing about half as many coaches playing than back in 2.0.

Well that is sad to see. 41% down is all that should matter to the higher ups I would think. That’s not an insignificant chunk that can be pushed to the side.

i picked a good first day to check out the forums for the first time in like a year.

One thing that may affect population though... did they used to advertise HD at all? If they used to advertise it, and now they don’t, that has a lot to do with population.

Mine is basically a year to am I suppose to take Sports with real grain of salt or a saltizer?

Posted by dahsdebater on 5/4/2020 10:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 5/4/2020 10:12:00 AM (view original):
I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

Fun to see the "let's just dismiss and belittle everyone who disagrees with us" attitude drifting out of politics and into general society.

You are to be applauded, sir. You've taken social jackassery into your paid leisure activities. Now you can truly find ways to be unpleasant to nearly everyone!

Actually, you make good points about DIII recruiting. I agree that recruiting in DIII can be excruciating waiting for those last 24 hours. I think if the D1/DII population numbers were higher, you'd see more DIII teams laying off the D1 recruits, and you'd see a lot more first cycle RS2 signings for those DIII teams.