Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 1:26:00 PM (view original):
It is very easy to ignore a post. Especially one which one regards as unneeded.

I did. Until someone said "I liked it." That's when I pointed out it was a familiar post from numerous threads. A variation of "This sucks. I quit." Hell, the OP acknowledged that others had said it already.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

I'm afraid the changes accelerated the decline, unfortunately. Agree completely that more incremental improvement could have saved the game. In my view, seble should have: (1) changed recruit generation so there were many more diamonds in the rough, so people aren't necessarily desperate to battle for the 25/30 legit players out there; (2) implemented preferences, but made them far more meaningful (i.e., if the recruit wants a rebuild, Duke/KY/UNC have almost no chance at all, despite prestige advantage); (3) kept recruiting on the deterministic end of the scale -- I think we've swung far too much towards a "black box" regarding recruits' decision-making, making it extremely difficult to actually strategize/learn from battles -- right now, it's a "get to VH, and hope your number comes up" regime; and (4) greatly upped firing probabilities at the elite schools (removing the "blocking" issue that people have complained about) -- i.e., if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost.

Posted by johnsensing on 12/19/2016 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

I'm afraid the changes accelerated the decline, unfortunately. Agree completely that more incremental improvement could have saved the game. In my view, seble should have: (1) changed recruit generation so there were many more diamonds in the rough, so people aren't necessarily desperate to battle for the 25/30 legit players out there; (2) implemented preferences, but made them far more meaningful (i.e., if the recruit wants a rebuild, Duke/KY/UNC have almost no chance at all, despite prestige advantage); (3) kept recruiting on the deterministic end of the scale -- I think we've swung far too much towards a "black box" regarding recruits' decision-making, making it extremely difficult to actually strategize/learn from battles -- right now, it's a "get to VH, and hope your number comes up" regime; and (4) greatly upped firing probabilities at the elite schools (removing the "blocking" issue that people have complained about) -- i.e., if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost.

"if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost."
I wouldn't usually comment out of my criteria. But this is too far out of hand. Nothing has changed in the job process or staying at the job within 3.0 they haven't announced it. So its more than likely like A/A-/A+ schools at D2 or low major division 1 that if you go to the conference tournament championship game and win that/ or go deep in the tourney you are more than likely to stay at the job for a eternity.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 12/19/2016 2:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 12/19/2016 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

I'm afraid the changes accelerated the decline, unfortunately. Agree completely that more incremental improvement could have saved the game. In my view, seble should have: (1) changed recruit generation so there were many more diamonds in the rough, so people aren't necessarily desperate to battle for the 25/30 legit players out there; (2) implemented preferences, but made them far more meaningful (i.e., if the recruit wants a rebuild, Duke/KY/UNC have almost no chance at all, despite prestige advantage); (3) kept recruiting on the deterministic end of the scale -- I think we've swung far too much towards a "black box" regarding recruits' decision-making, making it extremely difficult to actually strategize/learn from battles -- right now, it's a "get to VH, and hope your number comes up" regime; and (4) greatly upped firing probabilities at the elite schools (removing the "blocking" issue that people have complained about) -- i.e., if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost.

"if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost."
I wouldn't usually comment out of my criteria. But this is too far out of hand. Nothing has changed in the job process or staying at the job within 3.0 they haven't announced it. So its more than likely like A/A-/A+ schools at D2 or low major division 1 that if you go to the conference tournament championship game and win that/ or go deep in the tourney you are more than likely to stay at the job for a eternity.

What if you made a song that Gucci Mane stole?

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

It doesn't really all come down to marketing. I knew about the game and had no interest. The game tilted heavily in favor of the "big" schools and, if you got there too late, your fate was set. If you were content to go 20-11 while 15-20 schools went 33-1 or 32-2 while rotating in the E8 you could play. If you hoped to get a shot at the F4, you had to hope a user died so you could get one of those schools.

And, FWIW, no one can scream "Realism!!!" and have coaches at the same school for 60-80 seasons. I'm sure term limits at schools would have went over really well.

BCS schools were available in every world I was in.

I found it fun to run an elite program and also to run lesser DI programs - but different folks find fun in different ways.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

It doesn't really all come down to marketing. I knew about the game and had no interest. The game tilted heavily in favor of the "big" schools and, if you got there too late, your fate was set. If you were content to go 20-11 while 15-20 schools went 33-1 or 32-2 while rotating in the E8 you could play. If you hoped to get a shot at the F4, you had to hope a user died so you could get one of those schools.

And, FWIW, no one can scream "Realism!!!" and have coaches at the same school for 60-80 seasons. I'm sure term limits at schools would have went over really well.

You knew about the game because you were already a WIS user. Most of their growth would come from bringing new people to the site that didn't even know it existed. It really does come down to marketing. The only problem is that now they have a junk game to market.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 12/19/2016 2:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 12/19/2016 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

I'm afraid the changes accelerated the decline, unfortunately. Agree completely that more incremental improvement could have saved the game. In my view, seble should have: (1) changed recruit generation so there were many more diamonds in the rough, so people aren't necessarily desperate to battle for the 25/30 legit players out there; (2) implemented preferences, but made them far more meaningful (i.e., if the recruit wants a rebuild, Duke/KY/UNC have almost no chance at all, despite prestige advantage); (3) kept recruiting on the deterministic end of the scale -- I think we've swung far too much towards a "black box" regarding recruits' decision-making, making it extremely difficult to actually strategize/learn from battles -- right now, it's a "get to VH, and hope your number comes up" regime; and (4) greatly upped firing probabilities at the elite schools (removing the "blocking" issue that people have complained about) -- i.e., if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost.

"if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost."
I wouldn't usually comment out of my criteria. But this is too far out of hand. Nothing has changed in the job process or staying at the job within 3.0 they haven't announced it. So its more than likely like A/A-/A+ schools at D2 or low major division 1 that if you go to the conference tournament championship game and win that/ or go deep in the tourney you are more than likely to stay at the job for a eternity.

I'm not sure you read my email -- at least not correctly -- and I don't understand what "comment out of my criteria" means. My point was that rather than a total revamp of recruiting, which has caused, to put it charitably, some growing pains, I would have preferred that seble (among the other things I listed, and upping the marketing budget) implement a much, much quicker hook for lack of success at DI elite jobs. A lot of people seem to be rather annoyed (not without reason) that if you got to UNC, you were there forever. Hell, I would have been fine with having an NT win requirement not to get fired at the UNC/Kentuckys of the world (i.e., if you don't have 8 NT wins in 4 years, you get fired).

The "opportunity lost" comment refers to seble's lost opportunity to make incremental changes without running off many of the DI "elite" coaches and putting much of the commentariat at each others' throats. This process has been completely mismanaged from day 1. It is a shame.

Posted by mbriese on 12/19/2016 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/19/2016 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 12/19/2016 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/19/2016 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Just another guy driving off into the sunset in his waaaaambulance. Good-bye.

And there goes Spud unnecessarily trolling people who have ONE post about what they don't like about the changes.

God what a d1ckhead.


Edit - had to change the spelling so it didn't get censored.

I think what was unnecessary was the whiiiiining.

You're kind of splitting hairs there. This is a forum; technically it's all unnecessary. Yours was a pretty douchey response, though. When you post things like that, it's easy to see why nobody likes you on this forum.

(Quick! Respond with "I don't care what anyone thinks", ignoring the fact that you spend so much time commenting on things / desperately searching for validation!)

Hmm, yes and no. My response was admittedly a little on the douchy side, born out of being so tired of the incessant whining by guys who aren't sticking around. As for validation, no, it is hard for me to even imagine who needs validation from online gaming forums.

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

It doesn't really all come down to marketing. I knew about the game and had no interest. The game tilted heavily in favor of the "big" schools and, if you got there too late, your fate was set. If you were content to go 20-11 while 15-20 schools went 33-1 or 32-2 while rotating in the E8 you could play. If you hoped to get a shot at the F4, you had to hope a user died so you could get one of those schools.

And, FWIW, no one can scream "Realism!!!" and have coaches at the same school for 60-80 seasons. I'm sure term limits at schools would have went over really well.

You knew about the game because you were already a WIS user. Most of their growth would come from bringing new people to the site that didn't even know it existed. It really does come down to marketing. The only problem is that now they have a junk game to market.

I dont think junk game is a fair characterization - do you really mean that?

I know it is different and in some ways uncomfortable for long term customers. Junk seems harsh. Dont you mean more like different and you dont like a number of the differences?

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 3:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

It doesn't really all come down to marketing. I knew about the game and had no interest. The game tilted heavily in favor of the "big" schools and, if you got there too late, your fate was set. If you were content to go 20-11 while 15-20 schools went 33-1 or 32-2 while rotating in the E8 you could play. If you hoped to get a shot at the F4, you had to hope a user died so you could get one of those schools.

And, FWIW, no one can scream "Realism!!!" and have coaches at the same school for 60-80 seasons. I'm sure term limits at schools would have went over really well.

You knew about the game because you were already a WIS user. Most of their growth would come from bringing new people to the site that didn't even know it existed. It really does come down to marketing. The only problem is that now they have a junk game to market.

I dont think junk game is a fair characterization - do you really mean that?

I know it is different and in some ways uncomfortable for long term customers. Junk seems harsh. Dont you mean more like different and you dont like a number of the differences?

No, I mean junk.

Posted by johnsensing on 12/19/2016 3:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachWard95 on 12/19/2016 2:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 12/19/2016 2:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

I'm afraid the changes accelerated the decline, unfortunately. Agree completely that more incremental improvement could have saved the game. In my view, seble should have: (1) changed recruit generation so there were many more diamonds in the rough, so people aren't necessarily desperate to battle for the 25/30 legit players out there; (2) implemented preferences, but made them far more meaningful (i.e., if the recruit wants a rebuild, Duke/KY/UNC have almost no chance at all, despite prestige advantage); (3) kept recruiting on the deterministic end of the scale -- I think we've swung far too much towards a "black box" regarding recruits' decision-making, making it extremely difficult to actually strategize/learn from battles -- right now, it's a "get to VH, and hope your number comes up" regime; and (4) greatly upped firing probabilities at the elite schools (removing the "blocking" issue that people have complained about) -- i.e., if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost.

"if you miss the NT two straight years at the A/A+ baselines in DI, you're gone. Opportunity lost."
I wouldn't usually comment out of my criteria. But this is too far out of hand. Nothing has changed in the job process or staying at the job within 3.0 they haven't announced it. So its more than likely like A/A-/A+ schools at D2 or low major division 1 that if you go to the conference tournament championship game and win that/ or go deep in the tourney you are more than likely to stay at the job for a eternity.

I'm not sure you read my email -- at least not correctly -- and I don't understand what "comment out of my criteria" means. My point was that rather than a total revamp of recruiting, which has caused, to put it charitably, some growing pains, I would have preferred that seble (among the other things I listed, and upping the marketing budget) implement a much, much quicker hook for lack of success at DI elite jobs. A lot of people seem to be rather annoyed (not without reason) that if you got to UNC, you were there forever. Hell, I would have been fine with having an NT win requirement not to get fired at the UNC/Kentuckys of the world (i.e., if you don't have 8 NT wins in 4 years, you get fired).

The "opportunity lost" comment refers to seble's lost opportunity to make incremental changes without running off many of the DI "elite" coaches and putting much of the commentariat at each others' throats. This process has been completely mismanaged from day 1. It is a shame.

"comment out of my criteria" means-
I am not valid for anything I say about low division 1 or higher. But I am about to make the jump to low division 1 from low division 2.
If you search Spud's red light in this forum that is exactly what this forum post means

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmax on 12/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2016 12:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 12/19/2016 11:34:00 AM (view original):
It's a dying game as the results of their changes. I don't think it will make a difference even if they change it back or make improvements to fix the mistakes they made. Most people won't want to start their dynasty over.

Maybe they made changes because it was a dying game. That's my guess.

I agree that the game was in decline. I think WIS could have avoided the decline by making some efforts over the last 3-4 years to market the game.

BUT, the game clearly needed to be better suited to mobile devices

AND, the game clearly needed improvement.

I would have preferred significant marketing coupled with iterative more modest improvements, but without change the game was going no where.

In my opinion the game was severely underpopulated but I wouldn't call it dying. It all comes down to the marketing. The game could have done well as it was previously designed but people just didn't learn about it. I NEVER see a flash ad from whatifsports when I'm browsing the internet and I'm an actual user on the site which means that they clearly aren't marketing to people based on their cookies.

No, that's a poor assessment. It's not "all marketing", not with a game like this. Sports management sims are a very niche market. There is a population out there that should like sports management simulations, but the previous version wasn't a good sports management simulation. Most of the game was a commodity-based game, where the "game" was essentially bidding on recruits, both unrealistic (because in real life, recruits pick teams, not the other way around) and absurdly like winner's ball. It was too easily gamed, and rewarded "success" to the point of perpetuation, a degree far beyond what a competitive multi-player game that intends to attract and retain new players should ever allow. An update that broke the success cycle was looooong overdue; so I don't disagree with John that incremental change would have been the preferred method, but since the change that was necessary was never going to be acceptable in any increments to the people who couldn't tolerate their cheese being moved, ultimately I don't think it makes much of a long term difference. The game is far more marketable now, to the market they're trying to reach.