I’ve only been playing since April 2020 but I have a couple quick recruiting thoughts though not positive I have solutions. And apologies if this has already been discussed but my experience is only D3 so far. Right away I found some good mentors who instructed me to not even bother scouting D3 recruits. It sounds like some can be found that are decent but in order to compete, you need to be pulling D1/D2.

I’ve gotten used to this process of pulling down D1/D2 but I don’t love the stress of praying a D1/D2 human stays away and have lost some very late in the game. By the late stages all my backups are usually picked over and I try and leave some scouting money but it’s already slim pickings and at D3, the budgets are pretty small.

So I’m not sure if I want more quality D3 recruits so I wouldn’t have to always be shooting at the D1/D2? I’m also curious if this would be much easier if all the worlds were filled? Meaning if each division was full, more coaches would have to stick to recruiting their division? Since the elite D3 teams would no longer be rated in the upper 600’s since it wouldn’t be possible to pull D1/D2 with those all being humans?

Might’ve rambled a bit but the recruiting process at D3 seems to come down to whether or not D1/D2 humans decide they want your targets or not. Like I said earlier, not entirely sure on the solution - not having the delay for when D3 can sign D1/D2? Idk. I’ve enjoyed HD so far but just my two cents on recruiting.

Posted by iamjoeyd on 12/30/2020 10:55:00 PM (view original):
I think AP should be the same regardless of how many openings you have. IRL a coach only has so much time and so many assistants and neither of those change if he has one scholarship or seven. Truly, I think the budget should be the same as well. It would stop players from holding walkon slots to get extra money. Or we just don't give money for walkons.

I think recruit preferences should matter most of all. If a west coast kid and has "far away" preference. an east coast school should be a prohibitive favorite. If a kid has a "zone" preference, a "zone" coach should have a significant advantage.

Transfers should happen more often. If a kid loses double digit WE in a season, he should transfer (he would in RL). And you should be able to recruit that kid with promises of future playing time/starter status and AP during RS1.

Agreed regarding transferring. Also, something I abuse the hell out of lately...... EVERY Sr that gets redshirted should transfer. Why would a guy be a 3 year starter (in some situations) every game, and then be cool with skipping Sr year?

And one more, is offering promises to ineligibles..... either remove that option until they become eligible. Or make those promises have to be honored when they DO play their first season

Posted by RollerBU on 1/1/2021 3:27:00 PM (view original):
I’ve only been playing since April 2020 but I have a couple quick recruiting thoughts though not positive I have solutions. And apologies if this has already been discussed but my experience is only D3 so far. Right away I found some good mentors who instructed me to not even bother scouting D3 recruits. It sounds like some can be found that are decent but in order to compete, you need to be pulling D1/D2.

I’ve gotten used to this process of pulling down D1/D2 but I don’t love the stress of praying a D1/D2 human stays away and have lost some very late in the game. By the late stages all my backups are usually picked over and I try and leave some scouting money but it’s already slim pickings and at D3, the budgets are pretty small.

So I’m not sure if I want more quality D3 recruits so I wouldn’t have to always be shooting at the D1/D2? I’m also curious if this would be much easier if all the worlds were filled? Meaning if each division was full, more coaches would have to stick to recruiting their division? Since the elite D3 teams would no longer be rated in the upper 600’s since it wouldn’t be possible to pull D1/D2 with those all being humans?

Might’ve rambled a bit but the recruiting process at D3 seems to come down to whether or not D1/D2 humans decide they want your targets or not. Like I said earlier, not entirely sure on the solution - not having the delay for when D3 can sign D1/D2? Idk. I’ve enjoyed HD so far but just my two cents on recruiting.

This is a really good post from a new user.

I agree with this 100%, and this is why I primarily play D1.

It's just.... stressful... to pray to higher division humans stay off your guys and don't take some poor player just because they can. It just isn't quite as fun when your recruiting depends primarily on other people's actions. The frustration of EEs don't touch this for me.

Posted by iamjoeyd on 12/30/2020 10:55:00 PM (view original):
I think AP should be the same regardless of how many openings you have. IRL a coach only has so much time and so many assistants and neither of those change if he has one scholarship or seven. Truly, I think the budget should be the same as well. It would stop players from holding walkon slots to get extra money. Or we just don't give money for walkons.

I think recruit preferences should matter most of all. If a west coast kid and has "far away" preference. an east coast school should be a prohibitive favorite. If a kid has a "zone" preference, a "zone" coach should have a significant advantage.

Transfers should happen more often. If a kid loses double digit WE in a season, he should transfer (he would in RL). And you should be able to recruit that kid with promises of future playing time/starter status and AP during RS1.

Yeah I was saying this since before beta started. Remove cash altogether. Every school should have the same amount of attention to give, recruits should decide when coaches can do visits, based on how much interest they’ve accumulated. Interest should be a factor of prestige, promises, preferences, and prioritization. The problems this game has in recruiting boil down to the crazy resource allocation model it uses to determine where recruits go, which is basically nothing like real life, and encourages all the min/maxing the new folks say they want to address. I wish the idea could have gotten more traction at that point, but it probably wouldn’t have mattered, seble was pretty set on keeping some form of “bidding” as the heart of recruiting. Admittedly, it would have changed the nature of the game quite a bit, and it was already undergoing some big changes; though I’d argue that was the time to do an overhaul, especially one so necessary and obvious.

Personally, I think the thing that makes HD most unlike the real world is recruiting. I will also admit, it's gotten light years better than it was in 2.0. However, I think more tweeking needs to be done. There's not enough competition for recruits. There should be way more dice rolls than there actually are. Personally, I think either we should get a lot more recruiting money, or home visits and campus visits should cost less, or even more. But at the same time, there should be fewer home visits allowed. I would actually cap home visits at 5 per recruit (this would make it more realistic, however for the sake of logistics we could even do 10). This would allow teams to do more recruiting of different players. I also think the majority of top recruits should sign early. I'd say the top 300 should have 80-85% of players prefer to sign in RS1. This would allow for teams to look for better fallback options should they strike out. I also think scouting budgets should have allotments given for both RS1 and RS2. This is more crucial for D2 and D3 teams who have very small scouting budgets to begin with. Most people in D3 can only scout about 15-20 players all the way to level 4. And in order to find players they want, they pretty much have to burn their entire scouting budget in RS1 and if they lose those players, they're SOL. So having a scouting budget given to them in RS2 (even a small amount like $5000) would be very beneficial.

Read through a few pages of this thread, it's pretty apparent that the easiest solution would be to just re-write the entire HD model, and deliver HD 4.0 down the road. There's just no way to do anything that people are asking, in small increments without drastically affecting another portion of the game.

The question is, would people be OK with a complete overhaul and learning a completely different system? or would they just bail before ever giving it a shot?

Posted by lilspike0738 on 1/2/2021 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Read through a few pages of this thread, it's pretty apparent that the easiest solution would be to just re-write the entire HD model, and deliver HD 4.0 down the road. There's just no way to do anything that people are asking, in small increments without drastically affecting another portion of the game.

The question is, would people be OK with a complete overhaul and learning a completely different system? or would they just bail before ever giving it a shot?

I believe in Adams vision. So a 4.0 would be great in my opinion. Where do I sign off?

Posted by lilspike0738 on 1/2/2021 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Read through a few pages of this thread, it's pretty apparent that the easiest solution would be to just re-write the entire HD model, and deliver HD 4.0 down the road. There's just no way to do anything that people are asking, in small increments without drastically affecting another portion of the game.

The question is, would people be OK with a complete overhaul and learning a completely different system? or would they just bail before ever giving it a shot?

While things can always be tweaked, I think the game is pretty awesome as it is. I would much rather WIS spend their finite resources on marketing and attempting to grow the user base than spending the time and resources on creating 4.0.

Posted by mrslam34 on 1/2/2021 11:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lilspike0738 on 1/2/2021 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Read through a few pages of this thread, it's pretty apparent that the easiest solution would be to just re-write the entire HD model, and deliver HD 4.0 down the road. There's just no way to do anything that people are asking, in small increments without drastically affecting another portion of the game.

The question is, would people be OK with a complete overhaul and learning a completely different system? or would they just bail before ever giving it a shot?

While things can always be tweaked, I think the game is pretty awesome as it is. I would much rather WIS spend their finite resources on marketing and attempting to grow the user base than spending the time and resources on creating 4.0.

i agree. while i am not inherently opposed to a 4.0, i think it is a tough ask from two new guys managing 8 games. IMO the game as it stands is largely a viable game, and there should be greater effort to attract users - with any changes to the game in direct pursuit of that goal. like making d1 more accessible (lowering qualification) or simplifying d3 recruiting, or perhaps adding a rolling 50 season world game mode to allow folks to experience new worlds and the race to d1 without adding permanent worlds and permanently diluting the existing worlds.

selfishly i'd like to see short term changes that i personally would benefit from (in an enjoyment way, not like, advantage wise) - but i feel like its nearly impossible for them to justify investing in changes for the small existing user base, especially over trying to make the game more approachable and to attract more users (sure doesn't feel like they can choose both options!)

Well, I can see one thing that has already been fixed - world rollovers actually occur on time, right after the NBA draft.

gillispie1 I like 50 year individual resets (I can live with full world resets too) .. with the ability to get a better starting point with each successive roll over. (You can skip D3 the first rollover, can skip D2 the second rollover, etc.

I would also like Div3 and maybe even Div2 to only recruit in their own divisional recruit space. It would take a short time for the best teams to get rid of their current higher level recruits .. then everyone competes on the same level and you don't have to compete w/ higher division teams. Much easier recruiting for newer guys that way. Also something needs to be done to speed up opening the other recruiting options in the 2nd recruiting period.

Posted by mrslam34 on 1/2/2021 11:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lilspike0738 on 1/2/2021 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Read through a few pages of this thread, it's pretty apparent that the easiest solution would be to just re-write the entire HD model, and deliver HD 4.0 down the road. There's just no way to do anything that people are asking, in small increments without drastically affecting another portion of the game.

The question is, would people be OK with a complete overhaul and learning a completely different system? or would they just bail before ever giving it a shot?

While things can always be tweaked, I think the game is pretty awesome as it is. I would much rather WIS spend their finite resources on marketing and attempting to grow the user base than spending the time and resources on creating 4.0.

Oh I don't disagree... I was more just asking, because some of the expectations of users (or rather their desires to change stuff up) requires a lot more work than I htink they understand.

I'm just saying that the entire thread is about changes that really aren't possible without re-writing the entire game in some manner... Small tweaks are one thing, but small tweaks could take months to iron out, depending how they effect the rest of the simulation and unforeseen issues. I'm not sure that's a recipe for success, if people are already set in their ways.

I haven’t read this thread so someone may have mentioned this but I would absolutely LOVE one very simple change. Please, please, please add a drop down for home visits on the recruit page. I think we all have better things to do than sit and click the home visit button over and over and over again!

I have thoughts on actual game changes as well but this would be helpful as well....

Posted by snewell12 on 1/4/2021 5:31:00 PM (view original):
I haven’t read this thread so someone may have mentioned this but I would absolutely LOVE one very simple change. Please, please, please add a drop down for home visits on the recruit page. I think we all have better things to do than sit and click the home visit button over and over and over again!

I have thoughts on actual game changes as well but this would be helpful as well....

yes! especially on days when it takes a good 10 seconds to reload the page after each hv.

and finally! a change that we can all agree to. dogg, me, shoe, benis - we can all support this change in peace and harmony, because you literally have to be a monster not to support a dropdown box for HV.

let's make this official. HD 4.0 - now with a dropdown box for home visits. coming some time 2022.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/2/2021 1:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by iamjoeyd on 12/30/2020 10:55:00 PM (view original):
I think AP should be the same regardless of how many openings you have. IRL a coach only has so much time and so many assistants and neither of those change if he has one scholarship or seven. Truly, I think the budget should be the same as well. It would stop players from holding walkon slots to get extra money. Or we just don't give money for walkons.

I think recruit preferences should matter most of all. If a west coast kid and has "far away" preference. an east coast school should be a prohibitive favorite. If a kid has a "zone" preference, a "zone" coach should have a significant advantage.

Transfers should happen more often. If a kid loses double digit WE in a season, he should transfer (he would in RL). And you should be able to recruit that kid with promises of future playing time/starter status and AP during RS1.

Yeah I was saying this since before beta started. Remove cash altogether. Every school should have the same amount of attention to give, recruits should decide when coaches can do visits, based on how much interest they’ve accumulated. Interest should be a factor of prestige, promises, preferences, and prioritization. The problems this game has in recruiting boil down to the crazy resource allocation model it uses to determine where recruits go, which is basically nothing like real life, and encourages all the min/maxing the new folks say they want to address. I wish the idea could have gotten more traction at that point, but it probably wouldn’t have mattered, seble was pretty set on keeping some form of “bidding” as the heart of recruiting. Admittedly, it would have changed the nature of the game quite a bit, and it was already undergoing some big changes; though I’d argue that was the time to do an overhaul, especially one so necessary and obvious.

Worst idea ever and players will realize it once it got implemented.
Glad it never got traction.