Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
If more information results in false information, I'd rather have less.

You guys and seble disagree with me. That's fine. I know I'm not winning this one, but this issue is fun to kick around because it's a good illustration of the absurdities built into 3.0.

I don't think there's a right or wrong, personally. I can see it both ways.

But I wouldn't say it's false information. Perhaps it can be misleading if you don't know that a recruit can choose a team that is High.

Posted by Benis on 9/20/2016 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
If more information results in false information, I'd rather have less.

You guys and seble disagree with me. That's fine. I know I'm not winning this one, but this issue is fun to kick around because it's a good illustration of the absurdities built into 3.0.

I don't think there's a right or wrong, personally. I can see it both ways.

But I wouldn't say it's false information. Perhaps it can be misleading if you don't know that a recruit can choose a team that is High.

...which is irrational if another team is VH. And we are full circle.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/20/2016 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
If more information results in false information, I'd rather have less.

You guys and seble disagree with me. That's fine. I know I'm not winning this one, but this issue is fun to kick around because it's a good illustration of the absurdities built into 3.0.

I don't think there's a right or wrong, personally. I can see it both ways.

But I wouldn't say it's false information. Perhaps it can be misleading if you don't know that a recruit can choose a team that is High.

...which is irrational if another team is VH. And we are full circle.

Well what if it was <1% difference in effort between two teams and one was listed VH and the other H. Based upon the idea of the new game that the highest bidder doesn't win, it wouldn't be irrational for the H team to get the player.

Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

Posted by Benis on 9/20/2016 7:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/20/2016 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
If more information results in false information, I'd rather have less.

You guys and seble disagree with me. That's fine. I know I'm not winning this one, but this issue is fun to kick around because it's a good illustration of the absurdities built into 3.0.

I don't think there's a right or wrong, personally. I can see it both ways.

But I wouldn't say it's false information. Perhaps it can be misleading if you don't know that a recruit can choose a team that is High.

...which is irrational if another team is VH. And we are full circle.

Well what if it was <1% difference in effort between two teams and one was listed VH and the other H. Based upon the idea of the new game that the highest bidder doesn't win, it wouldn't be irrational for the H team to get the player.

See my previous post about making things complicated.

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:20:00 PM (view original):
Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

But the nonsensical result was fun, right?

No it wasn't. But I enjoy the platform because of how it simulates many of the facets of college basketball, which is anything but predictable.

I mean I am best friends with D3 head coach and this is nothing compared to the nonsensical stuff he's heard for why he lost a kid who he thought he had to someone else. That point might not do anything for you, but it's pretty amusing to me that I am complaining about how it makes no sense I didn't get that recruit just like he does.

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:30:00 PM (view original):
No it wasn't. But I enjoy the platform because of how it simulates many of the facets of college basketball, which is anything but predictable.

I mean I am best friends with D3 head coach and this is nothing compared to the nonsensical stuff he's heard for why he lost a kid who he thought he had to someone else. That point might not do anything for you, but it's pretty amusing to me that I am complaining about how it makes no sense I didn't get that recruit just like he does.

Ha, yeah, obviously in real life this stuff can be totally screwy.

Of course, I assume your buddy doesn't get a comparison report between schools that updates every 6 hours based on perfect information about the respective schools' efforts.

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:30:00 PM (view original):
No it wasn't. But I enjoy the platform because of how it simulates many of the facets of college basketball, which is anything but predictable.

I mean I am best friends with D3 head coach and this is nothing compared to the nonsensical stuff he's heard for why he lost a kid who he thought he had to someone else. That point might not do anything for you, but it's pretty amusing to me that I am complaining about how it makes no sense I didn't get that recruit just like he does.

The thing is tho: we are paying to get screwed by randomness. Your friend is getting paid to get screwed. If I'm paying for something I want more control of the results. I don't want randomness to set me back 3-4 seasons. This recruiting takes more time and can screw you. Time is precious. Time is money. The game has been fun, but not if it leads to a waste of time.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:20:00 PM (view original):
Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

But the nonsensical result was fun, right?

It's not "random", it's based on probabilities. Probabilities aren't "random".

That aside, we should also talk about how fun it was to get beat on recruits on signing cycle with no battle at all. We should talk about how fun it was to get 49.999% of the effort credit in a battle, but lose 100% of the time. We should also remember that probability battles can end up with you winning recruits unexpectedly, as well. It actually is fun when you win a recruit despite being knocked to "high" by a competitor who just dropped 20 HVs out of nowhere right before the first signing cycle, apparently hoping to re-invent the sniping process in 3.0.

Posted by pkoopman on 9/20/2016 7:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:20:00 PM (view original):
Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

But the nonsensical result was fun, right?

It's not "random", it's based on probabilities. Probabilities aren't "random".

That aside, we should also talk about how fun it was to get beat on recruits on signing cycle with no battle at all. We should talk about how fun it was to get 49.999% of the effort credit in a battle, but lose 100% of the time. We should also remember that probability battles can end up with you winning recruits unexpectedly, as well. It actually is fun when you win a recruit despite being knocked to "high" by a competitor who just dropped 20 HVs out of nowhere right before the first signing cycle, apparently hoping to re-invent the sniping process in 3.0.

What are you talking about? If you were smart, you don't lose battles or get poached in old recruiting. I haven't lost any battles in my last 20 seasons. Probability is randomness.

I've smoked enough joints to know there is not much difference between 'high' and 'very high'

Posted by Arfy on 9/20/2016 8:13:00 PM (view original):
I've smoked enough joints to know there is not much difference between 'high' and 'very high'

Haha!

What about super duper can't move my legs high

Posted by whitey34 on 9/20/2016 8:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 9/20/2016 7:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:20:00 PM (view original):
Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

But the nonsensical result was fun, right?

It's not "random", it's based on probabilities. Probabilities aren't "random".

That aside, we should also talk about how fun it was to get beat on recruits on signing cycle with no battle at all. We should talk about how fun it was to get 49.999% of the effort credit in a battle, but lose 100% of the time. We should also remember that probability battles can end up with you winning recruits unexpectedly, as well. It actually is fun when you win a recruit despite being knocked to "high" by a competitor who just dropped 20 HVs out of nowhere right before the first signing cycle, apparently hoping to re-invent the sniping process in 3.0.

What are you talking about? If you were smart, you don't lose battles or get poached in old recruiting. I haven't lost any battles in my last 20 seasons. Probability is randomness.

Probability is the measure of likelihood that something will happen. Randomness is the lack of ability to measure the likelihood that something will happen. They are not synonyms. I may not be smart enough to enjoy a game that rewards risk aversion and card counting, but I know that much.

Posted by whitey34 on 9/20/2016 8:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 9/20/2016 7:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/20/2016 7:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shfcbl on 9/20/2016 7:20:00 PM (view original):
Just to add to the discussion...I just lost out on a recruit to a team that was listed as High when I was Very High. I should have read up more on that possibility or I would have had more than interest points on the player. I just assumed that because I was B- prestige to the AI teams C- prestige, and roughly 100 miles closer to the player who has the close to home preference would be enough as long as my level of interest was higher than the other teams. Knowing that now, I'll adjust, but if I had to pick, I'd rather the random selection be between equal levels of interest.

But the nonsensical result was fun, right?

It's not "random", it's based on probabilities. Probabilities aren't "random".

That aside, we should also talk about how fun it was to get beat on recruits on signing cycle with no battle at all. We should talk about how fun it was to get 49.999% of the effort credit in a battle, but lose 100% of the time. We should also remember that probability battles can end up with you winning recruits unexpectedly, as well. It actually is fun when you win a recruit despite being knocked to "high" by a competitor who just dropped 20 HVs out of nowhere right before the first signing cycle, apparently hoping to re-invent the sniping process in 3.0.

What are you talking about? If you were smart, you don't lose battles or get poached in old recruiting. I haven't lost any battles in my last 20 seasons. Probability is randomness.

Recruiting with 6 player classes helps with preventing poaching and winning battles.