I think programmers have already left the building. They do not update informations as they did once they got to the suppose job. Now, I Wonder what they are doing, probably working on another WIS game.

If you weren't guaranteed to win the battle no matter how many AP, HV, CV you dropped on a player, wouldn't the complaining be 100x worse after a user loaded up on a player and still lost?

Posted by zorzii on 12/20/2016 10:13:00 AM (view original):
I think programmers have already left the building. They do not update informations as they did once they got to the suppose job. Now, I Wonder what they are doing, probably working on another WIS game.

This is probably correct. It's why I said people should accept the game as is or give it up. I seriously doubt you'll see any drastic change for months if not years. They tend to see how the changes play out before making more changes. Which is pretty smart. For every user that hates the new system, there are several who don't. Why keep upsetting the apple cart?

Mike, I'm curious as to your basis for this statement: "For every user that hates the new system, there are several who don't." From what I've seen on the forums, it's about a 50/50 split between those who like/have come to terms with 3.0 and those who dislike it/are holding out hope that significant improvements will be made (I tend to agree with you and zorzii that there's no appetite from WIS powers that be to make those improvements). That's not counting the silent masses who do not post, and those long-term veteran coaches who have quit or who don't post anymore. I think any comments like "most people love 3.0" or "most people hate 3.0" are made up.

John, I'm playing with 9 others who like this system much better than the last. Only two of them have posted. Now I certainly agree there is a silent group(more in number than those who do) that never post. Some are suffering in silence, some are enjoying the game(and, as this is an unfriendly environment for those who like the game, will not post) and some who silently walked away as I did 10 years ago. I saw some numbers posted by benis(??) that showed users were up even AFTER the freebies were gone.

I doubt there's a "most people" on either side of the like/suffer thru it. I do think there are a limited number of users left who hate the new system. To me, that's just common sense. While there are some like snafu4u who'll claim to hate it but still renew because he has credits, I think most sensible people simply aren't going to play an internet game they hate. I know that's just a version of my stand-by "it's just an internet game" but I believe it. Why would anyone invest any time into something they hate? It makes no sense to me.

Anyway, that's my basis for "For every user that hates the new system, there are several who don't." I just don't believe people will waste time doing something that can easily be replaced if they hate it.

Posted by Benis on 12/20/2016 10:12:00 AM (view original):
Unlimited effort?

now who is speaking in hyperbole...

You're right, I should have used the word uncapped, not unlimited.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 7:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 12:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/19/2016 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:13:00 PM (view original):
It's random. I just beat Alabama when I was High, went all-in, we had same preferences. It came down to a roll, the kid was in SC, under 300 miles from Alabama, on the top 100 list for everyone to see. The last four rolls, I won 1 out of 4... was happy to finally catch a break since I had lost two rolls when I was VH to H. There is no strategy in this... you look to the top 100, and think, this kid is good, and hope people get to other battles or fear your prestige or your preferences. If you are in a battle, know you will get to a roll, you focus on this. D1 is in need of some programming.

Sorry kid, you're apparently just as dense as our mets pal. Saying "there's no strategy in this" and 'It's random" is just flagrantly asinine.

I am not a kid. No strategy...

Cool. If there's "no strategy", then prove it. Don't look at who you're scouting, don't bother to prioritize, just randomly select guys to put attention points on. Haphazardly move them around in a "random" way. Don't worry about strategy, right? There is none.

Put your gameplan where your forum drivel is. Show us it's "random".

Knowing how to recruit the "right" way doesn't make you a good recruiter. Your recruiting skill doesn't determine if you sign your target.

Just like in craps where you set up your play to the best of your ability (ie: pick the recruits you're going after), and then the RNG decides if you get anyway. That's not skill based.

You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then want to say you have control over the whole thing .......... WRONG.

If you think it's just craps, then prove it. Come back and recruit as if it's "all random", and see how well your team does.

Its actually reverse. There is so much skill, so many more strategies to navigate than the duck all bigger fish strategy that dominated 2.0. You are the one choosing to isolate on the chance factor, and concluding that skill has been removed. If you want to stand by that stupid statement, then prove it.

You are the guy who goes to the doctor, finds out he's overweight and has high blood pressure, but refuses to take the doctor's advice seriously because there's a chance he could die from something "random" like a piano falling on his head. There's more skill in the game that currently exists, and the people who will excel at it are going to be the ones who understand how and where to make their choices for the most impact.

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, you want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is.

Is putting your money on 6 and winning skill in craps? No, you got lucky that the dice rolled a six. You winning a recruit has nothing to do with skill, you lucked out on the RNG.

Do you really think recruiting players that are of a high level and match your preferences is a skill? Wow - it really takes a genius to do that!

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 7:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 12:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/19/2016 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:13:00 PM (view original):
It's random. I just beat Alabama when I was High, went all-in, we had same preferences. It came down to a roll, the kid was in SC, under 300 miles from Alabama, on the top 100 list for everyone to see. The last four rolls, I won 1 out of 4... was happy to finally catch a break since I had lost two rolls when I was VH to H. There is no strategy in this... you look to the top 100, and think, this kid is good, and hope people get to other battles or fear your prestige or your preferences. If you are in a battle, know you will get to a roll, you focus on this. D1 is in need of some programming.

Sorry kid, you're apparently just as dense as our mets pal. Saying "there's no strategy in this" and 'It's random" is just flagrantly asinine.

I am not a kid. No strategy...

Cool. If there's "no strategy", then prove it. Don't look at who you're scouting, don't bother to prioritize, just randomly select guys to put attention points on. Haphazardly move them around in a "random" way. Don't worry about strategy, right? There is none.

Put your gameplan where your forum drivel is. Show us it's "random".

Knowing how to recruit the "right" way doesn't make you a good recruiter. Your recruiting skill doesn't determine if you sign your target.

Just like in craps where you set up your play to the best of your ability (ie: pick the recruits you're going after), and then the RNG decides if you get anyway. That's not skill based.

You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then want to say you have control over the whole thing .......... WRONG.

If you think it's just craps, then prove it. Come back and recruit as if it's "all random", and see how well your team does.

Its actually reverse. There is so much skill, so many more strategies to navigate than the duck all bigger fish strategy that dominated 2.0. You are the one choosing to isolate on the chance factor, and concluding that skill has been removed. If you want to stand by that stupid statement, then prove it.

You are the guy who goes to the doctor, finds out he's overweight and has high blood pressure, but refuses to take the doctor's advice seriously because there's a chance he could die from something "random" like a piano falling on his head. There's more skill in the game that currently exists, and the people who will excel at it are going to be the ones who understand how and where to make their choices for the most impact.

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, you want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is.

Is putting your money on 6 and winning skill in craps? No, you got lucky that the dice rolled a six. You winning a recruit has nothing to do with skill, you lucked out on the RNG.

Do you really think recruiting players that are of a high level and match your preferences is a skill? Wow - it really takes a genius to do that!

Play the game the way you're saying it works. All random. Don't pay any attention to scouting, prioritizing, or recruiting strategies. Let's see how you do. I'll even pay for your first season's credit.

Posted by pkoopman on 12/20/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 7:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 12:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/19/2016 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:13:00 PM (view original):
It's random. I just beat Alabama when I was High, went all-in, we had same preferences. It came down to a roll, the kid was in SC, under 300 miles from Alabama, on the top 100 list for everyone to see. The last four rolls, I won 1 out of 4... was happy to finally catch a break since I had lost two rolls when I was VH to H. There is no strategy in this... you look to the top 100, and think, this kid is good, and hope people get to other battles or fear your prestige or your preferences. If you are in a battle, know you will get to a roll, you focus on this. D1 is in need of some programming.

Sorry kid, you're apparently just as dense as our mets pal. Saying "there's no strategy in this" and 'It's random" is just flagrantly asinine.

I am not a kid. No strategy...

Cool. If there's "no strategy", then prove it. Don't look at who you're scouting, don't bother to prioritize, just randomly select guys to put attention points on. Haphazardly move them around in a "random" way. Don't worry about strategy, right? There is none.

Put your gameplan where your forum drivel is. Show us it's "random".

Knowing how to recruit the "right" way doesn't make you a good recruiter. Your recruiting skill doesn't determine if you sign your target.

Just like in craps where you set up your play to the best of your ability (ie: pick the recruits you're going after), and then the RNG decides if you get anyway. That's not skill based.

You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then want to say you have control over the whole thing .......... WRONG.

If you think it's just craps, then prove it. Come back and recruit as if it's "all random", and see how well your team does.

Its actually reverse. There is so much skill, so many more strategies to navigate than the duck all bigger fish strategy that dominated 2.0. You are the one choosing to isolate on the chance factor, and concluding that skill has been removed. If you want to stand by that stupid statement, then prove it.

You are the guy who goes to the doctor, finds out he's overweight and has high blood pressure, but refuses to take the doctor's advice seriously because there's a chance he could die from something "random" like a piano falling on his head. There's more skill in the game that currently exists, and the people who will excel at it are going to be the ones who understand how and where to make their choices for the most impact.

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, you want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is.

Is putting your money on 6 and winning skill in craps? No, you got lucky that the dice rolled a six. You winning a recruit has nothing to do with skill, you lucked out on the RNG.

Do you really think recruiting players that are of a high level and match your preferences is a skill? Wow - it really takes a genius to do that!

Play the game the way you're saying it works. All random. Don't pay any attention to scouting, prioritizing, or recruiting strategies. Let's see how you do. I'll even pay for your first season's credit.

What part of this don't you get?

"You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is."

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 12/20/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 7:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 12:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/19/2016 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:13:00 PM (view original):
It's random. I just beat Alabama when I was High, went all-in, we had same preferences. It came down to a roll, the kid was in SC, under 300 miles from Alabama, on the top 100 list for everyone to see. The last four rolls, I won 1 out of 4... was happy to finally catch a break since I had lost two rolls when I was VH to H. There is no strategy in this... you look to the top 100, and think, this kid is good, and hope people get to other battles or fear your prestige or your preferences. If you are in a battle, know you will get to a roll, you focus on this. D1 is in need of some programming.

Sorry kid, you're apparently just as dense as our mets pal. Saying "there's no strategy in this" and 'It's random" is just flagrantly asinine.

I am not a kid. No strategy...

Cool. If there's "no strategy", then prove it. Don't look at who you're scouting, don't bother to prioritize, just randomly select guys to put attention points on. Haphazardly move them around in a "random" way. Don't worry about strategy, right? There is none.

Put your gameplan where your forum drivel is. Show us it's "random".

Knowing how to recruit the "right" way doesn't make you a good recruiter. Your recruiting skill doesn't determine if you sign your target.

Just like in craps where you set up your play to the best of your ability (ie: pick the recruits you're going after), and then the RNG decides if you get anyway. That's not skill based.

You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then want to say you have control over the whole thing .......... WRONG.

If you think it's just craps, then prove it. Come back and recruit as if it's "all random", and see how well your team does.

Its actually reverse. There is so much skill, so many more strategies to navigate than the duck all bigger fish strategy that dominated 2.0. You are the one choosing to isolate on the chance factor, and concluding that skill has been removed. If you want to stand by that stupid statement, then prove it.

You are the guy who goes to the doctor, finds out he's overweight and has high blood pressure, but refuses to take the doctor's advice seriously because there's a chance he could die from something "random" like a piano falling on his head. There's more skill in the game that currently exists, and the people who will excel at it are going to be the ones who understand how and where to make their choices for the most impact.

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, you want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is.

Is putting your money on 6 and winning skill in craps? No, you got lucky that the dice rolled a six. You winning a recruit has nothing to do with skill, you lucked out on the RNG.

Do you really think recruiting players that are of a high level and match your preferences is a skill? Wow - it really takes a genius to do that!

Play the game the way you're saying it works. All random. Don't pay any attention to scouting, prioritizing, or recruiting strategies. Let's see how you do. I'll even pay for your first season's credit.

What part of this don't you get?

"You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is."

I don't get the part that you're insisting it works that way, but seem unwilling to try to actually play as though that is true.

Posted by pkoopman on 12/20/2016 2:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 12/20/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 10:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/20/2016 7:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/20/2016 12:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/19/2016 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/19/2016 10:13:00 PM (view original):
It's random. I just beat Alabama when I was High, went all-in, we had same preferences. It came down to a roll, the kid was in SC, under 300 miles from Alabama, on the top 100 list for everyone to see. The last four rolls, I won 1 out of 4... was happy to finally catch a break since I had lost two rolls when I was VH to H. There is no strategy in this... you look to the top 100, and think, this kid is good, and hope people get to other battles or fear your prestige or your preferences. If you are in a battle, know you will get to a roll, you focus on this. D1 is in need of some programming.

Sorry kid, you're apparently just as dense as our mets pal. Saying "there's no strategy in this" and 'It's random" is just flagrantly asinine.

I am not a kid. No strategy...

Cool. If there's "no strategy", then prove it. Don't look at who you're scouting, don't bother to prioritize, just randomly select guys to put attention points on. Haphazardly move them around in a "random" way. Don't worry about strategy, right? There is none.

Put your gameplan where your forum drivel is. Show us it's "random".

Knowing how to recruit the "right" way doesn't make you a good recruiter. Your recruiting skill doesn't determine if you sign your target.

Just like in craps where you set up your play to the best of your ability (ie: pick the recruits you're going after), and then the RNG decides if you get anyway. That's not skill based.

You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then want to say you have control over the whole thing .......... WRONG.

If you think it's just craps, then prove it. Come back and recruit as if it's "all random", and see how well your team does.

Its actually reverse. There is so much skill, so many more strategies to navigate than the duck all bigger fish strategy that dominated 2.0. You are the one choosing to isolate on the chance factor, and concluding that skill has been removed. If you want to stand by that stupid statement, then prove it.

You are the guy who goes to the doctor, finds out he's overweight and has high blood pressure, but refuses to take the doctor's advice seriously because there's a chance he could die from something "random" like a piano falling on his head. There's more skill in the game that currently exists, and the people who will excel at it are going to be the ones who understand how and where to make their choices for the most impact.

Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, you want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is.

Is putting your money on 6 and winning skill in craps? No, you got lucky that the dice rolled a six. You winning a recruit has nothing to do with skill, you lucked out on the RNG.

Do you really think recruiting players that are of a high level and match your preferences is a skill? Wow - it really takes a genius to do that!

Play the game the way you're saying it works. All random. Don't pay any attention to scouting, prioritizing, or recruiting strategies. Let's see how you do. I'll even pay for your first season's credit.

What part of this don't you get?

"You want to look at one microcosm of recruiting that you have control over and then use that small part of the game to say you have control over the whole thing....that's not how it is."

I don't get the part that you're insisting it works that way, but seem unwilling to try to actually play as though that is true.

It's the same way you're playing. Put your money into the players that you have the best chance at getting, and then cross your fingers that the RNG goes your way instead of the way of the school that you're battling.

Except it's not. I don't randomly choose the players I target. I don't randomly decide how to prioritize them, or how to assign attention. I don't randomly decide what kind of battles I'm willing to fight. I don't randomly offer promises, I don't randomly balance my class structures. I won't win every roll, I accept that. Teams in real life don't win every recruit. But my strategy is to put myself in best position to get as many good players as possible, and to withstand seasons when I lose a recruit I think I should have won.

So come on back. Let's see who is right about 3.0. If it's all random, and skill has been removed, all my scouting and planning should have no overall, long-term team benefit. I'm certainly not the best player in either version of the game, so it shouldn't take much to show us you are right.

Posted by pkoopman on 12/20/2016 2:56:00 PM (view original):
Except it's not. I don't randomly choose the players I target. I don't randomly decide how to prioritize them, or how to assign attention. I don't randomly decide what kind of battles I'm willing to fight. I don't randomly offer promises, I don't randomly balance my class structures. I won't win every roll, I accept that. Teams in real life don't win every recruit. But my strategy is to put myself in best position to get as many good players as possible, and to withstand seasons when I lose a recruit I think I should have won.

So come on back. Let's see who is right about 3.0. If it's all random, and skill has been removed, all my scouting and planning should have no overall, long-term team benefit. I'm certainly not the best player in either version of the game, so it shouldn't take much to show us you are right.

I said "Put your money into the players that you have the best chance at getting, and then cross your fingers that the RNG goes your way instead of the way of the school that you're battling."

Where in that do you see me saying that you're randomly choosing players to target? It's pretty clear that someone is losing a debate when they constantly try to put words into the other person's mouth that they didn't say.

Actually address what I'm saying to you instead of trying to deflect it and argue against something that I'm not even saying LOL.

Have you ever taken a large rock and just slammed it against your head for hours and hours? If so, you'd know that's what arguing with metsmaniac is like.

Stop it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/20/2016 3:00:00 PM (view original):
Have you ever taken a large rock and just slammed it against your head for hours and hours? If so, you'd know that's what arguing with metsmaniac is like.

Stop it.

I know. Anyone here will tell you I have a problem avoiding rabbit holes.