Posted by cubcub113 on 7/5/2017 5:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/5/2017 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 7/5/2017 4:21:00 PM (view original):
Why is everyone saying no? It would add so much more strategy with distro and matchups...

This would require major code changes (yes really) and wouldn't add nearly as much to the game as you think, so then you'd ask for more changes...

There is no way this actually happens. They can't even program the recruit considering list. This is just a fun idea.

Fair enough. Dream big!

Posted by cubcub113 on 7/5/2017 4:21:00 PM (view original):
Why is everyone saying no? It would add so much more strategy with distro and matchups...

The more I'm required to check in on the game, the more it is likely that life/work/my family is the tradeoff, and the game is going to lose that trade off every time. I avoid 2-a-day worlds for this very reason.

You're never required to check in on the game.

I'm guessing that his point was that if his opponents had opportunities to check in to make halftime adjustments, and he didn't, then he would be at a disadvantage.

But one can always come up with similar examples about how some folks may have inherent advantages just because they have more discretionary time to devote to games such as this, so I'm not sure how valid his point really is.

I agree with Rednu-players who prefer 1-a-day worlds do so because they only check in once a day, mostly because of time constraints.

And as Benis said I think the advantages are very, very minimal. If you do your homework when you game plan you can get a pretty good idea what your opponent is going to throw at you and can gameplan accordingly.

Agree, most people have lives other than sitting in front of their computer posting snarky comments 24/7.

Do tell, snarkycj!!

Posted by tecwrg on 7/6/2017 8:35:00 AM (view original):
I'm guessing that his point was that if his opponents had opportunities to check in to make halftime adjustments, and he didn't, then he would be at a disadvantage.

But one can always come up with similar examples about how some folks may have inherent advantages just because they have more discretionary time to devote to games such as this, so I'm not sure how valid his point really is.

He asked why people were saying no. I gave my personal reason for why I said no. That's about as valid as it gets since I do believe I'm the foremost expert on my feelings. Whether it extrapolates to others is irrelevant.

The difference with your example tecwrg si that discretionary time to devote to the game doesn't ensure any sort of advantage. We both get to input our "moves" to the game and if I use my time more efficiently or I have a higher understanding of the game, their extra time amounts to exactly nothing. By contrast, if my opponent is in a position to log in and input a lineup/position/distribution change and I'm not...that's a very tangible difference that manifests itself in the game engine and ultimately in the outcome of the results.

I think most people want MORE CONTROL in the outcome of results. In fact, I know they do. Otherwise, this forum wouldn't exist.

I voted no on halftime adjustments and I'm in agreement with Rednu and Darnoc for reasons they've described.

As far as control, why stop at just halftime adjustments? Why not have lineup adjustment cycles at every TV timeout? Have nine 2-hour cycles over the course of 18 hours.

None of my games have been televised. WTF?

Anyway, crazy nonsense aside, there are 4 cycles in recruiting, right? Suddenly "forcing" people to check in at halftime, i.e. twice a day, seems like almost as crazy nonsense as TV timeouts. Or are the people poo-pooing halftime adjustments trying to convince anyone that they only check once a day during recruiting?

it would be a rather big change in the game - hope they spend a few hours fixing obvious glitches before changing the engine this way

possible unforeseen effects - ages ago admin said that they had done some stuff inside the engine to reduce odd statistical results - that logic in the programming would then interact with user initiated half time changes. Need to beta how those would interact

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/6/2017 3:14:00 PM (view original):
Anyway, crazy nonsense aside, there are 4 cycles in recruiting, right? Suddenly "forcing" people to check in at halftime, i.e. twice a day, seems like almost as crazy nonsense as TV timeouts. Or are the people poo-pooing halftime adjustments trying to convince anyone that they only check once a day during recruiting?

Recruiting is what, 4 days long during the season? And 95% of my recruiting check ins are "oh good I'm still all alone" and then do nothing else.

this change would mean you'd want to read the pbp or at least look at box score and then make some tweaks/changes because that's the entire point of the idea. If a person doesn't want to have to do that every single game of the season then it seems like a reasonable excuse to me.

So you're for less control in the game? Many of your posts indicate otherwise.