Posted by hughesjr on 9/26/2016 2:50:00 PM (view original):

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.

And with anything near equal recruiting effort they DO win every time. That's not what this case is about, though.

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.

I sent a more general question about D1 prestige. I think the defanging of prestige is the biggest problem in 3.0 right now.

Posted by CoachSpud on 9/26/2016 3:16:00 PM (view original):
"Skimming through the discussion here, so forgive me if I missed it, but when we say Penn State gave "max effort" does that mean Penn State was on the recruit right from the start? If they were on the recruit from the start, then I'd have to agree that it seems to be a pretty unlikely outcome."

Bingo! Penn State was NOT on the recruit from the start, and only gradually built up interest in him, stopping first at Very Low, then Low, then Moderate, then High, then back and forth between High and very High on separate turns. The recruit was Penn State's for the taking, and they didn't get on the stick until it was too late. That failing is NOT a failing of the game.

Originally, part of the 3.0 vision was coaches didn't have to get started recruiting immediately at the pistol, and didn't have to be on a computer every cycle to recruit effectively. It's a shame that piece of the vision died so fast.

Posted by CoachSpud on 9/26/2016 3:05:00 PM (view original):

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.

The only valid discussion on this, IMO, is whether the big 6 team knocks down D2 max effort to moderate with scholarship alone, or if it takes a little recruiting effort. I can see both sides. But I think Tarv's suggestion is about right - put the highest D2 prestige level modifier somewhere below the lowest D1 prestige level modifier.

There's no reasonable expectation for a D2 team to be able to successfully recruit a top 100 player that any big 6 team is interested in. There doesn't have to be any chance of such an outlier result, just as there doesn't have to be any chance that the engine generates a flying pink unicorn to recruit.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/26/2016 3:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 9/26/2016 3:16:00 PM (view original):
"Skimming through the discussion here, so forgive me if I missed it, but when we say Penn State gave "max effort" does that mean Penn State was on the recruit right from the start? If they were on the recruit from the start, then I'd have to agree that it seems to be a pretty unlikely outcome."

Bingo! Penn State was NOT on the recruit from the start, and only gradually built up interest in him, stopping first at Very Low, then Low, then Moderate, then High, then back and forth between High and very High on separate turns. The recruit was Penn State's for the taking, and they didn't get on the stick until it was too late. That failing is NOT a failing of the game.

Originally, part of the 3.0 vision was coaches didn't have to get started recruiting immediately at the pistol, and didn't have to be on a computer every cycle to recruit effectively. It's a shame that piece of the vision died so fast.

The second part of that vision is still alive and well.

The first part died, although extending cycle #1 from two to nine hours was quite nice.

Posted by Benis on 9/26/2016 3:13:00 PM (view original):
"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?

This has been his unfounded assertion since the beginning of the beta when he began. Haven't you heard that if you repeat a falsehood enough times that it becomes true?

What is an "outlier"? My dictionary says (close I assume to the idea) : 3 : a statistical observation that is markedly different in value from the others of the sample.
What sample? How long were these Samples taken to judge one is an "Outlier"? This is how the game-program is now written. It is not, and will not be an 'exception'. It is the new rules.
Simple fact. Some love playing-paying for a game they have not a clue on how it is constructed. ok

Still , it will kill the game. Fix this. Home runs nt winners in d2, d1 a total unrealistic mess

I don't think it will kill anything, but it will be irritating, and make D2 and D1 rebuilds less fun than they should be.

Whoa, Nellie! The hysteria is mounting to deafening proportions! Settle down, folks. The earth is still going to spin in the same direction tomorrow. To be frank, none of this is even news to anyone who paid attention to the beta and the beta forums – none of it.

We all knew that Very High teams did not all have the same probabilities of winning a recruit. We all knew that if there were a Very High team or teams and a High team or teams that the Very High teams had the greatest chance of landing the recruit, and the chance of a High team landing a recruit was small but still greater than zero. I reiterate, this is not news.

And that is all that happened.

A D2 team went all in almost from the start on a recruit. A D1 team eventually went after the same recruit, casually at first, then toward the end of the process more seriously. We’ve all known that getting in your recruiting effort early has certain advantages. For example, getting promises unlocked and making promises that are significant to the recruit gives a better Preference profile, making your AP’s more powerful from that time forward. I reiterate, this is not news.

And there is nothing wrong with any of that.

Someone called this recruiting case “the ultimate high-risk, high-reward scenario,” and I agree. It is rewarded but rarely, but it isn’t flat out impossible.

And that is as it should be.

Wishing that the world worked according to how you think it should work is okay. Thinking that the world can be made to work the way you want it to merely by expressing your “shoulds” is a complete misunderstanding of how the world works. This is true no matter how strident your expressions are. HD is no different. I think and hope that Seble is smart enough to address the game on its merits, as he seems to have mostly done all along.

BTW, just to correct a glaring bit of misinformation above, “Regis had 1 preference (close to home) and maybe defense, but that was it”, Regis was +4 on Preferences, Very Good on Wants to Play and Defense, Good on Near Home and Bad on Wants Rebuild. That mistaken assessment by Penn State’s coach may have contributed to his under-estimating the situation.

"There's no reasonable expectation for a D2 team to be able to successfully recruit a top 100 player that any big 6 team is interested in."

Really? What do you want, D1: ”I’m interested, he’s mine.” Or D1: “I recruited him through legitimate effort, he’s mine.” The former is nothing more or less than a sense of entitlement on steroids. Granted, that characterization fits most of the wailing, but is that really you, too?

Posted by CoachSpud on 9/26/2016 8:30:00 PM (view original):
"There's no reasonable expectation for a D2 team to be able to successfully recruit a top 100 player that any big 6 team is interested in."

Really? What do you want, D1:”I’m interested, he’s mine.” Or D1: “I recruited him through legitimate effort, he’s mine.” The former is nothing more or less than a sense of entitlement on steroids. Granted, that characterization fits most of the wailing, but is that really you, too?

Troll. 1540 AP - 20 HV - 1 CV - 1 Start - 15 minutes. Please identify exactly how much you put in. State it exactly.

There is no considering credit. The only difference being on the recruit early would gain you is having more AP. You've refused to be forthcoming. I would prefer a screen grab.

I have always stated that there is a reasonable way to make the changes in recruiting function properly. In a full world, PSU would not have been able to win that recruit, but the loss would have been to Utah or Colorado or Stanford. Not being able to take out a D2 team renders the game unplayable. It should be relatively easy to adjust the effort credit assigned to such effort between D2/D3 & D1 to fix this issue. I expect that WIS will agree with me.

Posted by rogelio on 9/26/2016 9:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 9/26/2016 8:30:00 PM (view original):
"There's no reasonable expectation for a D2 team to be able to successfully recruit a top 100 player that any big 6 team is interested in."

Really? What do you want, D1:”I’m interested, he’s mine.” Or D1: “I recruited him through legitimate effort, he’s mine.” The former is nothing more or less than a sense of entitlement on steroids. Granted, that characterization fits most of the wailing, but is that really you, too?

Troll. 1540 AP - 20 HV - 1 CV - 1 Start - 15 minutes. Please identify exactly how much you put in. State it exactly.

There is no considering credit. The only difference being on the recruit early would gain you is having more AP. You've refused to be forthcoming. I would prefer a screen grab.

I have always stated that there is a reasonable way to make the changes in recruiting function properly. In a full world, PSU would not have been able to win that recruit, but the loss would have been to Utah or Colorado or Stanford. Not being able to take out a D2 team renders the game unplayable. It should be relatively easy to adjust the effort credit assigned to such effort between D2/D3 & D1 to fix this issue. I expect that WIS will agree with me.

I have tried not to embarrass you unnecessarily, but you keep asking for it. (1) I have already listed my recruiting effort. Read it. (2) They don't call it "considering credit" any more, but the better your Preference edge, the more powerful your AP's are. So getting the recruit unlocked and getting the promises in makes your AP's more powerful early on. That is not news to anyone who paid attention to the beta. (3) The recruit was there for the taking if you had understood the competition. Had you bothered to push me down to Moderate, as you certainly could have done, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. (4) "Not being able to take out a D2 team renders the game unplayable." What BS. You were totally able to take that recruit and didn't recruit him skillfully enough. Penn State's failure to sign the recruit was not a failure of the game.

You just got spudded.