Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 5:40:00 PM (view original):
" For starters, A+ D2s are much better teams than D level D1s."

This is true. But not for the right reasons. They're only better because recruit generation is horrible and SIMs are typically dumbazzes. Heck, D3 teams are better than a lot of D1 Sims. It doesn't mean that's how it SHOULD be (IMHO). It's not representative what you'd see in college bball.

It's true, because that's the game we want to play. Removing pull-downs would be a huge change, and I doubt it would be very popular. People want to have the option to reach up. People want the recruiting game to be effort based, for better or worse. My preference would be to remove all the effort based stuff, but it's not going to happen. So as long as it's a commodity game, I want it to be both rational and competitive. Whether or not it is an accurate representation of real college basketball in this particular aspect is not high on my list of priorities.

People should just stop talking about relatively to real life college basketball.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 5:40:00 PM (view original):
" For starters, A+ D2s are much better teams than D level D1s."

This is true. But not for the right reasons. They're only better because recruit generation is horrible and SIMs are typically dumbazzes. Heck, D3 teams are better than a lot of D1 Sims. It doesn't mean that's how it SHOULD be (IMHO). It's not representative what you'd see in college bball.

It's true, because that's the game we want to play. Removing pull-downs would be a huge change, and I doubt it would be very popular. People want to have the option to reach up. People want the recruiting game to be effort based, for better or worse. My preference would be to remove all the effort based stuff, but it's not going to happen. So as long as it's a commodity game, I want it to be both rational and competitive. Whether or not it is an accurate representation of real college basketball in this particular aspect is not high on my list of priorities.

I get that's what you want. On the effort thing- I don't necessarily disagree.

But I just didn't agree with what you were saying about how D2 teams are better than D1 teams and that should be reflected in the prestige level. If that's not what you were saying then my mistake.

But if that is what you're saying then to me, it's just a flawed argument because of the flaws of the game engine which has nothing to do with 3.0 recruiting. You got guys who have single digit ath and def, even at D1. That's a recruit generation problem. You got SIM teams with 6 Bigs in a class with no guards, that's a SIM AI issue. Bottom line, it's messed up.

I think you're right that removing pulldowns completely could potentially be unpopular. But the system we had in 2.0 was popular, I think. It gave the ability to pull down but within reason. It also protected the user from reaching too high for a player that they couldn't actually get (which would make Mike happy). To me, that was a good set up and I think most people really liked it. Why not go back to something like that?

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 5:40:00 PM (view original):
" For starters, A+ D2s are much better teams than D level D1s."

This is true. But not for the right reasons. They're only better because recruit generation is horrible and SIMs are typically dumbazzes. Heck, D3 teams are better than a lot of D1 Sims. It doesn't mean that's how it SHOULD be (IMHO). It's not representative what you'd see in college bball.

It's true, because that's the game we want to play. Removing pull-downs would be a huge change, and I doubt it would be very popular. People want to have the option to reach up. People want the recruiting game to be effort based, for better or worse. My preference would be to remove all the effort based stuff, but it's not going to happen. So as long as it's a commodity game, I want it to be both rational and competitive. Whether or not it is an accurate representation of real college basketball in this particular aspect is not high on my list of priorities.

I get that's what you want. On the effort thing- I don't necessarily disagree.

But I just didn't agree with what you were saying about how D2 teams are better than D1 teams and that should be reflected in the prestige level. If that's not what you were saying then my mistake.

But if that is what you're saying then to me, it's just a flawed argument because of the flaws of the game engine which has nothing to do with 3.0 recruiting. You got guys who have single digit ath and def, even at D1. That's a recruit generation problem. You got SIM teams with 6 Bigs in a class with no guards, that's a SIM AI issue. Bottom line, it's messed up.

I think you're right that removing pulldowns completely could potentially be unpopular. But the system we had in 2.0 was popular, I think. It gave the ability to pull down but within reason. It also protected the user from reaching too high for a player that they couldn't actually get (which would make Mike happy). To me, that was a good set up and I think most people really liked it. Why not go back to something like that?

Not really what I was saying. My comment was a response to the notion - put forth by zorzii and endorsed by jpmills - that a promise of minutes alone, from a d level D1, should be enough to overcome all-in effort by elite D2 teams. I don't mind that there is a prestige modifier between the lowest D1 and the highest D2. But that level of differentiation would be absurd.

As I've said before, if you really want to see superpowered D3s, adopt a system where A+ teams can "pull down" recruits that lower level teams can't touch.

The recruiting game is a commodity game. It should be market based, and the users set the market. If a high level D2 values the #80 sf in the country significantly higher than any D1 values him, and decides to go all-in on effort and promises, then he's set the market for that commodity. It's up to the higher level teams to invest enough to try to land him.

And on the realism front, it's completely realistic that a championship caliber D2 is competitive with a D or mediocre C level D1 for any single recruit. They'll be playing for national championships at high level D2; they'll be lucky to sniff a conference championship with a low level D1. Some guys at that level will be swayed by the possibility of maybe a couple games against Duke or UK during their career. Others don't care about that. There shouldn't be an extreme automatic division modifier that annihilates that possibility.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 4:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 4:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/6/2017 4:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 1/6/2017 3:49:00 PM (view original):
Then reduce the prestige value of d2 compared to D1... Right now it's too close.

Oh, man, people are going to get all over you for that post. You are not supposed to ask for D1 welfare.

People? No one on these forums uses the word welfare.. it's actually kind of offensive.

Not any more offensive than the phrase "participation trophy".

I wouldnt use the term welfare, but not because it's offensive. It just isn't very precise. If we're going to use socially charged terms to describe what spud is trying to describe, I think "privilege" works better. It's more accurate, and is likely to get more panties wadded up by the people arguing for it.

Well put. Bevis and I both stand corrected in the same post.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 8:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 5:40:00 PM (view original):
" For starters, A+ D2s are much better teams than D level D1s."

This is true. But not for the right reasons. They're only better because recruit generation is horrible and SIMs are typically dumbazzes. Heck, D3 teams are better than a lot of D1 Sims. It doesn't mean that's how it SHOULD be (IMHO). It's not representative what you'd see in college bball.

It's true, because that's the game we want to play. Removing pull-downs would be a huge change, and I doubt it would be very popular. People want to have the option to reach up. People want the recruiting game to be effort based, for better or worse. My preference would be to remove all the effort based stuff, but it's not going to happen. So as long as it's a commodity game, I want it to be both rational and competitive. Whether or not it is an accurate representation of real college basketball in this particular aspect is not high on my list of priorities.

I get that's what you want. On the effort thing- I don't necessarily disagree.

But I just didn't agree with what you were saying about how D2 teams are better than D1 teams and that should be reflected in the prestige level. If that's not what you were saying then my mistake.

But if that is what you're saying then to me, it's just a flawed argument because of the flaws of the game engine which has nothing to do with 3.0 recruiting. You got guys who have single digit ath and def, even at D1. That's a recruit generation problem. You got SIM teams with 6 Bigs in a class with no guards, that's a SIM AI issue. Bottom line, it's messed up.

I think you're right that removing pulldowns completely could potentially be unpopular. But the system we had in 2.0 was popular, I think. It gave the ability to pull down but within reason. It also protected the user from reaching too high for a player that they couldn't actually get (which would make Mike happy). To me, that was a good set up and I think most people really liked it. Why not go back to something like that?

Not really what I was saying. My comment was a response to the notion - put forth by zorzii and endorsed by jpmills - that a promise of minutes alone, from a d level D1, should be enough to overcome all-in effort by elite D2 teams. I don't mind that there is a prestige modifier between the lowest D1 and the highest D2. But that level of differentiation would be absurd.

As I've said before, if you really want to see superpowered D3s, adopt a system where A+ teams can "pull down" recruits that lower level teams can't touch.

The recruiting game is a commodity game. It should be market based, and the users set the market. If a high level D2 values the #80 sf in the country significantly higher than any D1 values him, and decides to go all-in on effort and promises, then he's set the market for that commodity. It's up to the higher level teams to invest enough to try to land him.

And on the realism front, it's completely realistic that a championship caliber D2 is competitive with a D or mediocre C level D1 for any single recruit. They'll be playing for national championships at high level D2; they'll be lucky to sniff a conference championship with a low level D1. Some guys at that level will be swayed by the possibility of maybe a couple games against Duke or UK during their career. Others don't care about that. There shouldn't be an extreme automatic division modifier that annihilates that possibility.

What about D3 being competitive with D1 teams in real life?

I beat D1 Cornell by 30 in an exhibition with D3 Ramapo.

That proves ... well, that proves the same thing as a game between the Washington Generals and Harlem Globetrotters. Nothing at all.

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/6/2017 9:23:00 PM (view original):
That proves ... well, that proves the same thing as a game between the Washington Generals and Harlem Globetrotters. Nothing at all.

Hold up, you're saying that 1 game doesn't prove anything? It takes CoachK one game of film tape and organizing depth chart to prepare a game plan.

Ward ... you game plan for the Generals?

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 8:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/6/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/6/2017 5:40:00 PM (view original):
" For starters, A+ D2s are much better teams than D level D1s."

This is true. But not for the right reasons. They're only better because recruit generation is horrible and SIMs are typically dumbazzes. Heck, D3 teams are better than a lot of D1 Sims. It doesn't mean that's how it SHOULD be (IMHO). It's not representative what you'd see in college bball.

It's true, because that's the game we want to play. Removing pull-downs would be a huge change, and I doubt it would be very popular. People want to have the option to reach up. People want the recruiting game to be effort based, for better or worse. My preference would be to remove all the effort based stuff, but it's not going to happen. So as long as it's a commodity game, I want it to be both rational and competitive. Whether or not it is an accurate representation of real college basketball in this particular aspect is not high on my list of priorities.

I get that's what you want. On the effort thing- I don't necessarily disagree.

But I just didn't agree with what you were saying about how D2 teams are better than D1 teams and that should be reflected in the prestige level. If that's not what you were saying then my mistake.

But if that is what you're saying then to me, it's just a flawed argument because of the flaws of the game engine which has nothing to do with 3.0 recruiting. You got guys who have single digit ath and def, even at D1. That's a recruit generation problem. You got SIM teams with 6 Bigs in a class with no guards, that's a SIM AI issue. Bottom line, it's messed up.

I think you're right that removing pulldowns completely could potentially be unpopular. But the system we had in 2.0 was popular, I think. It gave the ability to pull down but within reason. It also protected the user from reaching too high for a player that they couldn't actually get (which would make Mike happy). To me, that was a good set up and I think most people really liked it. Why not go back to something like that?

Not really what I was saying. My comment was a response to the notion - put forth by zorzii and endorsed by jpmills - that a promise of minutes alone, from a d level D1, should be enough to overcome all-in effort by elite D2 teams. I don't mind that there is a prestige modifier between the lowest D1 and the highest D2. But that level of differentiation would be absurd.

As I've said before, if you really want to see superpowered D3s, adopt a system where A+ teams can "pull down" recruits that lower level teams can't touch.

The recruiting game is a commodity game. It should be market based, and the users set the market. If a high level D2 values the #80 sf in the country significantly higher than any D1 values him, and decides to go all-in on effort and promises, then he's set the market for that commodity. It's up to the higher level teams to invest enough to try to land him.

And on the realism front, it's completely realistic that a championship caliber D2 is competitive with a D or mediocre C level D1 for any single recruit. They'll be playing for national championships at high level D2; they'll be lucky to sniff a conference championship with a low level D1. Some guys at that level will be swayed by the possibility of maybe a couple games against Duke or UK during their career. Others don't care about that. There shouldn't be an extreme automatic division modifier that annihilates that possibility.

What about D3 being competitive with D1 teams in real life?

I beat D1 Cornell by 30 in an exhibition with D3 Ramapo.

I don't know, what about it? Haven't you been able to beat low D1s with high D3s in this game for a while? I did, back when I had D3 teams. As long as coaches are allowed to park in D3, and low D1 is composed mostly of sims, that's going to be a part of this game. The screaming and gnashing of teeth will be unbearable if sims start actually recruiting like humans, using the same player valuations we do. Because we like pull downs and effort based recruiting, sims need to be mediocre at best recruiters.