I don't object to uncertain results based on probability. I can deal with that. But the high number of maximum home visits as combined with relatively low total per player recruiting budget creates a problem in my opinion. In the absence of being able to determine whether one is going to win a battle, it seems to me the budgets are too low to make up for a lost battle where the participants go all in. On the other hand perhaps committing to 20 home visits is the new spending $50,000.00 on campus visits...if neither coach backs down someone is going to get burned badly.

Posted by snafu4u on 9/30/2016 9:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):
It is NOT a coin flip .. I wish you guys would stop saying that.

A coin flip is 50% / 50% with nothing modifying the possibility.

The person with the most effort gets the highest shot of getting a recruit .. other people who are Very High also have a good chance. People with High have a lower chance. If it boils down to 60% for Team A and 30 % for Team B and 10% for Team C .. based on effort, that is not a freaking coin flip. Any more than a 95 PER / 95 SPD / 95 BH guy might have a 70% chance of hitting a 3 pt shoot while a Center with 3 PER might have a 5% chance is a coin flip. Sometimes the Center hits a 3 point shot ... sometimes the 10% team wins. But most of the time they don't.

We get it .. some of you don't like that. Some of us do. Because, probability works and I like probability. That is why I play the game in the first place.

According to the Dev Chat ... 3% of battle signings went to High teams ... that means 97% when to Very High teams. How the ^&^&% is that a coin flip?

The 3% stat was an eye-roller for me.

There are two possibilities there:
1) The 3% number is not accurate.
2) The 3% number is accurate, in which case it's such a remote possibility for a high to win that they shouldn't even be bothering allowing it. It'll always feel like a bug.

Anecdotally from other worlds and glancing through Tarks top 100 signings it is more like 50/50 or 60/40.....definitely not 97/3.

Lower prestige does mean high instead of very high. What they said was a very high team signed 97 and high signed 3.

Posted by snafu4u on 9/30/2016 9:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):
It is NOT a coin flip .. I wish you guys would stop saying that.

A coin flip is 50% / 50% with nothing modifying the possibility.

The person with the most effort gets the highest shot of getting a recruit .. other people who are Very High also have a good chance. People with High have a lower chance. If it boils down to 60% for Team A and 30 % for Team B and 10% for Team C .. based on effort, that is not a freaking coin flip. Any more than a 95 PER / 95 SPD / 95 BH guy might have a 70% chance of hitting a 3 pt shoot while a Center with 3 PER might have a 5% chance is a coin flip. Sometimes the Center hits a 3 point shot ... sometimes the 10% team wins. But most of the time they don't.

We get it .. some of you don't like that. Some of us do. Because, probability works and I like probability. That is why I play the game in the first place.

According to the Dev Chat ... 3% of battle signings went to High teams ... that means 97% when to Very High teams. How the ^&^&% is that a coin flip?

The 3% stat was an eye-roller for me.

There are two possibilities there:
1) The 3% number is not accurate.
2) The 3% number is accurate, in which case it's such a remote possibility for a high to win that they shouldn't even be bothering allowing it. It'll always feel like a bug.

Anecdotally from other worlds and glancing through Tarks top 100 signings it is more like 50/50 or 60/40.....definitely not 97/3.

I don't know what the 3% figure means exactly, but what I interpret is them saying a recruit has gone to a "high" considering team when there was one or more "very high" considering teams competing for him. Put that way, it makes sense. It's not saying that of all the 1-on-1 battles between high and very high, high wins only 3% of the time. I would imagine most battles come down to very high signing players that weren't battled over, and VH vs VH (vsVH) battles where all combatants were relatively close. If those signings are part of that 97%, then the figure is probably accurate, and unsurprising.

Posted by tarvolon on 9/30/2016 11:25:00 AM (view original):
IIRC, the drop of the lesser team to moderate is closer to 60/40 than to 70/30. I think that seble explicitly said in the beta forum that a 65/35 battle would have the 35 team at moderate.

I don't have any problem with the randomness in signings. I actually think it is a positive addition to the game. I do think APs are massively overweighted right now. I'd love to see that as a question in the DevChat. Has anyone asked it yet?

Moderate teams have a zero percent chance if someone is very high.

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 9:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 9/30/2016 9:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):
It is NOT a coin flip .. I wish you guys would stop saying that.

A coin flip is 50% / 50% with nothing modifying the possibility.

The person with the most effort gets the highest shot of getting a recruit .. other people who are Very High also have a good chance. People with High have a lower chance. If it boils down to 60% for Team A and 30 % for Team B and 10% for Team C .. based on effort, that is not a freaking coin flip. Any more than a 95 PER / 95 SPD / 95 BH guy might have a 70% chance of hitting a 3 pt shoot while a Center with 3 PER might have a 5% chance is a coin flip. Sometimes the Center hits a 3 point shot ... sometimes the 10% team wins. But most of the time they don't.

We get it .. some of you don't like that. Some of us do. Because, probability works and I like probability. That is why I play the game in the first place.

According to the Dev Chat ... 3% of battle signings went to High teams ... that means 97% when to Very High teams. How the ^&^&% is that a coin flip?

The 3% stat was an eye-roller for me.

There are two possibilities there:
1) The 3% number is not accurate.
2) The 3% number is accurate, in which case it's such a remote possibility for a high to win that they shouldn't even be bothering allowing it. It'll always feel like a bug.

Anecdotally from other worlds and glancing through Tarks top 100 signings it is more like 50/50 or 60/40.....definitely not 97/3.

Lower prestige does mean high instead of very high. What they said was a very high team signed 97 and high signed 3.

Right. In a given sample of 100 signings, 3 recruits signed with a high when there was a very high battling. 97 recruits signed with very high, or did not have a very high in the mix. Perhaps only 15 of those signings resulted from a battle featuring a high taking a recruit from one or more very highs.

Posted by vandydave on 9/30/2016 7:49:00 PM (view original):
There is a high probability that I don't like Coin Flip Dynasty.

That post probably made sense in your mind when you typed it.

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):
It is NOT a coin flip .. I wish you guys would stop saying that.

A coin flip is 50% / 50% with nothing modifying the possibility.

The person with the most effort gets the highest shot of getting a recruit .. other people who are Very High also have a good chance. People with High have a lower chance. If it boils down to 60% for Team A and 30 % for Team B and 10% for Team C .. based on effort, that is not a freaking coin flip. Any more than a 95 PER / 95 SPD / 95 BH guy might have a 70% chance of hitting a 3 pt shoot while a Center with 3 PER might have a 5% chance is a coin flip. Sometimes the Center hits a 3 point shot ... sometimes the 10% team wins. But most of the time they don't.

We get it .. some of you don't like that. Some of us do. Because, probability works and I like probability. That is why I play the game in the first place.

According to the Dev Chat ... 3% of battle signings went to High teams ... that means 97% when to Very High teams. How the ^&^&% is that a coin flip?

I hope people read this post over and over and learn from it. Calling the game a coin flip just makes it sound like you don't understand the game but do understand a coin flip, which requires maybe 20 or 30 IQ points. You are influencing the outcome of every action in the game, totally unlike a coin flip, over which you have no influence at all. So I'm with hughesjr on this one -- let's discuss the game like it is.

I feel like if someone could explain the difference between probabilities and a coin flip that all the upset coaches would return and HD would start thriving. Because I think the big issue is that a lot of coaches are leaving because they think someone at wis is actually flipping a real coin to resolve each recruiting battle.

Posted by vandydave on 10/1/2016 1:22:00 AM (view original):
I feel like if someone could explain the difference between probabilities and a coin flip that all the upset coaches would return and HD would start thriving. Because I think the big issue is that a lot of coaches are leaving because they think someone at wis is actually flipping a real coin to resolve each recruiting battle.

Since the 3.0 launch I've been flipping a coin hundreds of times a day to practice my HD recruiting strategy.

It's a Pocahantas $1 coin in case anyone would like to copy my method. I've worked my way up to about a 50% success rate.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/1/2016 1:35:00 AM (view original):

Posted by vandydave on 10/1/2016 1:22:00 AM (view original):
I feel like if someone could explain the difference between probabilities and a coin flip that all the upset coaches would return and HD would start thriving. Because I think the big issue is that a lot of coaches are leaving because they think someone at wis is actually flipping a real coin to resolve each recruiting battle.

Since the 3.0 launch I've been flipping a coin hundreds of times a day to practice my HD recruiting strategy.

It's a Pocahantas $1 coin in case anyone would like to copy my method. I've worked my way up to about a 50% success rate.

Because you influenced which coin you are using by choosing the Pocahontas coin it's no longer a coin flip now. I wish people could understand this.

Posted by kobo on 9/30/2016 9:05:00 PM (view original):
I don't object to uncertain results based on probability. I can deal with that. But the high number of maximum home visits as combined with relatively low total per player recruiting budget creates a problem in my opinion. In the absence of being able to determine whether one is going to win a battle, it seems to me the budgets are too low to make up for a lost battle where the participants go all in. On the other hand perhaps committing to 20 home visits is the new spending $50,000.00 on campus visits...if neither coach backs down someone is going to get burned badly.

Note that you essentially have some 'free budget' now in attention points so the number listed is not your actual full budget.

Posted by vandydave on 10/1/2016 1:22:00 AM (view original):
I feel like if someone could explain the difference between probabilities and a coin flip that all the upset coaches would return and HD would start thriving. Because I think the big issue is that a lot of coaches are leaving because they think someone at wis is actually flipping a real coin to resolve each recruiting battle.

Coin flip implies the process is mostly random when in reality you know it isn't mostly random. There is not a bipolar existence of completely deterministic and completely random. Something isn't 'just random' because you don't automatically win if you have even one dollar worth more of recruiting effort.

Posted by jpmills3 on 9/30/2016 10:52:00 AM (view original):
This is pricelesly the issue with the randomness element. Awful. Takes away skill.

Poker has a randomness element a fairly large one. Does that take away skill? Are some poker players more skilled than others? Skill is about putting yourself consistently in positions where the odds are in your favour. Occasionally you will lose even some of the situations where the odds are in your favour but overall you will win.

Posted by rogelio on 9/30/2016 10:52:00 AM (view original):
It's both. You are substantially undervaluing the weight given to AP. They are outrageously overweighted and not scaled appropriately by Division or prestige. What was each school at the time of signing, both VH or VH & H?

The second part is, from the analysis provided in the Beta Forums of a few battles, even a VH v. H battle gave fairly significant odds to the H school. Admin was not terribly clear on how the cutoffs and odds worked, but I suspect that anything worse than 70/30 would put the lower team down to "moderate" and they would be removed from the RNG completely (even the the calculation without the thresholds would give them some chance). In other words, my sense is that a VH v. H spread would be about a 70/30 probability, which I view as very significant odds for the lower considered team.

The preferences clearly help unlock actions earlier and they act as some multiplier on effort. Given the lack of tourney cash and the fact that nothing was done with prestige, Prestige (both team and conference) is effectively nerfed...even though WIS can honestly state that "prestige was not changed". In the end, however, with two schools with that prestige and from BCS conferences, I would think admin would tell you that it is functioning as intended and, if they chose to be honest, that result was probably a virtual coin-flip (somewhere around 55/45 or so). So, you cannot make much out of it.

To me, the success or failure of the game depends on admin realizing that the overall structure of the recruiting game is ok, but the weight of all these factors and the resulting thresholds and probabilities are screwed up.

So what stockpile of data are you basing your '55/45' probability on?

Posted by pkoopman on 9/30/2016 9:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 9:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 9/30/2016 9:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 9/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):
It is NOT a coin flip .. I wish you guys would stop saying that.

A coin flip is 50% / 50% with nothing modifying the possibility.

The person with the most effort gets the highest shot of getting a recruit .. other people who are Very High also have a good chance. People with High have a lower chance. If it boils down to 60% for Team A and 30 % for Team B and 10% for Team C .. based on effort, that is not a freaking coin flip. Any more than a 95 PER / 95 SPD / 95 BH guy might have a 70% chance of hitting a 3 pt shoot while a Center with 3 PER might have a 5% chance is a coin flip. Sometimes the Center hits a 3 point shot ... sometimes the 10% team wins. But most of the time they don't.

We get it .. some of you don't like that. Some of us do. Because, probability works and I like probability. That is why I play the game in the first place.

According to the Dev Chat ... 3% of battle signings went to High teams ... that means 97% when to Very High teams. How the ^&^&% is that a coin flip?

The 3% stat was an eye-roller for me.

There are two possibilities there:
1) The 3% number is not accurate.
2) The 3% number is accurate, in which case it's such a remote possibility for a high to win that they shouldn't even be bothering allowing it. It'll always feel like a bug.

Anecdotally from other worlds and glancing through Tarks top 100 signings it is more like 50/50 or 60/40.....definitely not 97/3.

Lower prestige does mean high instead of very high. What they said was a very high team signed 97 and high signed 3.

Right. In a given sample of 100 signings, 3 recruits signed with a high when there was a very high battling. 97 recruits signed with very high, or did not have a very high in the mix. Perhaps only 15 of those signings resulted from a battle featuring a high taking a recruit from one or more very highs.

I just lost in Tark as Very high to High you can add that to the totals.
B+ Very HIgh Iowa
vs
A+ High Kansas


i also won in the beta as HIgh vs Very high about the same scenario i dont have any numbers to back it up but id say based on experience its higher than 3 out of 100 chance..