Understanding 3.0 Recruiting, Poaching? Topic

Sometimes the 10% team wins.. And sometimes it will be you. Sometimes it will be your opponent. That's how it goes.

Plan for it.. And use it for times, like when you have an EE.
10/6/2016 8:35 PM
Need help understanding the timing of signings:

Have a player who has been very high for me since before signings began three cycles ago. No other school has been above low since two cycles before signings. His preference is to sign by end of period 1, and most of his other preferences are well suited to my school. Is this common for players with a much higher considering ranking for one school to not sign right away? Strikes me as odd if I'm way in the lead, and still putting in effort (both AP and visits) that he doesn't sign on first available signing cycle.

Also - with the higher impact of promised starts/minutes - do ineligibles accept those promises? If you make that promise and the player stays ineligible, just he still balk and transfer? And do we still get the occasional emails that say what the knucklehead scored on his latest SAT to see if he becomes eligible?
10/7/2016 11:42 AM (edited)
Welcome to 3.0
Something else in Seble's bag of tricks for us. We complained about his whole signing timing logic but to no avail. (good riddance again)

He will sign at the end of period 1.....unless you get poached between now and then.
10/7/2016 11:43 AM
Ya'll can talk about RNG all you want, but when you stick a lot of effort into a guy and when you feel that you are mathematically leading all other schools and then you get beat out by random number, it really sucks. Recruiting budgets are already very thin, it can screw up your entire recruiting season and it takes fun OUT of the game. Call me a complainer/whiner/*****/whatever, it's ludicrous and you can put that on the mother effing board!!!!
10/7/2016 12:13 PM
Posted by treyomo on 10/7/2016 11:42:00 AM (view original):
Need help understanding the timing of signings:

Have a player who has been very high for me since before signings began three cycles ago. No other school has been above low since two cycles before signings. His preference is to sign by end of period 1, and most of his other preferences are well suited to my school. Is this common for players with a much higher considering ranking for one school to not sign right away? Strikes me as odd if I'm way in the lead, and still putting in effort (both AP and visits) that he doesn't sign on first available signing cycle.

Also - with the higher impact of promised starts/minutes - do ineligibles accept those promises? If you make that promise and the player stays ineligible, just he still balk and transfer? And do we still get the occasional emails that say what the knucklehead scored on his latest SAT to see if he becomes eligible?
Like much of 3.0, it takes an adaptation of mindset. The previous version conditioned us to expect that once signings start, if I'm the only one he's considering, he's mine. That setup is just gone. I could be wrong, but I think even "early" guys may wait a few cycles. It makes intuitive sense, if you think about it. "By end of period 1" means he wants to sign in the first session if an appropriate level team shows enough interest, but he may see what comes along early. You can always keep tabs on what other humans are doing from the considering tab, and if no one else offers a scholarship, you are still safe. If someone does offer a scholarship, assume he's coming after you, and you can put in more effort, if you have it.

I'm not sure what happens to ineligibles' promises if they show up to campus ineligible. I do know you still get those SAT emails, but I think it has to be a recruit you have flagged with one of the color dots.
10/7/2016 12:14 PM
Posted by wansingk on 10/7/2016 12:13:00 PM (view original):
Ya'll can talk about RNG all you want, but when you stick a lot of effort into a guy and when you feel that you are mathematically leading all other schools and then you get beat out by random number, it really sucks. Recruiting budgets are already very thin, it can screw up your entire recruiting season and it takes fun OUT of the game. Call me a complainer/whiner/*****/whatever, it's ludicrous and you can put that on the mother effing board!!!!
Yeah, I get that. I've been very fortunate to come out on the right side of the RNG in the three pitched battles I've faced so far (I think I might've been leading in all three, but still, that doesn't mean everything).

That said, I do think it's better for the game to have it this way. if you know that having 49.9% of the effort will lose you a battle, it highly discourages battles. And more battling is good for the game.
10/7/2016 12:16 PM
Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 10:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 9/30/2016 9:46:00 PM (view original):
As I said in another thread...

100 recruits
3 sign with "high" in a battle with one or more "very highs"
97 sign with very highs, or had no teams reach very high consideration.

This is the only way the 3% figure makes sense with what we know. This fits anecdotally with my experience in beta, where only 3 of the 15 rolls I've gone to featured a high battling a very high (I did happen to win one of those battles as the "high").
Minor clarification, all 100 had to have VHs in consideration based on the quote from the dev chat:

"3% have gone with a High interest team over a Very High interest."
couldn't you read that as, that is 3% of all recruits, overall?
10/7/2016 7:36 PM
Posted by pkoopman on 10/1/2016 12:24:00 AM (view original):
Posted by kcsundevil on 9/30/2016 10:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pkoopman on 9/30/2016 9:46:00 PM (view original):
As I said in another thread...

100 recruits
3 sign with "high" in a battle with one or more "very highs"
97 sign with very highs, or had no teams reach very high consideration.

This is the only way the 3% figure makes sense with what we know. This fits anecdotally with my experience in beta, where only 3 of the 15 rolls I've gone to featured a high battling a very high (I did happen to win one of those battles as the "high").
Minor clarification, all 100 had to have VHs in consideration based on the quote from the dev chat:

"3% have gone with a High interest team over a Very High interest."
I know at first glance it looks like they're saying highs have a 3% win rate against very highs. But that's not what they said. Go back another sentence for full context:

"Only a couple worlds have begun to recruit but thus far a majority of the signed recruits have gone with the team that had the most interest as expected. Only 3% have gone with a High interest team over a Very High interest." (emphasis mine, obviously)

They aren't saying highs have a 3% win percentage over very highs. I suspect that's actually between 20 and 30%, and I don't expect them to disclose that figure, nor the target figure they have in mind; they probably would have done it already if they intended to. They're saying of the set of signed recruits, a majority go with the team with most interest (% not disclosed) and a subset of only 3% includes recruits that chose high over very high. It's not a win rate, it's a percentage of the overall signees that chose high over very high. The point being, while those upsets understandably get a lot of attention, they represent a very small number of overall recruits, because most signings don't involve a battle between high and very high.
oh yeah, this is almost definitely correct, nice job pkoopman.
10/7/2016 7:37 PM
There is one part that is hard to quantify as well. Seble got complaints about poaching and about recruiting momentum, meaning someone is putting in a bigger effort at the end even though you put it a lot of effort in the beginning to get very high. To show that, he shows momentum by moving a team to very high and dropping a very high team to high. He mentioned a few times that does not mean the high team put in less effort overall, just that the very high team is getting the recruits attention. I could find the exact posting but I even remember seeing an example of a battle where the high team actually put in more points worth. This was done so you would know someone is trying to come in late. He repeated over and over for the high team not to be too worried about it and in the end, the total effort is what counts.
10/8/2016 6:37 AM
well, total effort and a rng
10/8/2016 8:45 AM
◂ Prev 1234
Understanding 3.0 Recruiting, Poaching? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.