They just need to remove EE's all together. Here and in real life.

Posted by mullycj on 12/11/2020 9:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/10/2020 11:55:00 PM (view original):
And I think the assumption that overall attrition is primarily, or significantly comprised of new players who are discouraged by too much losing to high OVR teams at the D3 level, in relation to the immense time and money investment it takes to get to D1 in the current set up is simply way off base. This is a solution in search of a problem. If this is about new player experience, fix the amount of time and money it takes to get to D1, because that’s what most folks are thinking about when they go looking for a game like this. The “why am I losing?” thing is a pretty broad thing, but can be addressed by info - whether through searching or just observing.

Where is this survey where you see players are losing because they cant get to DI vs leaving because they are having a non-competitive experience at DIII?

Are you sure you arent projecting your own thoughts onto everyone else? Just because you feel it takes too long to get to DI doesn't necessarily mean that's why new coaches are leaving the game.

I’m talking about my thoughts, and the thoughts of the handfuls of friends I’ve tried to steer to the game. Some leave when they realize how long it will take, more don’t even start.

Do some people leave because they don’t like how bad their first team is? I’m sure. Of course at the same time - improving the overall quality of all the D3 sims, as buddha suggests, will drastically reduce the actual ability of new players to win games that first season, as well. A new player is a lot more likely to achieve a respectable record, and earn credits for the next season, against a schedule of mostly garbage sims. But again, access to the knowledge is key. Steering more new players to mentors, and to the forums would help a lot.

One thing for sure, though. Forcing new players into MORE direct competition with parked vets will not increase their competitive experience, regardless of whether the best recruits are 750 OVR or 550 OVR.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/11/2020 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 12/11/2020 9:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/10/2020 11:55:00 PM (view original):
And I think the assumption that overall attrition is primarily, or significantly comprised of new players who are discouraged by too much losing to high OVR teams at the D3 level, in relation to the immense time and money investment it takes to get to D1 in the current set up is simply way off base. This is a solution in search of a problem. If this is about new player experience, fix the amount of time and money it takes to get to D1, because that’s what most folks are thinking about when they go looking for a game like this. The “why am I losing?” thing is a pretty broad thing, but can be addressed by info - whether through searching or just observing.

Where is this survey where you see players are losing because they cant get to DI vs leaving because they are having a non-competitive experience at DIII?

Are you sure you arent projecting your own thoughts onto everyone else? Just because you feel it takes too long to get to DI doesn't necessarily mean that's why new coaches are leaving the game.

I’m talking about my thoughts, and the thoughts of the handfuls of friends I’ve tried to steer to the game. Some leave when they realize how long it will take, more don’t even start.

Do some people leave because they don’t like how bad their first team is? I’m sure. Of course at the same time - improving the overall quality of all the D3 sims, as buddha suggests, will drastically reduce the actual ability of new players to win games that first season, as well. A new player is a lot more likely to achieve a respectable record, and earn credits for the next season, against a schedule of mostly garbage sims. But again, access to the knowledge is key. Steering more new players to mentors, and to the forums would help a lot.

One thing for sure, though. Forcing new players into MORE direct competition with parked vets will not increase their competitive experience, regardless of whether the best recruits are 750 OVR or 550 OVR.

AFIAK, nobody is suggesting that. nobody wants to force a d3 rookie to compete with a d3 vet.

first off, if the recruit pools are split (this is re: some earlier post), i would envision it such that you could ONLY recruit in your division - not just up but also down. as such, having clear separation between divisions is meaningless. go ahead and beef up the d3 pool - on the whole it should be worse than d2 - but it doesnt have to be so much worse to stop d2 coaches from stealing the top d3 players.

second off, to make this happen, obviously the d2/d3 pools would have to grow. that should go without saying. the idea would be to create a low competition environment - many good recruits of similar caliber - so that competing for the top guys wasn't such a risk/reward and was also not strictly required. it is literally impossible for a new coach to use d3 recruits and compete. this should not be the reality. recruiting up a division is too complex, its definitely a deterrent. plus d3 recruiting is just so terrible at preparing you for d1 recruiting - that is really a mistake IMO from a bringing new coaches in standpoint.

there's absolutely no reason having a robust d3 pool just for d3 schools has to mean intense competition between vets and rookies.

I am still relatively new to the forums and admit that I haven’t checked it for awhile, so it’s possible someone has already mentioned this (please ignore if so!).

But something I think would be a fun feature would be to have some top prospects as juniors that we could put AP on. That way the second cycle wouldn’t be wasted after you are done recruiting for the year. You could have a head start for their senior years and have something to do in the second cycle if you’re done recruiting that year’s senior class.

Not sure how feasible this is and it’s certainly not at the top of the list, but it could help give some more interaction during those dull days before the season rolls over.

Posted by gillispie1 on 12/11/2020 12:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/11/2020 11:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 12/11/2020 9:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/10/2020 11:55:00 PM (view original):
And I think the assumption that overall attrition is primarily, or significantly comprised of new players who are discouraged by too much losing to high OVR teams at the D3 level, in relation to the immense time and money investment it takes to get to D1 in the current set up is simply way off base. This is a solution in search of a problem. If this is about new player experience, fix the amount of time and money it takes to get to D1, because that’s what most folks are thinking about when they go looking for a game like this. The “why am I losing?” thing is a pretty broad thing, but can be addressed by info - whether through searching or just observing.

Where is this survey where you see players are losing because they cant get to DI vs leaving because they are having a non-competitive experience at DIII?

Are you sure you arent projecting your own thoughts onto everyone else? Just because you feel it takes too long to get to DI doesn't necessarily mean that's why new coaches are leaving the game.

I’m talking about my thoughts, and the thoughts of the handfuls of friends I’ve tried to steer to the game. Some leave when they realize how long it will take, more don’t even start.

Do some people leave because they don’t like how bad their first team is? I’m sure. Of course at the same time - improving the overall quality of all the D3 sims, as buddha suggests, will drastically reduce the actual ability of new players to win games that first season, as well. A new player is a lot more likely to achieve a respectable record, and earn credits for the next season, against a schedule of mostly garbage sims. But again, access to the knowledge is key. Steering more new players to mentors, and to the forums would help a lot.

One thing for sure, though. Forcing new players into MORE direct competition with parked vets will not increase their competitive experience, regardless of whether the best recruits are 750 OVR or 550 OVR.

AFIAK, nobody is suggesting that. nobody wants to force a d3 rookie to compete with a d3 vet.

first off, if the recruit pools are split (this is re: some earlier post), i would envision it such that you could ONLY recruit in your division - not just up but also down. as such, having clear separation between divisions is meaningless. go ahead and beef up the d3 pool - on the whole it should be worse than d2 - but it doesnt have to be so much worse to stop d2 coaches from stealing the top d3 players.

second off, to make this happen, obviously the d2/d3 pools would have to grow. that should go without saying. the idea would be to create a low competition environment - many good recruits of similar caliber - so that competing for the top guys wasn't such a risk/reward and was also not strictly required. it is literally impossible for a new coach to use d3 recruits and compete. this should not be the reality. recruiting up a division is too complex, its definitely a deterrent. plus d3 recruiting is just so terrible at preparing you for d1 recruiting - that is really a mistake IMO from a bringing new coaches in standpoint.

there's absolutely no reason having a robust d3 pool just for d3 schools has to mean intense competition between vets and rookies.

Come on gil, you know that last sentence is just ridiculous. The way it’s set up, the game is mostly recruiting, getting the best pieces. (And if you truly want recruiting at D3 to prepare for D1 recruiting, inflating the D3 pool with talent is basically the opposite direction.) Veterans are going to get the *best pieces* and are going to continue to demolish new players in their first seasons, until they figure it out, like they’ve always done. But if you’re also making all the sim teams around them relatively better, you’re also making it harder for the new players to find wins and make NTs and earn credits. This whole thing is just not well thought through.

Some background too, for folks following along, especially the new dev folks. During and right after beta, this issue was invented by folks disgruntled with the recruiting process. Not new players, mind you. Folks mostly playing higher levels were frustrated that lower level teams were locking in and winning recruits that they wanted sitting around waiting for them as backups. I suspect that’s still at play in this resurrection. Closing off pulldowns means there is no longer any pressure from top D2 teams on those #75 by position recruits with green mid 60s starting cores which want to play. Closing the pools reduces the choices we make, and reduces competitiveness overall. It will reduce battles, and will end up benefiting the high prestige programs in each division more than anyone. That’s why it still smells a lot like a solution in search of a problem. Of all the new players I’ve helped, not one of them has indicated any frustration at the ability to recruit D1 pool players - at most, just lack of knowledge that they could before they started. Once they know, they go on to be as competitive as they want to be, generally speaking. It’s not too complicated, or at least doesn’t have to be; it’s just a matter of knowing.

I tend to agree with shoe3 and tecwrg in that having separate recruit pools is not the way to go. Just having one pool for all divisions could work and would more closely mimic real life, but it would make scouting more expensive. A DI team would be scouting more trash players that would never have a chance of playing DI. Either scouting would have to be much cheaper or have the top-50 recruits for each position automatically scouted to level 3. In the real world, there's so much information on the top-300 players widely available to every team.

A somewhat related issue is that this game just isn't very dynamic. Except for a few cases (fb/fcp), most systems require the same types of players, which means that 85% of recruits are just bad. Ideally it would be nice if the offenses were a little more differentiated and coaches needed different types of players. I also think the individual "Defense" attribute is too high on average. There shouldn't be 15-20 teams full of 90+ Defense players. Or break Defense up into 2 or 3 different attributes like Defensive Footwork, Help-side Defense, etc.

*Edit - I feel like game planning would be much more fun if most high-level D1 teams had 2-5 elite defenders on average. We would have to move them around and try to create mismatches.

I voted for new user. Without the ability to retain players after one season is a recipe for end of the game. Anything else you are wanting is mute. At least let the new players be able to recruit in their first season.

I've mentioned this before, but D3 really should just be for new coaches. After 5-10 seasons, there should be a forced promotion to D2, or you could jump straight to D1 easier to satisfy getting their quicker. Most games out there, whether its first person shooters or FIFA, do not throw new players at veterans. They have matchmaking ratings, social/ranked game modes, etc. It's all designed to not scare away players who are trying to learn the game. It wouldn't be so widely adopted if there wasn't merit to it.

It won't happen. Enough veterans have dynasties in D3 that WIS won't want to upset, even though those same teams probably bring in very little revenue, if any at all given the reward structure. Plus it might upset the players who have alma maters at D3 that they'd prefer to coach.

Lots of complex games have a tutorial mode. It would make a lot of sense to have a disclaimer at the opening of the recruiting tab for D3 players, notifying the coach that there are 3 pools, and explaining the basic differences between them; how to select for them in scouting and recruiting, when they will start signing with D3 schools, what happens when bigger fish come along, etc.

Posted by Basketts on 12/11/2020 4:31:00 PM (view original):
I've mentioned this before, but D3 really should just be for new coaches. After 5-10 seasons, there should be a forced promotion to D2, or you could jump straight to D1 easier to satisfy getting their quicker. Most games out there, whether its first person shooters or FIFA, do not throw new players at veterans. They have matchmaking ratings, social/ranked game modes, etc. It's all designed to not scare away players who are trying to learn the game. It wouldn't be so widely adopted if there wasn't merit to it.

It won't happen. Enough veterans have dynasties in D3 that WIS won't want to upset, even though those same teams probably bring in very little revenue, if any at all given the reward structure. Plus it might upset the players who have alma maters at D3 that they'd prefer to coach.

My personal favorite idea is still to make D3 a free to play, no-credit sandbox. Sure you can stay as long as you want at your alma mater, but if you want credits, you have to move up. In that case, I would support closing off the pool; it would be necessary. And actually, that would be much more realistic, as there is a lot of overlap of quality between high D2 and low D1. But at D3, where players don’t get scholarships, schools are typically drawing a different sort of student athlete.

D3 should absolutely be free.

D3 should absolutely be free.

Posted by Baums_away on 12/11/2020 5:32:00 PM (view original):
D3 should absolutely be free.

How would that work?

I don't think it would be that difficult. Just have the D3 teams auto-renew without consuming a season. If players ever want to move to D2 or D1, they must have seasons available, or they aren't allowed to view D1/D2 openings.

Also, think about making the D3 resume applicable to all of the worlds, making it easier or more attractive for users to graduate to D2. You might even just have D3 detached from worlds altogether.