There shouldn't be any arguing about this scenario. A four star player, FOUR star, not diamond in the rough, not unranked low rated prospect, would never, EVER, choose a D2 school over a D1 BCS school (and despite your attempts at explanation Hughes, BCS or not DOES make a difference) who is offering the kid a start. Everyone here wants to scream "realism, realism" and then when a case like this arises, that is clearly not realistic, it suddenly becomes "well things like this, uhh, should, ummm, kinda maybe should, umm happen sometimes so the small, umm schools have a chance". Make up your mind people, realism or not. Because in "real life" that signing never happens.

If this is any indication of what the game has become then I'll be the one to get banned for saying it, "Someone took something that wasn't broke and didn't need fixing, and broke it without fixing it. Unfortunately this is par for the course when certain specific site staff get involved. There were plenty of other areas of the game that could have used an update besides recruiting but a certain site staff got head strong, bull headed, stubborn, and attempted to tackle an update that was clearly out of their skill range".

'Twas a fine game years ago, now it's just turned into a puddle of shite.

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/26/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):
There shouldn't be any arguing about this scenario. A four star player, FOUR star, not diamond in the rough, not unranked low rated prospect, would never, EVER, choose a D2 school over a D1 BCS school (and despite your attempts at explanation Hughes, BCS or not DOES make a difference) who is offering the kid a start. Everyone here wants to scream "realism, realism" and then when a case like this arises, that is clearly not realistic, it suddenly becomes "well things like this, uhh, should, ummm, kinda maybe should, umm happen sometimes so the small, umm schools have a chance". Make up your mind people, realism or not. Because in "real life" that signing never happens.

If this is any indication of what the game has become then I'll be the one to get banned for saying it, "Someone took something that wasn't broke and didn't need fixing, and broke it without fixing it. Unfortunately this is par for the course when certain specific site staff get involved. There were plenty of other areas of the game that could have used an update besides recruiting but a certain site staff got head strong, bull headed, stubborn, and attempted to tackle an update that was clearly out of their skill range".

'Twas a fine game years ago, now it's just turned into a puddle of shite.

Honestly, a four-star kid shouldn't be going to a D+ prestige D1 school unless he's not nearly as good as his star rating.

And unless the kid had a preference for conference prestige, there is no mechanism in the game by which to make BCS vs non-BCS matter. It matters for baseline prestige, making it unlikely that BCS schools get to D+ in the first place, but other than that, no.

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/26/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):
There shouldn't be any arguing about this scenario. A four star player, FOUR star, not diamond in the rough, not unranked low rated prospect, would never, EVER, choose a D2 school over a D1 BCS school (and despite your attempts at explanation Hughes, BCS or not DOES make a difference) who is offering the kid a start. Everyone here wants to scream "realism, realism" and then when a case like this arises, that is clearly not realistic, it suddenly becomes "well things like this, uhh, should, ummm, kinda maybe should, umm happen sometimes so the small, umm schools have a chance". Make up your mind people, realism or not. Because in "real life" that signing never happens.

If this is any indication of what the game has become then I'll be the one to get banned for saying it, "Someone took something that wasn't broke and didn't need fixing, and broke it without fixing it. Unfortunately this is par for the course when certain specific site staff get involved. There were plenty of other areas of the game that could have used an update besides recruiting but a certain site staff got head strong, bull headed, stubborn, and attempted to tackle an update that was clearly out of their skill range".

'Twas a fine game years ago, now it's just turned into a puddle of shite.

dcy ... except BCS does not make a difference in THIS GAME.

D+ Div-1 is D+ Div-1 regardless of the conference they play in.

So if Cleveland State is a B+ and Penn State is a C- .. then Cleveland State is the better team. (From the recruits perspective)

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with it .. just stating the facts. There is no BCS prestige boost or recruiting boost. If you (or others) want one, fine.

WRT where you make teams EQUAL .. (D- Div and A Div-2 ... etc.) , that is also for open for discussion. I am not saying I know where that EQUAL spot should be, just redirecting the conversation in WIS HD terms, so we are talking about the correct topic, which is, at what Prestige Level does a D2 prestige and a D1 prestige have equal recruiting value.

Appreciate the conversation redirect, hughes. It's good to start talking in concrete, WIS terms instead of "something must happen to make this match reality."

IMO, what needs to happen is this:

(1) D1 Prestige needs to be as big a multiplier as in the old game (I have strong reason to doubt that this is the case with 3.0 as we stand now)
(2) A+ D2 should be treated as somewhere between 1/3 and 1 letter grade below D- D1.

I think these two things knock Regis down to moderate in this example, but without just making it impossible for D2 schools to compete with low D1 schools by fiat.

Hughes, it's fixable through Division scaling on AP credit; conference prestige; and the fact that no Top #10 position player is going D2. Top 100 players, since they do not need to be discovered, should be rejecting effort from D2 & D3 teams. Period. No excuse. The signing never happens. That fits in the structure of the new game.

Here's the thing: Regis was on 1st, but the final AP tally sounds like 1540 to 1925 (according to spud); 20 HV + 1 CV each; a start either way and 15 minutes promised to 20. Regis had 1 preference (close to home) and maybe defense, but that was it. In a straight race for a Top 10 position recruit, a Big6 team needs to be able to put away any D2 team or this game doesn't work.

If that battle plays out in regular HD, then I assume Wyoming or Colorado or AZ St. or someone will jump in and take the lead over PSU. No problem. Choosing playing D2 ball over playing BigTen is just stupid.

Posted by rogelio on 9/26/2016 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Hughes, it's fixable through Division scaling on AP credit; conference prestige; and the fact that no Top #10 position player is going D2. Top 100 players, since they do not need to be discovered, should be rejecting effort from D2 & D3 teams. Period. No excuse. The signing never happens. That fits in the structure of the new game.

Here's the thing: Regis was on 1st, but the final AP tally sounds like 1540 to 1925 (according to spud); 20 HV + 1 CV each; a start either way and 15 minutes promised to 20. Regis had 1 preference (close to home) and maybe defense, but that was it. In a straight race for a Top 10 position recruit, a Big6 team needs to be able to put away any D2 team or this game doesn't work.

If that battle plays out in regular HD, then I assume Wyoming or Colorado or AZ St. or someone will jump in and take the lead over PSU. No problem. Choosing playing D2 ball over playing BigTen is just stupid.

I do agree that Big Ten should win every time against D2 .. certainly with anything near equal credit.

IMO Here is the disconnect that Seble missed.

Old HD you didn't need a huge difference in "prestige" between DI and DII because DI got 3x the budget per scholarship. If a DII team could spend as much as DI they could pull it off.

Not true in 3.0. The recruiting budgets are pretty close, so he SHOULD have given the upper divisions a bigger boots to offset the loss in $$ advantage.

Posted by mullycj on 9/26/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):
IMO Here is the disconnect that Seble missed.

Old HD you didn't need a huge difference in "prestige" between DI and DII because DI got 3x the budget per scholarship. If a DII team could spend as much as DI they could pull it off.

Not true in 3.0. The recruiting budgets are pretty close, so he SHOULD have given the upper divisions a bigger boots to offset the loss in $$ advantage.

And money doesn't really matter anyway since you're capped at 20 HVs. Attention points are so much more powerful.

Posted by Benis on 9/26/2016 2:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/26/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):
IMO Here is the disconnect that Seble missed.

Old HD you didn't need a huge difference in "prestige" between DI and DII because DI got 3x the budget per scholarship. If a DII team could spend as much as DI they could pull it off.

Not true in 3.0. The recruiting budgets are pretty close, so he SHOULD have given the upper divisions a bigger boots to offset the loss in $$ advantage.

And money doesn't really matter anyway since you're capped at 20 HVs. Attention points are so much more powerful.

Exactly. Which is why it is absolutely vital to give a prestige advantage some real teeth.

Would be great if WIS site staff would weigh in here, at least to tell us if this was a bug or a by-design result, and if adjustments will be made based on the complete silliness of the result.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/26/2016 10:51:00 AM (view original):
I agree with the majority here. A D2 should never beat anything but a very low D1 - and that excludes all Big 6 schools regardless of prestige, IMO. D2 can have access to that kind of player, if passed on by Big 6 teams. But pretty much any serious effort - early or late, as long as it's before the player signs - should put that D2 back behind the red light.

Disagree. That is exactly the prestige imbalance Seble is trying to remedy, and with good reason. There has to be at least a small chance of an outlier result like this when an A prestige D2 maxes and a D+ or even C prestige D1 does not max. Rogelio could have had this recruit, and nothing in the game prevented him from getting him. Maybe nine out of ten times he would have gotten him even without maxing, but that tenth time represents important new life in this game.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/26/2016 3:02:00 PM (view original):
Would be great if WIS site staff would weigh in here, at least to tell us if this was a bug or a by-design result, and if adjustments will be made based on the complete silliness of the result.

Send a ticket and/or participate in dev chat tomorrow. I've sent in a question on this issue, if many do it can't be missed.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/26/2016 3:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/26/2016 3:02:00 PM (view original):
Would be great if WIS site staff would weigh in here, at least to tell us if this was a bug or a by-design result, and if adjustments will be made based on the complete silliness of the result.

Send a ticket and/or participate in dev chat tomorrow. I've sent in a question on this issue, if many do it can't be missed.

Site staff often lurk on these boards.

I'd hate to see the dev chat tomorrow be unduly focused this single, rather significant bit of evidence of how the new game works. Addressing it in front of the chat strikes me as efficient.

"There has to be at least a small chance of an outlier result like this"

Why? I disagree.

edit- and where did he say that this was EXACTLY what he was trying to do? Where D2 teams would beat D1 teams. Can you link to this?