A Potential Solution to Recruitment Topic

I have also lost a "battle" to a DIII team. It was a backup player that I didn't prioritize until other options had expired, so I only had 280 AP. However, I promised a start and 25 minutes and had a preference advantage. He did not offer a promised start nor minutes, but did offer 20 home visits and 1 campus visit, whereas I had no budget to offer those. He was an A+ DIII, I was C- DI Stanford. Final odds were 66/34 in my favor.

The best solution, in my opinion, would be to drastically increase the gap in preference advantage between divisions. On top of that, improve Sim AI recruiting (since the worlds are not going to fill up) such that they actually recruit with any modicum of intelligence. Caps and even the existing inability for DII and DIII to sign up in RS1 are just patches on a broken system that needs internally fixed and fine tuned.
3/14/2019 9:11 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Posted by gdog13cavs on 3/14/2019 9:11:00 PM (view original):
I have also lost a "battle" to a DIII team. It was a backup player that I didn't prioritize until other options had expired, so I only had 280 AP. However, I promised a start and 25 minutes and had a preference advantage. He did not offer a promised start nor minutes, but did offer 20 home visits and 1 campus visit, whereas I had no budget to offer those. He was an A+ DIII, I was C- DI Stanford. Final odds were 66/34 in my favor.

The best solution, in my opinion, would be to drastically increase the gap in preference advantage between divisions. On top of that, improve Sim AI recruiting (since the worlds are not going to fill up) such that they actually recruit with any modicum of intelligence. Caps and even the existing inability for DII and DIII to sign up in RS1 are just patches on a broken system that needs internally fixed and fine tuned.
You are missing the point... you even say "I didnt prioritize" the backup. The D3 did prioritize him. It's pretty simple and the game seems to be working as intended because you only put 280 AP into the guy and basically created a 2:1 advantage. You even said he had a 20 HV and 1 CV advantage over you and you still had him basically beat, but lost out on an unlucky roll.
3/16/2019 11:01 PM
Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 4:01:00 PM (view original):
“I'm being a tool.” - Benis
Perfect example: “Whether the other team 'allowed' it to happen is irrelevant.
3/17/2019 9:28 PM
Posted by gdog13cavs on 3/14/2019 9:11:00 PM (view original):
I have also lost a "battle" to a DIII team. It was a backup player that I didn't prioritize until other options had expired, so I only had 280 AP. However, I promised a start and 25 minutes and had a preference advantage. He did not offer a promised start nor minutes, but did offer 20 home visits and 1 campus visit, whereas I had no budget to offer those. He was an A+ DIII, I was C- DI Stanford. Final odds were 66/34 in my favor.

The best solution, in my opinion, would be to drastically increase the gap in preference advantage between divisions. On top of that, improve Sim AI recruiting (since the worlds are not going to fill up) such that they actually recruit with any modicum of intelligence. Caps and even the existing inability for DII and DIII to sign up in RS1 are just patches on a broken system that needs internally fixed and fine tuned.
I don't think that will work. Because all it'll do is create the people who stay up longer smarter. I think upping the ratings on every player and assigning a player pool will do the trick. However I think that was my highest record breaker player that you lost me too. I was at the top of my studies and was preparing for a upcoming album and I did prioritize the recruit.
3/18/2019 3:44 PM
◂ Prev 123
A Potential Solution to Recruitment Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.