Posted by Benis on 7/22/2017 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MWalpole on 7/22/2017 12:39:00 PM (view original):
Worthy, for the record I don't want you to think my "coasting on credits" comments are directed towards you, just speaking in generalities. Also, I'm curious (because I don't foresee myself ever actually winning one) but how much do you get in credits for a NT win?

• Lose opening round game: $3 in credits
• Lose second round game: $5 in credits
• Lose Sweet 16 game: $10 in credits
• Lose Elite 8 game: $15 in credits
• Lose Final Four game: $20 in credits
• Lose Championship game: 4,000 reward points
• National Champion: 6,000 reward points

FWIW my Mount St. Mary's team missed both tourneys with a 21-7 record but I still got $1.50 so we can add that to the list too lol but thanks!

I got nothing when I made the PI.

Posted by Benis on 7/22/2017 10:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MWalpole on 7/22/2017 1:06:00 AM (view original):
this may not be a popular opinion but if i'm WIS what do i care if some longtime players leave? apparently 2.0 was catered to veteran coaches entrenched at the top programs, while everyone else had no shot. so i can either retain the winning veteran coaches who are piling up $100's in credits (aka not making me a penny) and risk losing the actual paying customers who'll leave because they have no shot at winning....or i can roll out 3.0 and make the game enjoyable for a wider audience. a paying audience. this isn't an "everyone deserves a medal for trying" argument like some try to turn it into, it's a business. it's like a bartender catering to his regulars who get free drinks while ignoring the paying customer. makes no sense.

JS's first paragraph in his post is spot on so I won't repeat it.

MWalpole - in theory, you are definitely correct. You want to make the game more enjoyable for a wider audience. I 100% agree there. Unfortunately, 3.0 as a whole, has not done that. If it did, then the populations wouldn't be at an all time low. There are aren't many new players.

So basically what happened - they changed the game into something the vets didn't like so they left but were unable to replace them with people who DO like the new game.

This...Ben15 is spot on.

Here's my 2 cents.

• IMO, Recruiting isn't worse or better in 3.0, you're just trading one set of flaws for another. I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was nearly impossible. 3.0 feels too random at times and the 10+ school alphebetical order glitch must be fixed, but likely never will.
• Older coaches are leaving because the changes feel too drastic.
• New coaches are not sticking around likely because the new recruiting is not intuitive at all, and very difficult to grasp/master, and there's not much obvious help out there.

Here's 2 more cents.

• If I'm a new coach, and I read these dysfunctional forums right now searching for help, I either assume the game is completely broken and not worth my time, or I assume that most vet coaches are overly argumentative and abrasive and asking them for help is a waste of time, or some combination of both. It has to be pretty intimidating/frustrating right now for new coaches entering the game. There's much more complaining about declining population than desire to help new coaches.
• CS is mostly dormant and now occasionally rude/sarcastic with customers. This doesn't help at all. It's evident they (FOX) don't value/enjoy/have pride in the game, and that CS is either overworked or apathetic (or a combination). That being said, the strength of this game/community has always been the vet coaches helping out the up-and-comers. If we wait on CS to listen to complaints/prioritize the game, you'll likely wait forever.

I include myself in this. I just play now and rarely offer help, nor do I even touch the forums lately.

When we see new coaches join, we should offer them help. Right now, these forums look like a place where a new coach might even be blasted/criticized for asking for help. 3.0 is likely a better product with more human coaches. For those who want to continue to play and want more coaches competing, don't expect CS to do anything, we need to constructively help newcomers, and maybe use some discretion to keep the forums from looking like some kind of trash-talking online war zone.

I always LMAO when I read quotes like these "I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was beyond impossible."

It should really read "I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was beyond impossible for average to bad coaches".

Because that's really what it is. Good coaches could easily brake into the top echelon, at least in the worlds I was in. But there are a limited number of coaches who actually put in the time and effort to be successful so they made a game where the casual, no so good coach, had a chance to succeed. Some will say that's a good thing. But stop with the Spudlike, "impossible to succeed" lines, because it just ain't so.

Posted by mullycj on 7/23/2017 12:09:00 PM (view original):
I always LMAO when I read quotes like these "I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was beyond impossible."

It should really read "I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was beyond impossible for average to bad coaches".

Because that's really what it is. Good coaches could easily brake into the top echelon, at least in the worlds I was in. But there are a limited number of coaches who actually put in the time and effort to be successful so they made a game where the casual, no so good coach, had a chance to succeed. Some will say that's a good thing. But stop with the Spudlike, "impossible to succeed" lines, because it just ain't so.

OK, "Beyond impossible" was probably not the best language to get my point across. Maybe I should edit to "nearly impossible".

I doubt many consider me an average-to-poor coach but I won't take the bait of arguing otherwise if we want to go there. However, I never figured out how to unseat those A+ schools that camped out at the top programs. I'm sure individual elite cases existed (I remember lostmyth at St. Bonaventure for instance, or the other coach who was the published statistician and lived off of income from daily sports leagues) who could pull this off. However, the flaw was that examples of coaches moving up in 2.0 to the upper echelon in D1 and knocking off those top schools was very rare and reserved for the completely elite (and I mean maybe 4 to 5 coaches total in the entire game), as many vet coaches just camped out with their A+ prestige and grabbed the top recruits with little challenge. Others solid coaches that came along later would just hang out on the fringes of D1 hoping for some sweet 16 berths with mid-major schools, or just focus on winning in DII and DIII (which was more often my strategy).

That being said, harping on the language in that one part of my post kind of takes away from my greater point, which is that WIS likely won't fix 3.0 outside of small cosmetic changes, and if we're sticking it out in 3.0, its up to us to be realistic and constructive given the game that we have. If the vet coaches aren't a helpful resource anymore for new coaches that find this game, the numbers will continue to dwindle, because vet coaches will continue to leave and new coaches will become frustrated.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 7/21/2017 9:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 7/21/2017 9:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 7/21/2017 8:38:00 AM (view original):
Worthy is yet another outstanding d1 coach in smith world that has left due to 3.0. Most of the really good guys have jumped ship there and left us with participation trophy snowflakes that have more worthless forum posts than wins.

Yeah its a bummer how many really good coaches left.

worse is that a lot of helpful knowledge leaves with them.

Good coaches were always leaving. This just expedited it.

I think we (as in the people who know stuff) should make a concerted effort to drive intelligent discussion. There was a thread on 3 point shooting we should spend more time on those than on the 11 standard WIS sucks because of "x".

I'm going to give the classic Wardo +1 to this post right here.

Posted by bbunch on 7/23/2017 12:39:00 PM (view original):
Here's my 2 cents.

• IMO, Recruiting isn't worse or better in 3.0, you're just trading one set of flaws for another. I feel it's an overcorrection, but 2.0 was too predictable/mathy and breaking into the top of D1 was nearly impossible. 3.0 feels too random at times and the 10+ school alphebetical order glitch must be fixed, but likely never will.
• Older coaches are leaving because the changes feel too drastic.
• New coaches are not joining likely because the new recruiting is not intuitive at all, and very difficult to grasp/master, and there's not much obvious help out there.

Here's 2 more cents.

• If I'm a new coach, and I read these dysfunctional forums right now searching for help, I either assume the game is completely broken and not worth my time, or I assume that most vet coaches are overly argumentative and abrasive and asking them for help is a waste of time, or some combination of both. It has to be pretty intimidating/frustrating right now for new coaches entering the game. There's much more complaining about declining population than desire to help new coaches.
• CS is mostly dormant and now occasionally rude/sarcastic with customers. This doesn't help at all. It's evident they (FOX) don't value/enjoy/have pride in the game, and that CS is either overworked or apathetic (or a combination). That being said, the strength of this game/community has always been the vet coaches helping out the up-and-comers. If we wait on CS to listen to complaints/prioritize the game, you'll likely wait forever.

I include myself in this. I just play now and rarely offer help, nor do I even touch the forums lately.

When we see new coaches join, we should offer them help. Right now, these forums look like a place where a new coach might even be blasted/criticized for asking for help. 3.0 is likely a better product with more human coaches. For those who want to continue to play and want more coaches competing, don't expect CS to do anything, we need to constructively help newcomers, and maybe use some discretion to keep the forums from looking like some kind of trash-talking online war zone.

I think this is pretty spot on and I agree with basically everything you said (including the revised definition of impossible in your other post).

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/23/2017 1:47:00 PM (view original):
I really need to see one person say "I'm not joining because the new recruiting is not intuitive at all, and very difficult to grasp/master, and there's not much obvious help out there" to believe this is even in the same zip code of true.

Again, just a flaw in how I wrote the post. Replace "joining" with "sticking around" and that's more of the issue. I think if this forum has less bickering and is more informative, and if vets reach out more to new coaches, our numbers might eventually increase.

The new recruiting is not immediately intuitive. It takes a level of dedication to learn. You and I both learned it because we are pretty dedicated to playing the game. Newcomers with one foot in would benefit from help being more evident to them, and the forums being something other than a chaotic amalgam of personal attacks and hyperbole.

Again, the intent of my post is for coaches to be realistic about the lack of involvement from support staff, and for the forums to exist primarily for helping others being successful in the game. I'd be surprised if you disagreed with that.

I've long said this forum is toxic and, if I were a "real" n00b, I'd have never posted a single question in it. I would have also felt the game was terrible before my first season even started.

I don't think recruiting was all that difficult to learn, or at least know where/how to scout, but, then again, I read the forums.

I agree whole-heartedly with the final paragraph.

It probably doesn't help that we hijack every thread with the "let's diagnose what's wrong with the game" discussion. I wish we had one dedicated thread for it that couldn't get deleted.

I am new and maybe didn't learn the game much yet. I like recruiting and glad that string coach like bbunch will help.

Posted by DeBeque on 7/23/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):
I am new and maybe didn't learn the game much yet. I like recruiting and glad that string coach like bbunch will help.

Feel free to sitemail me with any questions, DeBeque!

Posted by mbriese on 7/23/2017 2:29:00 PM (view original):
It probably doesn't help that we hijack every thread with the "let's diagnose what's wrong with the game" discussion. I wish we had one dedicated thread for it that couldn't get deleted.

Agreed! I understand the need to vent, but maybe that all deserves it's own thread or set of threads on the forum