Posted by coolman97865 on 12/1/2011 8:09:00 PM (view original):
Anyone else having trouble pulling up player pages?

Worked before the changes for the color blind,, now I get an error message when pulling up individual players pages.

Not always.  ONly sometimes, ont he error.

In the newly updated Smith world, I noticed there is not a one for one correlation between the player report sitemail after the first exhibition game and the player status sheet, I looked at about half my team, I think all but one player was not identical.  Not a big deal, if seble is still monitoring, might be something is not quite right and a chance to catch it sooner rather than later.

Also, as others have hinted, there are times I have had to hit the player page 5 or 6 (I actually quit trying before one particular player came up, tried later and he did) times this am before it came up, got an error message when the page fails to load.  Is the new update taxing the system????

Posted by seble on 12/1/2011 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Couple of comments:

- The projection report won't show correct ordering of teams until the next game cycle (this afternoon or tomorrow am) runs for each world.
- I hadn't thought about the issue of recruiting a player above your class max before cutting a current player.  Maybe instead of a complete restriction, I'll just add a prominent warning.  The goal of that change was just to prevent people from spending money on a player before realizing they couldn't sign him.
- FT potential was overlooked.  I'll try to get that in soon.
- I'll look into switching the colors to help the color-blind. 

So now that the projecctions report is supposed to be working I feel I am going to have major issues with it.  In Naismith this morning an 11-17 UNC with an RPI of 90ish that lost in their conference tourney is a bubble team in the mid 60's of the projections.  While my Manhattan team that is 22-5 still alive with an RPI of 60 is rated #95 and listed out.  If my team doesn't even make the PIT because of this change I am going to be demanding some sort of reimbursement of this season's payment and never playing again.

You should be sending a ticket now.

Posted by oldresorter on 12/2/2011 6:59:00 AM (view original):


In the newly updated Smith world, I noticed there is not a one for one correlation between the player report sitemail after the first exhibition game and the player status sheet, I looked at about half my team, I think all but one player was not identical.  Not a big deal, if seble is still monitoring, might be something is not quite right and a chance to catch it sooner rather than later.

Also, as others have hinted, there are times I have had to hit the player page 5 or 6 (I actually quit trying before one particular player came up, tried later and he did) times this am before it came up, got an error message when the page fails to load.  Is the new update taxing the system????

I noticed a couple problems , too, OR. Definitely send a ticket. 

Posted by jtt8355 on 12/1/2011 4:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ardthomp on 12/1/2011 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cornfused on 12/1/2011 2:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jtt8355 on 12/1/2011 1:55:00 PM (view original):
the color coding is great and all, but haven't we already gone over the problem with WIS using red and green?!?!? would it have been so difficult to use red and blue or some other color that's distinguishable for those of us that are color blind???

...but for the rest of us, red and green are the universal "bad" and "good" colors.  Are they the same to you on WiS or is one darker?

They will appear to be the same in most instances.

But some color blind people are blue/yellow deficient instead of red/green deficient, so if the colors were changed to blue, then that may also affect some individuals!

ard - i'm color blind for every shade contrast testable...and i can see the difference between blue and red - even if i think i'm looking at purple and orange!

Purple and Orange it is!!  :)

Posted by thethrill10 on 12/2/2011 7:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seble on 12/1/2011 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Couple of comments:

- The projection report won't show correct ordering of teams until the next game cycle (this afternoon or tomorrow am) runs for each world.
- I hadn't thought about the issue of recruiting a player above your class max before cutting a current player.  Maybe instead of a complete restriction, I'll just add a prominent warning.  The goal of that change was just to prevent people from spending money on a player before realizing they couldn't sign him.
- FT potential was overlooked.  I'll try to get that in soon.
- I'll look into switching the colors to help the color-blind. 

So now that the projecctions report is supposed to be working I feel I am going to have major issues with it.  In Naismith this morning an 11-17 UNC with an RPI of 90ish that lost in their conference tourney is a bubble team in the mid 60's of the projections.  While my Manhattan team that is 22-5 still alive with an RPI of 60 is rated #95 and listed out.  If my team doesn't even make the PIT because of this change I am going to be demanding some sort of reimbursement of this season's payment and never playing again.

Last week, in Crum, a team with an RPI in the 70's was passed over for the DIII PIT in favor of a team with RPI 93.  In 8 of the 10 selection criteria, the first team was superior. They were tied for non-conf record at 4-6 and team B had a better record over the last 10 games (7-3 vs. 6-4). In every other category, team A was way ahead.

This wasn't my team but I sent in a ticket anyway. I was told, and correctly so I believe, that they couldn't check it because once another game was played, the RPI, SOS, etc. change and they could't retrieve the old data.  They said, with the new upgrade, that will no longer be an issue.

So, if you fear you'll be passed over for an inferior team, organize your facts now. Use the 10 criteria in the FAQ and see how your team compares to UNC.

I sent a ticket this morning about player pages not coming up.

Posted by thethrill10 on 12/2/2011 7:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seble on 12/1/2011 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Couple of comments:

- The projection report won't show correct ordering of teams until the next game cycle (this afternoon or tomorrow am) runs for each world.
- I hadn't thought about the issue of recruiting a player above your class max before cutting a current player.  Maybe instead of a complete restriction, I'll just add a prominent warning.  The goal of that change was just to prevent people from spending money on a player before realizing they couldn't sign him.
- FT potential was overlooked.  I'll try to get that in soon.
- I'll look into switching the colors to help the color-blind. 

So now that the projecctions report is supposed to be working I feel I am going to have major issues with it.  In Naismith this morning an 11-17 UNC with an RPI of 90ish that lost in their conference tourney is a bubble team in the mid 60's of the projections.  While my Manhattan team that is 22-5 still alive with an RPI of 60 is rated #95 and listed out.  If my team doesn't even make the PIT because of this change I am going to be demanding some sort of reimbursement of this season's payment and never playing again.

Talk about melodramatic overreaction. . . . if one season doesn't go the way you want because of a change, you quit?  Also.  11 - 17 any team will not make it in.  Although it woudl probably be useful if the report accounted for that and just moved the team with the losing record to the first 'out' position or somesuch.

 

 

Posted by girt25 on 12/1/2011 9:53:00 PM (view original):
Potential isn't perfect, but I think it's vastly superior to the fully predictable, linear improvement that was literally the same for all players at all positions in all categories. That was way worse, imho.

Daalt, I wasn't trying to say that the old way was better (although I can see how my comment may have been misconstrued), just responding to Corn's comment that the new color-coding had taken some of the strategy out of practice planning.  What I was trying to say was that the introduction of potential had already taken most of the strategy out of practice plans anyway.  As I said, if one even somewhat pays attention, the practice plans are basically spoonfed to us.  Perhaps introducing soft caps would be a happy medium between old and new........

Can someone explain the concept of soft caps?  It's never really made sense to me.  Isn't that basically what we have now?  If there is no cap, isn't that basically the old system?  And if there is, isn't that the current system?

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/2/2011 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by thethrill10 on 12/2/2011 7:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seble on 12/1/2011 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Couple of comments:

- The projection report won't show correct ordering of teams until the next game cycle (this afternoon or tomorrow am) runs for each world.
- I hadn't thought about the issue of recruiting a player above your class max before cutting a current player.  Maybe instead of a complete restriction, I'll just add a prominent warning.  The goal of that change was just to prevent people from spending money on a player before realizing they couldn't sign him.
- FT potential was overlooked.  I'll try to get that in soon.
- I'll look into switching the colors to help the color-blind. 

So now that the projecctions report is supposed to be working I feel I am going to have major issues with it.  In Naismith this morning an 11-17 UNC with an RPI of 90ish that lost in their conference tourney is a bubble team in the mid 60's of the projections.  While my Manhattan team that is 22-5 still alive with an RPI of 60 is rated #95 and listed out.  If my team doesn't even make the PIT because of this change I am going to be demanding some sort of reimbursement of this season's payment and never playing again.

Talk about melodramatic overreaction. . . . if one season doesn't go the way you want because of a change, you quit?  Also.  11 - 17 any team will not make it in.  Although it woudl probably be useful if the report accounted for that and just moved the team with the losing record to the first 'out' position or somesuch.

 

 

It may be dramatic-- but (a) the 11-17 team CAN go to the PIT, which is the tournament he's talking about, and (b) if a team from the ACC now makes the NT (or PIT) over a low-major team despite a 30 position discrepancy in RPI, that's going to make life really difficult in the low-major conferences.  It significantly changes the strategy for getting from D2 to a BCS-conference D1 job if it's much harder than it used to be to get an at-large bid from 18 or so conferences in D1.

It's ticket-worthy, worth asking seble if that's how the change is meant to work.

A couple more comments:

- There was an issue with the player profile that has been fixed.  If you see any issues going forward please submit a ticket.

- There was an issue with DI coaches not seeing all the recruits.  That has also been fixed, so if you see any issues going forward please submit a ticket.

- The potentials you see on the practice plan may not match what you got in the Player Thoughts email.  I think there is some funky logic in the Player Thoughts that causes some inaccuracies.  The practice plan page is correct and up-to-date.  I will most likely remove the Player Thoughts now unless there is some reason to keep it around.

- If you have specific issues with tournament logic you can submit a ticket.  I will try to continue monitoring the forums as much as possible, but I'm more likely to see a ticket.  One general point though.  The new logic isn't going to overvalue a tough schedule.  Just because a team plays a bunch of good teams doesn't mean it's a good team.  You need to actually win some games against those good teams, or at the very least be consistently competitive.  But on the flip side, a good win/loss record doesn't mean a whole lot if there aren't any impressive wins.

Posted by seble on 12/2/2011 1:20:00 PM (view original):
A couple more comments:

- There was an issue with the player profile that has been fixed.  If you see any issues going forward please submit a ticket.

- There was an issue with DI coaches not seeing all the recruits.  That has also been fixed, so if you see any issues going forward please submit a ticket.

- The potentials you see on the practice plan may not match what you got in the Player Thoughts email.  I think there is some funky logic in the Player Thoughts that causes some inaccuracies.  The practice plan page is correct and up-to-date.  I will most likely remove the Player Thoughts now unless there is some reason to keep it around.

- If you have specific issues with tournament logic you can submit a ticket.  I will try to continue monitoring the forums as much as possible, but I'm more likely to see a ticket.  One general point though.  The new logic isn't going to overvalue a tough schedule.  Just because a team plays a bunch of good teams doesn't mean it's a good team.  You need to actually win some games against those good teams, or at the very least be consistently competitive.  But on the flip side, a good win/loss record doesn't mean a whole lot if there aren't any impressive wins.

I am sending in a ticket, but the 7-20 Florida State team in Naismith is listed as a bubble team to ahead of my previous mentioned Manhattan squad also.  1 conference win and a first round loss in their conference tourney, but the new logic is not going to overvalue a tough schedule.  And I thought the RPI already took into account schedule so I am obviously missing something.