Oh sweet, I might have missed the part about a D1 only world. A D1 only world sounds awesome, I'd be down.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/4/2020 3:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 12/4/2020 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Basketts on 12/4/2020 2:26:00 PM (view original):
What about world where it hard reset after x amount of seasons? Other games have done this for a while to create that excitement of rushing the ladder after every reset. The amount would have to be long enough for the coaches who reach the top spots to stay there for a little bit, but short enough so that people would still look forward to a reset/rush all over again. Probably would make the most sense with a x2 a day world.

Yeah, I'd be down for that if we got 1 new world. But I think the number should be closer to 40 or 50 or so.

8.5.5

This is way down the road thinking, IMO, but I like this idea a lot better if it’s linked to a user’s career, not a world’s seasons. So a user gets a certain number of seasons in a world (50-60 are preferable currently I think, but I’d say 40 would be fine if we could start at D1), and then must start over at the bottom wrung, wherever that is set in the world. But the rest of the world goes on. That keeps continuity, records, history all intact. If a user did want consecutive careers, they could simply be delineated by (1), (2), or they could use abbreviations of teams involved in the career (ex - shoe3[LU, OSU, KU, WI]).

I don’t think the game should be using the “rush” model, personally. I think it was bad long term design to start with, unsustainable. This gives the benefit of continual upward mobility without relying on that quick fix mentality.

To be clear, I would be reaaaally unhappy if this was in every world.

Yeah, that's a cool alternative vision Shoe. I'd be down for that as well.

Posted by Benis on 12/3/2020 9:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 12/3/2020 8:31:00 PM (view original):
If current D1 worlds are not full, why would a new one be?

Several reasons.

1) the current game is not set up for the worlds to be sustainably full. Recruit gen is the biggest problem.
2)New worlds gives new opportunities. Opening a new world would create new excitement where many will 'race to the top' for the big jobs. People will want to have the first tile of the first world. etc etc
3)I believe more new worlds will be fueled by existing users. Imagine if just 200 current long time users picked up another team in this new world, you wouldn't need too many new users to make it comaprable to any existing worlds. I believe the total number of user controlled teams in HD would increase.

honestly I could go on and on. But I've always been against people who say we should remove a world and always in favor of opening a new one.

I get that INITIALLY there will be people flocking to that world who are trying to race to their favorite D1 team .. but once the top D1 conferences fill up, then we have diluted the human coach population of other worlds. In the end, IMHO, adding new worlds does not really help if we don't get new coaches coming in.

What might help is a setup similar to Hardball Dynasty. Which would be NEW worlds, created by players. You could make such worlds Div-1 only and require a minimum number of coaches before the world starts. But that also has positives and negatives. You would likely need less permanent worlds in that case as well. But, that does create new races to the top (maybe you have to start in one of several 'Big 8' D-1 conferences).

I mean, I do get that people what the top tier Div-1 teams and there are only so many out there and people never lease once they get them.

Posted by mullycj on 12/4/2020 12:41:00 PM (view original):
Benis - my point is everyone was so excited about the new two day worlds, Then the excitement quickly wears off and the populations fall in line with the existing worlds. Plus you probably cannabalized some of the users for those worlds.

Until WIS con figure out how to bring in and retain new users, a new world seems a waste of time.

Exactly my point as well.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/4/2020 3:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 12/4/2020 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Basketts on 12/4/2020 2:26:00 PM (view original):
What about world where it hard reset after x amount of seasons? Other games have done this for a while to create that excitement of rushing the ladder after every reset. The amount would have to be long enough for the coaches who reach the top spots to stay there for a little bit, but short enough so that people would still look forward to a reset/rush all over again. Probably would make the most sense with a x2 a day world.

Yeah, I'd be down for that if we got 1 new world. But I think the number should be closer to 40 or 50 or so.

8.5.5

This is way down the road thinking, IMO, but I like this idea a lot better if it’s linked to a user’s career, not a world’s seasons. So a user gets a certain number of seasons in a world (50-60 are preferable currently I think, but I’d say 40 would be fine if we could start at D1), and then must start over at the bottom wrung, wherever that is set in the world. But the rest of the world goes on. That keeps continuity, records, history all intact. If a user did want consecutive careers, they could simply be delineated by (1), (2), or they could use abbreviations of teams involved in the career (ex - shoe3[LU, OSU, KU, WI]).

I don’t think the game should be using the “rush” model, personally. I think it was bad long term design to start with, unsustainable. This gives the benefit of continual upward mobility without relying on that quick fix mentality.

I really like this suggestion a lot .. and I like it for most worlds. This could open up some of those top tier programs that people want so badly. And the more I think about it, the more I like it.

You could even base it on the coach's age as well. You are an actual new coach who starts at 'age X' .. with no experience, etc. X might be 25 or 30 .. and by a max of age 70 or so, you have to start over w/ a new coach.. Maybe in the 3rd or 4th playthrough , you get to start with a little better Reputation or Experience and therefore qualify for a little bit better job initially. But neve qualify directly for a power 6 initially.

If based on age, the end could also be variable .. so not everyone always goes at a specific age, It could be an age range with a percent chance to retire.

i will just say, one major advantage of actually putting the cap on worlds themselves instead of the coaches is that worlds can restart clean or in line with reality, and that would give a way to keep on top of changes over time. things like conference realignment or whatever else. plus its a way to deal with changing population over time.

my vote would be to go that direction because of how structurally advantageous it is to the evolution of HD over time, and how hard it is to deal with said evolution otherwise. i would like to see new worlds time boxed personally. and really by personally, i don't mean my own preferences - i couldn't care less about starting in an already-established world - you start behind in all the other games i've ever played, and as long as there is opportunity to catch up (there clearly is), it bothers me zero. however my opinion about what is best for HD is to time box new worlds.

Posted by gillispie1 on 12/7/2020 11:15:00 AM (view original):
i will just say, one major advantage of actually putting the cap on worlds themselves instead of the coaches is that worlds can restart clean or in line with reality, and that would give a way to keep on top of changes over time. things like conference realignment or whatever else. plus its a way to deal with changing population over time.

my vote would be to go that direction because of how structurally advantageous it is to the evolution of HD over time, and how hard it is to deal with said evolution otherwise. i would like to see new worlds time boxed personally.

As long as we get a new world in 2021 I won't complain.

A world with 150-200 D1 coaches would be amazing (in theory). Right now, once you've established yourself everything is pretty ho-hum until the NT. Doubling or tripling the amount of coaches all of a sudden makes everything more meaningful and winning that much more impressive.

Give us a new world that's D1 only with no baseline prestige. Then aside from location advantages in recruiting it'd be an entirely even playing field. Maybe it's a discounted World to encourage people to sign up. Maybe it's free if you have X amount of teams in other worlds. Maybe there's increased prizes for winning based on how many coaches in the world.

Posted by Baums_away on 12/7/2020 12:24:00 PM (view original):
A world with 150-200 D1 coaches would be amazing (in theory). Right now, once you've established yourself everything is pretty ho-hum until the NT. Doubling or tripling the amount of coaches all of a sudden makes everything more meaningful and winning that much more impressive.

Give us a new world that's D1 only with no baseline prestige. Then aside from location advantages in recruiting it'd be an entirely even playing field. Maybe it's a discounted World to encourage people to sign up. Maybe it's free if you have X amount of teams in other worlds. Maybe there's increased prizes for winning based on how many coaches in the world.

tark has about 130 now, i think it was closer to 180 when i was playing there a lot in the olden days. i don't think there is a terribly huge difference. it was cool when the worlds were fuller, and some of these like 60 in a world d3 deals are probably a different story. but overall i'd say the season to season d1 experience for someone who seeks a human-filled schedule today is not that much different than one who sought a human-filled schedule 10 years ago.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/3/2020 9:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 12/3/2020 9:19:00 PM (view original):
Side note:
Any new World should be named after John Thompson Jr.

Jim Calhoun and his three national championships disagrees.

Will they bring back payoffs to players for Calhoun world?

Another suggestion for a new world is make teams in the right conference and Division. It will be different than other worlds as they are right now.