Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I’ve lost 87.5% of rolls where I had 70% odds to win. How is that possibly a natural consequence?

Posted by snafu4u on 2/2/2023 7:45:00 PM (view original):

I’ve had a really, really bad string of recruiting losses as the favorite before the roll. I’ve lost 9 out of the last 10, and 14 out of the last 16. I’ve lost 5 consecutive rolls for my primary target over the last 5 seasons, all of which I was the favorite, all of which I had 80 AP every cycle, and maxed all promises and visits. For most of these rolls I’ve been 70/30 or better favorite, because I’ve gone all in with 80 AP per cycle, and maxed everything else. My last 16 rolls are as follows:

L 73/27

L 71/29

W 75/25

L 64/36

L 79/21

L 65/35

L 73/27

W 76/24

L 71/29

L 78/22

L 70/30

L 44/28/28

L 73/27

L 73/27

L 55/45
L 54/46

I know I’m not the best coach, I’ve been to a few NT Championship games but never sealed the deal. I know my game planning and understanding of the mechanics lacks well behind the elite coaches out there like Gillespie, piman, shoe, and cubcub (and many others). But I also know that recruiting is 80% of this game, and I am consistently putting myself in a position to win as a heavy favorite, yet I almost always lose. I’ve been taking 3-4 walk-ons a year for what seems like every year in recent memory, and signing DII level pull-downs (apologies to all the DII coaches whose recruiting plan I ruin) after I’m left with no resources following all these bad beats. I cannot field a competitive team at an A+ prestige school, because I keep losing as a 70/30 favorite.

I’m extremely frustrated, as I’m guessing soon I will get fired for lack of success, but I don’t know what else I can do. Shoe always gives the advice to prioritize your recruits and put yourself in a position to win, which I am doing. I’m the heavy favorite, I just always lose regardless. It’s not fun to always lose when you are really trying, and putting yourself in the position to win. It’s not fair to always lose and be on the verge of getting fired, when these outcomes have all been completely out of my hands. Does anyone have any advice? It’s gotten to the point where I’m pretty sure other coaches in my region are targeting my recruits late because they have a history of beating me as major underdogs. I don’t blame them.

In my entire WIS career I’ve won one roll as a major underdog, 24/76, and I felt guilty about it and apologized in conference chat after because it was ridiculous I won coming in so late. I don’t even care about a dynasty at this point, I just want to field a 10 man roster. What can I do????

I have been keeping track for many seasons since 3.0 recruiting started. I agree that this can be VERY aggravating when you are losing so many in a row. I do like the fact that not all 5/4 star athletes go to A+ schools now. My biggest issue is this: After all the record keeping, I usually win about 33% of the time when I am behind percentage wise. I can handle that stat well. Given that number, I would expect to win the battle if I am ahead percentage wise 67% of the time....but I don't. I only win 40% of the time when I am ahead by less than 20 percentage points, and only 50% of the time when I am ahead by more than 20 percentage points. That seems very out of line to me. I just roll with the punches now. I haven't been nearly as successful as you have, and for me that's OK. Sure, I would like to win a championship, but I get enough satisfaction out of this game in whatever I can achieve.

Posted by snafu4u on 2/11/2023 8:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I’ve lost 87.5% of rolls where I had 70% odds to win. How is that possibly a natural consequence?

A string of 16 battles seems significant to us, but the sim processes thousands of battles every season, in every world. Many of us who have played a bit have gone through such stretches with teams - I've gone through 2 myself, 3 if you count my experience in beta for 3.0 - and know they (generally) work themselves out eventually. That's not to say these rolls are all 100% straight RNG. I don't think they are. I think there's probably a luck modifier that attaches to coaches and/or programs and moves up and down and affects both recruiting and games. But that's controversial and kind of a separate issue.

What I mean by natural consequence is that when you are recruiting guys you know you will end up in battles for, of course you will lose some of those battles. That will flow up and down, and you can't really control that. What you can control is what you're prepared to deal with. So sustained success becomes a matter of how well you are preparing your team for those losses. If you only recruit those guys, you have to be prepared to play very tall some years, relying on only a few players, rather than depth. Another option, though, is to be recruiting 4 year backups and role players to go along with the elites, not just as emergency options, but as low-cost replacements for the losses you'll inevitably take. Guys you don't mind cutting if recruiting goes miraculously well for you next season (which also happens sometimes).

Posted by R0pey on 2/11/2023 10:57:00 AM (view original):
the engine hates you unlike other players who do the exact same thing so recruit **** players instead. genuis

Dumb take. Try again,

I think the issue is, the roll percentages don’t apply to YOU. they apply to us all. So it feels personal. But it isn’t. Snafu is just in a bad swing. And will bounce back

Posted by shoe3 on 2/11/2023 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 2/11/2023 8:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I’ve lost 87.5% of rolls where I had 70% odds to win. How is that possibly a natural consequence?

A string of 16 battles seems significant to us, but the sim processes thousands of battles every season, in every world. Many of us who have played a bit have gone through such stretches with teams - I've gone through 2 myself, 3 if you count my experience in beta for 3.0 - and know they (generally) work themselves out eventually. That's not to say these rolls are all 100% straight RNG. I don't think they are. I think there's probably a luck modifier that attaches to coaches and/or programs and moves up and down and affects both recruiting and games. But that's controversial and kind of a separate issue.

What I mean by natural consequence is that when you are recruiting guys you know you will end up in battles for, of course you will lose some of those battles. That will flow up and down, and you can't really control that. What you can control is what you're prepared to deal with. So sustained success becomes a matter of how well you are preparing your team for those losses. If you only recruit those guys, you have to be prepared to play very tall some years, relying on only a few players, rather than depth. Another option, though, is to be recruiting 4 year backups and role players to go along with the elites, not just as emergency options, but as low-cost replacements for the losses you'll inevitably take. Guys you don't mind cutting if recruiting goes miraculously well for you next season (which also happens sometimes).

Have you looked at my roster? I’m not only targeting 5* recruits. You make a lot of confidently incorrect assumptions.

I think Snafu's bad recruiting luck is compounded and frustrating because HD has given him insane amounts of bad luck in tons of deep NT runs.

Like, just one of his many Final Four runs should have resulted in a ring at some point. In HD as in many sports, it's a game of inches. And it seems that randomly those close battles always work *against* him, unlike random sh-t luck *favoring* his opponents.

Now HD is just royally hosing him in recruiting.

The advice of "be patient, eventially things will even out in recruiting"... or, "be patient, you'll get that elusive ring some day..." , while well-meaning, has got to be annoying... unless you've been screwed as much as he has, it's easy to say be patient.

Posted by snafu4u on 2/12/2023 9:52:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/11/2023 10:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 2/11/2023 8:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I’ve lost 87.5% of rolls where I had 70% odds to win. How is that possibly a natural consequence?

A string of 16 battles seems significant to us, but the sim processes thousands of battles every season, in every world. Many of us who have played a bit have gone through such stretches with teams - I've gone through 2 myself, 3 if you count my experience in beta for 3.0 - and know they (generally) work themselves out eventually. That's not to say these rolls are all 100% straight RNG. I don't think they are. I think there's probably a luck modifier that attaches to coaches and/or programs and moves up and down and affects both recruiting and games. But that's controversial and kind of a separate issue.

What I mean by natural consequence is that when you are recruiting guys you know you will end up in battles for, of course you will lose some of those battles. That will flow up and down, and you can't really control that. What you can control is what you're prepared to deal with. So sustained success becomes a matter of how well you are preparing your team for those losses. If you only recruit those guys, you have to be prepared to play very tall some years, relying on only a few players, rather than depth. Another option, though, is to be recruiting 4 year backups and role players to go along with the elites, not just as emergency options, but as low-cost replacements for the losses you'll inevitably take. Guys you don't mind cutting if recruiting goes miraculously well for you next season (which also happens sometimes).

Have you looked at my roster? I’m not only targeting 5* recruits. You make a lot of confidently incorrect assumptions.

who could've imagined lol

Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I'd just like to point out this is an argument that was had multiple times that each division's recruits should be locked to their division. If you want to make the argument a D1 can pull up, I can understand, but DIIs should not be able to successfully recruit D1 recruits and should prefer a low end sim team or juco route. If your argument is a low end DI recruit wasn't good enough to sign to a DI school, then chances are they were improperly labeled a DI recruit or you could even leave it to where only DII sims can recruit those to help them maintain competitive balance.

Posted by npb7768 on 2/12/2023 1:02:00 PM (view original):
I think Snafu's bad recruiting luck is compounded and frustrating because HD has given him insane amounts of bad luck in tons of deep NT runs.

Like, just one of his many Final Four runs should have resulted in a ring at some point. In HD as in many sports, it's a game of inches. And it seems that randomly those close battles always work *against* him, unlike random sh-t luck *favoring* his opponents.

Now HD is just royally hosing him in recruiting.

The advice of "be patient, eventially things will even out in recruiting"... or, "be patient, you'll get that elusive ring some day..." , while well-meaning, has got to be annoying... unless you've been screwed as much as he has, it's easy to say be patient.

True. Better advice might be "don't drive a car, don't even go out of the house" since the entire world seems to be against you.

Posted by CoachSpud on 2/12/2023 5:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 2/12/2023 1:02:00 PM (view original):
I think Snafu's bad recruiting luck is compounded and frustrating because HD has given him insane amounts of bad luck in tons of deep NT runs.

Like, just one of his many Final Four runs should have resulted in a ring at some point. In HD as in many sports, it's a game of inches. And it seems that randomly those close battles always work *against* him, unlike random sh-t luck *favoring* his opponents.

Now HD is just royally hosing him in recruiting.

The advice of "be patient, eventially things will even out in recruiting"... or, "be patient, you'll get that elusive ring some day..." , while well-meaning, has got to be annoying... unless you've been screwed as much as he has, it's easy to say be patient.

True. Better advice might be "don't drive a car, don't even go out of the house" since the entire world seems to be against you.

Hey shoe you can just post this on your actual ID and don't need to hide behind your spud account.

Posted by snafu4u on 2/11/2023 8:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/10/2023 5:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by R0pey on 2/9/2023 9:25:00 PM (view original):
Just recruit crappier players so you don't have to battle or lose them to EEs

I don't know if it's in jest or not, but yeah. That's literally how it's supposed to work. I think folks forget or never understood in the first place how rare it is to see college teams in real life with more than 2-3 future NBA players. It's insane to think that a competitive and well-balanced simulation of college basketball would feature teams only recruiting 3* players and better - in other words, likely future NBA players. Part of the game has to be figuring out how many of those elite guys you can afford to go after, and the ones you land need to be a risk for leaving. Lose that, and it's not a good simulation of college basketball.

Now all that said, I'm certainly sympathetic to guys going through long losing streaks, and it's pretty absurd that there's this *enormous* dropoff of talent available after you get through the top tier of un-starred players. There should be a very large pool of replacement level D1 guys, low potential, starting around 650 OVR or so, who will always choose juco over dropping levels; and/or that should pop up as second session only juco players in the first place. This is a no-brainer that would make the game a ton more functional and realistic, and probably stop a lot of rage quitting as well. But the game has to maintain a nice wide window within which teams can reasonably compete with each other for elite recruits.

So I get OP's frustration. I've been there, as I've said. But for coaches only going after the best of the best, these are natural consequences you should have to manage to stay at a high level. I'm critical of many parts of this game, but this is an aspect it generally gets very right, post 3.0.

I’ve lost 87.5% of rolls where I had 70% odds to win. How is that possibly a natural consequence?

I can think of a couple of solutions.
1.) Complain in the forums.
2.) Put a little more into the recruits you want so no other team has a shot at them. You won't lose any 100-0 decisions if you are the 100.

I would not suggest #1. I don't think it would improve your teams much.

Posted by CoachSpud on 2/12/2023 5:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 2/12/2023 1:02:00 PM (view original):
I think Snafu's bad recruiting luck is compounded and frustrating because HD has given him insane amounts of bad luck in tons of deep NT runs.

Like, just one of his many Final Four runs should have resulted in a ring at some point. In HD as in many sports, it's a game of inches. And it seems that randomly those close battles always work *against* him, unlike random sh-t luck *favoring* his opponents.

Now HD is just royally hosing him in recruiting.

The advice of "be patient, eventially things will even out in recruiting"... or, "be patient, you'll get that elusive ring some day..." , while well-meaning, has got to be annoying... unless you've been screwed as much as he has, it's easy to say be patient.

True. Better advice might be "don't drive a car, don't even go out of the house" since the entire world seems to be against you.

Spud = clown :sadface: