I think getting fired ADDS to the experience! I know when I suck. And I’d understand if I got fired! This isn’t my real career. It’s a game! And I understand that we don’t want to lose people bc they can’t keep their jobs for 80 years, but the fact of the matter is, you’re probably losing more people bc they are stuck in jobs they don’t want bc the jobs they do want never open up! Your argument can go both ways.

Again, I’m ecstatic we are even having this conversation! Although small changes are nice, sometimes big changes need to be made to get the most out of your product.

And shoe3 made good points earlier. But I think if you go with career limits, you have to go all worlds. Make the change, inform ppl that they have 20 seasons until they have to retire, but give everyone the option to retire anytime in those 20 seasons to start over. Then each new career, you get 50 seasons to do your damage until u have to retire again. This would stagger the reallocation of jobs and allow current worlds to keep right on trucking.

But I’m just a guy that spends way too much money here tossing around ideas! And I guess I’ll keep spending until something is changed bc I’m an addict! Anybody got spare change they wanna throw me to support my habit?! Lol

Honestly though, I appreciate your response! And good luck going forward! Excited to see where u take it!

Posted by georgerollin on 2/18/2021 10:55:00 AM (view original):
so basically this patch does nothing

The fact that there are patches at all is the whole point.

New employees are looking at the code .. interacting with users and trying to make things better.

They have to try simple things and see how the code reacts to figure out how this stuff works. These guys were not here in the code for years and years. They have to figure out how the game works first and how the code changes they are introducing impact the overall game.

I am a software engineer (operating systems .. not games).. inheriting code, some of which is undocumented (or lightly documented), means you have to FIGURE OUT what algorithms actually do BEFORE you change them. For people who don't understand coding .. think how a mechanic has to figure out undocumented additions to a car to fix things, etc.

So .. be happy there is someone who gives a crap about fixing the game in the first place.

Think
forced career limits at this point would be a bad idea in practice - forcing people to give up a school they have invested forever in would generate more bad feeling among those effected than good feeling among those benefiting.

I kind of hope at some point they actually realign the conferences to mirror the current conferences. I know that is an unpopular opinion, but the younger folks and those just joining probably do not even remember these old conference alignments.

That’s another one that’s likely to cause more trouble than you gain benefits.

I dont know, at some point the conferences will REALLY be outdated, thus newer users may not find it as attractive

Posted by adlorenz on 2/18/2021 1:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Brokenee on 2/18/2021 12:18:00 PM (view original):
Just thought I would throw this into the convo. I site mailed adlorenz the following. I'd like to get anyone's thoughts on the subject.

Hey adlorenz,

I have a few questions about the patch. I hope it's not too much to bother u with. Here they are:

In Hoops Dynasty, what does the following mean?

"Recruiting Balance Change - Adjusted scholarship offers to be more balanced towards real life value"

Does this mean that a scholly offer from, let's say, a B+ prestige Georgia Tech is more valuable than a scholly offer from a B+ prestige Wichita St because Georgia Tech is an ACC school?

Or is this just directed toward D1 schools versus D2 schools?

I'm sorry, that note confuses and scares me just a little bit and a little clarification would help ease my anxiety! lol.

On a side note, has a limit on the number of seasons you can coach at one school ever been considered? I ask because there are schools out there that have had the same coach for 60-70 plus seasons. That is not realistic because ppl don't live or coach that long. And those big time schools rarely have coaching turnover bc once a coach gets that job, they never leave. I know I wouldn't.

The fun in this game is the climb. And with the New Coach Experience and Job Qualification formula, I think getting one of these jobs is more feasible now, IF they ever come available. If it hasn't been discussed; I don't know but maybe it's worth you and your team considering. Even the best college hoops games of all time on console have career timeframe limits. Let me know your thoughts if you have the time!

Thanks for reading this over! It's good to have someone actually trying to make the game better and more realistic! I can't wait to see what you guys come up with next! Good luck!

Let me know what you guys think.

I saw the sitemail, and while I understand change is different for WIS and the community, it's hard to answer these questions around the scholarship offer change, part of the game is figuring it out, its how a lot of you have gotten to be the successful coaches you are today. It was not a big change, it was essentially an adjustment the base value of scholarship offers. I do not think many people (or anyone for that fact) will notice much difference at all. I stated I am not here to make massive changes but we saw an opportunity to improve the game a bit.

Regarding the length of tenure at positions, this is regarding high level or D1 jobs. I do not see people clamoring to take over Kennesaw State in D2 of Bethel in D3. The simple fix to allow coaches in these positions to be fired, but its not that simple. When you are talking about a small player base crappy experiences like injuries or getting fired from your dream job can drive people away (a luxury we do not really have right now considering most worlds are around 30% full). Also when firing someone, there needs the expectations be crystal clear (such as make the sweet 16 in the next three years), not some success score or prestige score that isn't 100% transparent to players. So we are talking about is a complete overhaul of how coaches (potentially) get and keep jobs whether its contract based, promises to the schools can be made during the applications process, etc. This is something that I am looking for the Gridiron Dynasty rewrite we are currently designing.

I hear you but I'm not asking for the mechanics of the change, what you guys are trying to accomplish with the change would be enough (in slightly more specifics than: improve the game a bit.)

Going back to my original point everyone must offer a scholarship to get a player, so even if you're lying in the weeds on a recruit, you'll eventually have to offer a scholarship at which point you'll get the same "adjusted base value" of every other team that offers the guy. So is this change designed to drive more late-cycle guys who get a scholarship offer and little else to accept it vs. going JUCO? Or was the hope in adjusting the base value of the scholarship to make prestige more meaningful because a scholarship offer from a high prestige school would mean more? Or something else?

And again, I'm thrilled that the games are getting updates. I'm just trying to understand what you actually mean by this one.

Question on job changes: will it impact the quality of DI jobs coaches get offered when they first reach that level? For example, right now typical rule of thumb is 1 good DIII year + 3 good DII years get you DI offers — but only the truly basement dweller programs with D- prestige.

curious if now it’ll be a little easier to get some better offers? I’m fine either way, just planning on making my first DI jump soon so would be good to know.

PS: to echo what everyone else is saying it’s awesome to see some quality of life improvements in this game and to see an admin on the forums — might not seem like a lot but it does mean a lot to the userbase

I think being fired only adds to the experiences for those who can continually do well, Which is fine in real life but if I am spending my hard earned money on something to take it away is a sure way of killing the very user base you rely on for revenue - and why I quit for years

Posted by shoe3 on 2/18/2021 12:50:00 PM (view original):
If new worlds are added, I think a coach career term limit of 60 seasons total (across all divisions and schools, then start over at the bottom as “shoe3[2]”, for example) would be great for those worlds. I would not advise changing the existing worlds for the reasons gil mentions. A world with its own shelf life is problematic, because what do you do with the coaches who come to the world in the last 30% or 10% of that world’s life? It becomes much less attractive, and would get very stale at the end. Individual coach career term limits is much better, maintains fluidity and continuity.

But only in new worlds.

the problem is, if you just open new permanent problems, you have to have an ever-growing user base to justify regularly opening new ones. regularly meaning every couple years even. but if you had a rolling world, yeah it might get kinda stale at the end - not that the coaches left who are able to win titles more easily would be complaining (i personally think it would keep going, but i definitely share your concern).

the thing is, even if HD started growing, it won't always. there is absolutely no mechanism for adjusting up and down the number of worlds based on population. i think that is bad. you can kill a few birds with 1 stone if you create new worlds with destruction dates, you allow for the opening of new worlds fairly regularly (2 rolling 2/day worlds with 50 seasons each would allow a new world to start every 2 years, for example), but you also do so in a sustainable way (without an ever-increasing world count) and in a way that allows for expansion and contraction in world count as needed over time.

edit: also maybe HD folks eventually put a new conference layout in for the new worlds that are spinning up?

Posted by arssanguinus on 2/18/2021 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Think
forced career limits at this point would be a bad idea in practice - forcing people to give up a school they have invested forever in would generate more bad feeling among those effected than good feeling among those benefiting.

This 100%. I spent SO LONG in Tark patiently waiting for the Indiana job.... 48 seasons to be exact. I’m an Indiana alum, wanted that job, (im)patiently waited for it, and once I got it, turned them back into an annual contender and have won a championship with that. I am not going anywhere and will be there for the long haul. It would be a shame to be forced to leave there and I would for sure quit playing the game.

What about a new D1 only world?

Posted by robinsmd on 2/18/2021 4:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 2/18/2021 2:24:00 PM (view original):
Think
forced career limits at this point would be a bad idea in practice - forcing people to give up a school they have invested forever in would generate more bad feeling among those effected than good feeling among those benefiting.

This 100%. I spent SO LONG in Tark patiently waiting for the Indiana job.... 48 seasons to be exact. I’m an Indiana alum, wanted that job, (im)patiently waited for it, and once I got it, turned them back into an annual contender and have won a championship with that. I am not going anywhere and will be there for the long haul. It would be a shame to be forced to leave there and I would for sure quit playing the game.

This is my feeling as well. I wouldn't leave the game, but not coaching Oklahoma State in Iba (my alma mater) because I've reached some arbitrary season limit would be very upsetting, especially if I had been successful there for that length of time.

Edit: This is different from firings based on poor performance, which I think should be a thing. I just don't want to lose my dream job because of some season limit.

Posted by adlorenz on 2/18/2021 1:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Brokenee on 2/18/2021 12:18:00 PM (view original):
Just thought I would throw this into the convo. I site mailed adlorenz the following. I'd like to get anyone's thoughts on the subject.

Hey adlorenz,

I have a few questions about the patch. I hope it's not too much to bother u with. Here they are:

In Hoops Dynasty, what does the following mean?

"Recruiting Balance Change - Adjusted scholarship offers to be more balanced towards real life value"

Does this mean that a scholly offer from, let's say, a B+ prestige Georgia Tech is more valuable than a scholly offer from a B+ prestige Wichita St because Georgia Tech is an ACC school?

Or is this just directed toward D1 schools versus D2 schools?

I'm sorry, that note confuses and scares me just a little bit and a little clarification would help ease my anxiety! lol.

On a side note, has a limit on the number of seasons you can coach at one school ever been considered? I ask because there are schools out there that have had the same coach for 60-70 plus seasons. That is not realistic because ppl don't live or coach that long. And those big time schools rarely have coaching turnover bc once a coach gets that job, they never leave. I know I wouldn't.

The fun in this game is the climb. And with the New Coach Experience and Job Qualification formula, I think getting one of these jobs is more feasible now, IF they ever come available. If it hasn't been discussed; I don't know but maybe it's worth you and your team considering. Even the best college hoops games of all time on console have career timeframe limits. Let me know your thoughts if you have the time!

Thanks for reading this over! It's good to have someone actually trying to make the game better and more realistic! I can't wait to see what you guys come up with next! Good luck!

Let me know what you guys think.

I saw the sitemail, and while I understand change is different for WIS and the community, it's hard to answer these questions around the scholarship offer change, part of the game is figuring it out, its how a lot of you have gotten to be the successful coaches you are today. It was not a big change, it was essentially an adjustment the base value of scholarship offers. I do not think many people (or anyone for that fact) will notice much difference at all. I stated I am not here to make massive changes but we saw an opportunity to improve the game a bit.

Regarding the length of tenure at positions, this is regarding high level or D1 jobs. I do not see people clamoring to take over Kennesaw State in D2 of Bethel in D3. The simple fix to allow coaches in these positions to be fired, but its not that simple. When you are talking about a small player base crappy experiences like injuries or getting fired from your dream job can drive people away (a luxury we do not really have right now considering most worlds are around 30% full). Also when firing someone, there needs the expectations be crystal clear (such as make the sweet 16 in the next three years), not some success score or prestige score that isn't 100% transparent to players. So we are talking about is a complete overhaul of how coaches (potentially) get and keep jobs whether its contract based, promises to the schools can be made during the applications process, etc. This is something that I am looking for the Gridiron Dynasty rewrite we are currently designing.

"Contract based" sounds interesting. I am very pro-clear guidelines that would/could lead to people getting fired. "Promises to the schools can be made during the applications process" sounds like a bit of a slippery slope to me that could end with people perpetually making promises they can't keep to get the best jobs. Might be fun, might **** off everyone involved. I would definitely recommend beta testing that idea before roll-out.

I also really 50-60 year "careers" but only in a new world (or two). There are too many people that have the team they love, that will be upset if it's taken away. But I do think if you knew that coming in, it would really make the game more fun.

I may quit this game if they don't implement some kind of firing process, I have no issues if a coach is at a school for 50, 60, or a 100 seasons as long as they are good at least making the tournament every other season, but there are some coaches out there that haven't had a winning season in 20 + seasons who are at Power 5 conferences, which makes the game unrealistic, how long would a Kentucky coach last with no postseason