Banking on that based upon what evidence or research?

I am not sure what you are asking for. Are you asking for why I think they are trying to appeal to new users? If so:

1. The commonly accepted belief that when you make a change, a significant percent of your customers will not like it.
2. The statements admin has made multiple times about making a marketing push after the release.
3. The hundreds of new users that try the game and don't stick around (see last april's spike in owners in Rupp).

What we had was a game that appealed to a very small subset of people (sports fans that like text based games). I think their biggest problem is probably that text based games mostly appeal to Men between the ages of 30-50. These games have:

1. Very few women users
2. Don't appeal to men over 50 very often because they didn't grow up playing video games
3. Are less appealing to men under 30 because of "action" games available on Xbox and systems like that.

For the above, I have no hard evidence just my own personal logic.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/10/2016 9:03:00 PM (view original):
I am not sure what you are asking for. Are you asking for why I think they are trying to appeal to new users? If so:

1. The commonly accepted belief that when you make a change, a significant percent of your customers will not like it.
2. The statements admin has made multiple times about making a marketing push after the release.
3. The hundreds of new users that try the game and don't stick around (see last april's spike in owners in Rupp).

What we had was a game that appealed to a very small subset of people (sports fans that like text based games). I think their biggest problem is probably that text based games mostly appeal to Men between the ages of 30-50. These games have:

1. Very few women users
2. Don't appeal to men over 50 very often because they didn't grow up playing video games
3. Are less appealing to men under 30 because of "action" games available on Xbox and systems like that.

For the above, I have no hard evidence just my own personal logic.

Problem here TJ is that this update doesn't really change the target group other than it is more phone friendly (and that's debatable). The only way to make it more appealing then for a younger group is to make it almost a live action type of game and this is never going to be that. In no way shape or form will they ever target the older audience.

I still have yet to see what about this new game is going to make people more likely to stick. Maybe they pull in a few new people, but for every new person that likes it, what's to say a new person doesn't like it, because they liked the old one better. That is exactly the case with cavs. I spent more time recruiting this last cycle than I'd like to admit, and that's with 4 seasons in the Beta.

I know that our thoughts on this aren't going to change anything and I can quit whenever as I've been told plenty, but I'm just in the camp that in the long run this change is going to do significantly more harm to HD than it will good. Even if the change was good, they screwed up in how they brought it in. I remember the fallout from the last update. We never recovered from that one. I don't see this one being any different.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/10/2016 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 12:17:00 AM (view original):
I think Cavs post is by far one of the most important posts in this entire thread. Cavs is the current target audience. The vets who don't like the update have been told to suck it up and move on if we don't like it, because there is a presumption that the old game could not retain new players. Cavs is the target audience of this update. He is a new player who had a few seasons under HD2 and now has time under HD3 and immediately he is turned off. What this says is that maybe HD3 will not appeal as much to new players. Yes there are some who will like the update, but it just further enforces the point that HD2.0 was not the issue for retention. As may have been saying for years, you can't expect to build a game and not advertise for multiple years. If you don't advertise, you cannot replace those who eventually leave.

The target audience is fans of sports simulation and fantasy sports who are not already playing the game. They have filled worlds before on promotions/giveaways, and after 2 seasons they went straight back to where they were. Advertising that game would have been good money after bad.

If you show this game to 100 random game players, 90 of them won't be interested from the start. Text-based sports simulations is a very niche market. Of the 10 who might give it a chance, you want to retain as many as possible. And some of those 10 still aren't going to like it, just because of their own preferences. As I've said before, players have different preferences on how much ambiguity they can handle, how deterministic they want the game to be. But one constant from the business end is that you don't want a large group of players who have "figured it out" clogging up all the top spots. It's not that you don't want their money (for those who are paying something), but you need to adapt the game to keep ahead of them, or it's taken over by whales.

Nobody has vision or real interest in WIS business plan, except WIS and their employees, so this "mass exodus" speculation is a time and energy waster. It's a fact that every major tech update is met with a certain amount of attrition from people who just don't like the change for whatever reason. You have a right to not like it and voice your displeasure. But this kind of doom and gloom thread about how disastrous it's going to be if this or that subset of customers decide to go away is pretty myopic.

I don't understand what evidence you have to believe this update changes your 10 out of every 100 scenario, especially when you lose a few hundred in the process. People keep harping on this elite players who have "figured it out" clogging the top. Please explain how this update has fixed that issue, other than the fact that there are less people playing the game? There are still going to be elite coaches who dominate and clog the top, there is just less of a population now.

I agree with you poncho. The target audience didn't change.

The one thing they did do that may be attractive to new users is get rid of the hidden tricks like pulldowns, 70 mile rule, international phone calls, high highs and stuff like that. The game is straight forward now which isn't a big deal to us because we knew the cheat codes but it may be more attractive to the new user base.

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 9:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/10/2016 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 12:17:00 AM (view original):
I think Cavs post is by far one of the most important posts in this entire thread. Cavs is the current target audience. The vets who don't like the update have been told to suck it up and move on if we don't like it, because there is a presumption that the old game could not retain new players. Cavs is the target audience of this update. He is a new player who had a few seasons under HD2 and now has time under HD3 and immediately he is turned off. What this says is that maybe HD3 will not appeal as much to new players. Yes there are some who will like the update, but it just further enforces the point that HD2.0 was not the issue for retention. As may have been saying for years, you can't expect to build a game and not advertise for multiple years. If you don't advertise, you cannot replace those who eventually leave.

The target audience is fans of sports simulation and fantasy sports who are not already playing the game. They have filled worlds before on promotions/giveaways, and after 2 seasons they went straight back to where they were. Advertising that game would have been good money after bad.

If you show this game to 100 random game players, 90 of them won't be interested from the start. Text-based sports simulations is a very niche market. Of the 10 who might give it a chance, you want to retain as many as possible. And some of those 10 still aren't going to like it, just because of their own preferences. As I've said before, players have different preferences on how much ambiguity they can handle, how deterministic they want the game to be. But one constant from the business end is that you don't want a large group of players who have "figured it out" clogging up all the top spots. It's not that you don't want their money (for those who are paying something), but you need to adapt the game to keep ahead of them, or it's taken over by whales.

Nobody has vision or real interest in WIS business plan, except WIS and their employees, so this "mass exodus" speculation is a time and energy waster. It's a fact that every major tech update is met with a certain amount of attrition from people who just don't like the change for whatever reason. You have a right to not like it and voice your displeasure. But this kind of doom and gloom thread about how disastrous it's going to be if this or that subset of customers decide to go away is pretty myopic.

I don't understand what evidence you have to believe this update changes your 10 out of every 100 scenario, especially when you lose a few hundred in the process. People keep harping on this elite players who have "figured it out" clogging the top. Please explain how this update has fixed that issue, other than the fact that there are less people playing the game? There are still going to be elite coaches who dominate and clog the top, there is just less of a population now.

This allows for, even promotes battles. This means people don't get an elite recruit for no cash. That is very important. Good players go for max value now. That by itself makes this update worth it to me.

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/10/2016 9:03:00 PM (view original):
I am not sure what you are asking for. Are you asking for why I think they are trying to appeal to new users? If so:

1. The commonly accepted belief that when you make a change, a significant percent of your customers will not like it.
2. The statements admin has made multiple times about making a marketing push after the release.
3. The hundreds of new users that try the game and don't stick around (see last april's spike in owners in Rupp).

What we had was a game that appealed to a very small subset of people (sports fans that like text based games). I think their biggest problem is probably that text based games mostly appeal to Men between the ages of 30-50. These games have:

1. Very few women users
2. Don't appeal to men over 50 very often because they didn't grow up playing video games
3. Are less appealing to men under 30 because of "action" games available on Xbox and systems like that.

For the above, I have no hard evidence just my own personal logic.

Problem here TJ is that this update doesn't really change the target group other than it is more phone friendly (and that's debatable). The only way to make it more appealing then for a younger group is to make it almost a live action type of game and this is never going to be that. In no way shape or form will they ever target the older audience.

I still have yet to see what about this new game is going to make people more likely to stick. Maybe they pull in a few new people, but for every new person that likes it, what's to say a new person doesn't like it, because they liked the old one better. That is exactly the case with cavs. I spent more time recruiting this last cycle than I'd like to admit, and that's with 4 seasons in the Beta.

I know that our thoughts on this aren't going to change anything and I can quit whenever as I've been told plenty, but I'm just in the camp that in the long run this change is going to do significantly more harm to HD than it will good. Even if the change was good, they screwed up in how they brought it in. I remember the fallout from the last update. We never recovered from that one. I don't see this one being any different.

For the most part I agree with poncho's comments - if Trenton's comments are accurate the new game seems to do little to nothing to address the issues he mentions.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/10/2016 9:37:00 PM (view original):
I agree with you poncho. The target audience didn't change.

The one thing they did do that may be attractive to new users is get rid of the hidden tricks like pulldowns, 70 mile rule, international phone calls, high highs and stuff like that. The game is straight forward now which isn't a big deal to us because we knew the cheat codes but it may be more attractive to the new user base.

TJ, I actually have no issues with removing those things. Those are things we learned, but I can understand would be tricky for a new player. If there are any improvements in the new game imo, it is tied to this to a degree. I like that the color coding of H vs VH is differentiated. I was never a fan of pulldowns, although I would much prefer dropdowns to the current wild west free for all (but you can't sign until the 2nd period). I think that actually could create more confusion for a new player, because they are going to get overwhelmed at the studs they see and think they have a shot at the lower divisions, only to blow their cash (just like in the old game) and only have APs and Scholarships to work with.

Posted by hughesjr on 10/10/2016 9:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 9:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/10/2016 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 12:17:00 AM (view original):
I think Cavs post is by far one of the most important posts in this entire thread. Cavs is the current target audience. The vets who don't like the update have been told to suck it up and move on if we don't like it, because there is a presumption that the old game could not retain new players. Cavs is the target audience of this update. He is a new player who had a few seasons under HD2 and now has time under HD3 and immediately he is turned off. What this says is that maybe HD3 will not appeal as much to new players. Yes there are some who will like the update, but it just further enforces the point that HD2.0 was not the issue for retention. As may have been saying for years, you can't expect to build a game and not advertise for multiple years. If you don't advertise, you cannot replace those who eventually leave.

The target audience is fans of sports simulation and fantasy sports who are not already playing the game. They have filled worlds before on promotions/giveaways, and after 2 seasons they went straight back to where they were. Advertising that game would have been good money after bad.

If you show this game to 100 random game players, 90 of them won't be interested from the start. Text-based sports simulations is a very niche market. Of the 10 who might give it a chance, you want to retain as many as possible. And some of those 10 still aren't going to like it, just because of their own preferences. As I've said before, players have different preferences on how much ambiguity they can handle, how deterministic they want the game to be. But one constant from the business end is that you don't want a large group of players who have "figured it out" clogging up all the top spots. It's not that you don't want their money (for those who are paying something), but you need to adapt the game to keep ahead of them, or it's taken over by whales.

Nobody has vision or real interest in WIS business plan, except WIS and their employees, so this "mass exodus" speculation is a time and energy waster. It's a fact that every major tech update is met with a certain amount of attrition from people who just don't like the change for whatever reason. You have a right to not like it and voice your displeasure. But this kind of doom and gloom thread about how disastrous it's going to be if this or that subset of customers decide to go away is pretty myopic.

I don't understand what evidence you have to believe this update changes your 10 out of every 100 scenario, especially when you lose a few hundred in the process. People keep harping on this elite players who have "figured it out" clogging the top. Please explain how this update has fixed that issue, other than the fact that there are less people playing the game? There are still going to be elite coaches who dominate and clog the top, there is just less of a population now.

This allows for, even promotes battles. This means people don't get an elite recruit for no cash. That is very important. Good players go for max value now. That by itself makes this update worth it to me.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't 100% agree. I still think players are eventually going to shy away from battles, to make sure they can fill enough of their class. That's just human nature, once you get burned in battles once or twice. The preferences, will provide some opportunities, but I don't think it adds much to player retention, because they are not going to understand the impacts of things like preferences. TJ just mentioned new players don't understand the tricks us vets learned, but what exactly do we think preferences are going to do to new people? It is exactly the same thing. Some sort of secret, that the vets will grow to understand and the new guys will get frustrated by.

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/11/2016 1:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 10/10/2016 9:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 9:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/10/2016 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/10/2016 12:17:00 AM (view original):
I think Cavs post is by far one of the most important posts in this entire thread. Cavs is the current target audience. The vets who don't like the update have been told to suck it up and move on if we don't like it, because there is a presumption that the old game could not retain new players. Cavs is the target audience of this update. He is a new player who had a few seasons under HD2 and now has time under HD3 and immediately he is turned off. What this says is that maybe HD3 will not appeal as much to new players. Yes there are some who will like the update, but it just further enforces the point that HD2.0 was not the issue for retention. As may have been saying for years, you can't expect to build a game and not advertise for multiple years. If you don't advertise, you cannot replace those who eventually leave.

The target audience is fans of sports simulation and fantasy sports who are not already playing the game. They have filled worlds before on promotions/giveaways, and after 2 seasons they went straight back to where they were. Advertising that game would have been good money after bad.

If you show this game to 100 random game players, 90 of them won't be interested from the start. Text-based sports simulations is a very niche market. Of the 10 who might give it a chance, you want to retain as many as possible. And some of those 10 still aren't going to like it, just because of their own preferences. As I've said before, players have different preferences on how much ambiguity they can handle, how deterministic they want the game to be. But one constant from the business end is that you don't want a large group of players who have "figured it out" clogging up all the top spots. It's not that you don't want their money (for those who are paying something), but you need to adapt the game to keep ahead of them, or it's taken over by whales.

Nobody has vision or real interest in WIS business plan, except WIS and their employees, so this "mass exodus" speculation is a time and energy waster. It's a fact that every major tech update is met with a certain amount of attrition from people who just don't like the change for whatever reason. You have a right to not like it and voice your displeasure. But this kind of doom and gloom thread about how disastrous it's going to be if this or that subset of customers decide to go away is pretty myopic.

I don't understand what evidence you have to believe this update changes your 10 out of every 100 scenario, especially when you lose a few hundred in the process. People keep harping on this elite players who have "figured it out" clogging the top. Please explain how this update has fixed that issue, other than the fact that there are less people playing the game? There are still going to be elite coaches who dominate and clog the top, there is just less of a population now.

This allows for, even promotes battles. This means people don't get an elite recruit for no cash. That is very important. Good players go for max value now. That by itself makes this update worth it to me.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't 100% agree. I still think players are eventually going to shy away from battles, to make sure they can fill enough of their class. That's just human nature, once you get burned in battles once or twice. The preferences, will provide some opportunities, but I don't think it adds much to player retention, because they are not going to understand the impacts of things like preferences. TJ just mentioned new players don't understand the tricks us vets learned, but what exactly do we think preferences are going to do to new people? It is exactly the same thing. Some sort of secret, that the vets will grow to understand and the new guys will get frustrated by.

But people are not going to necessarily shy away from them though. If they see a guy that they have have a 50% chance to sign and no other real options they are going to go all in. At least some will.

I am not frustrated by it at all. I know I can max out effort and have a reasonable 'probability' to sign a recruit. Not every recruit, and not against every team. But if you play the percentages, punch within your Prestige/Division and efficiently scout, you can find decent players. And you can find fall back options.

It's far from perfect, but it is fairly based on probability.

BTW, I have no problem whatsoever with a bit more degrading of the prestige impact between divisions. And I have no problem with them dropping a D-III guy to moderate for any recruit where a D-1 team shows more than just a little effort. If a D-1 team that is higher than D- does any effort and offers a scholarship, I am fine with them winning every time against D-III. And I am fine with 10% more prestige factored into D-1 vs a D-2 team as well.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/10/2016 9:37:00 PM (view original):
I agree with you poncho. The target audience didn't change.

The one thing they did do that may be attractive to new users is get rid of the hidden tricks like pulldowns, 70 mile rule, international phone calls, high highs and stuff like that. The game is straight forward now which isn't a big deal to us because we knew the cheat codes but it may be more attractive to the new user base.

With the new updates, i agree that it is attractive to a new user base like myself for example). For me, I do like the level playing field and the new changes. The ability to scout and recruit during the season is a great addition.

Ive played 2.0 on a previous account a long time ago (couldn't remember account). And after playing one season of 2.0 before now switching to 3.0, i certainly love the change to 3.0.

Posted by ardthomp on 10/4/2016 10:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by oldresorter on 10/4/2016 10:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ardthomp on 10/3/2016 10:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 10/3/2016 5:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ardthomp on 10/3/2016 9:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by oldresorter on 10/3/2016 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ardthomp on 10/3/2016 8:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by oldresorter on 10/3/2016 8:43:00 AM (view original):
last season in wooden d1/d2/d3 - 115/104/85, this season 87/77/60 so far, that is 80 of 304 coaches, pretty close to the 25% number that some predicted. There still are quite a few fence sitters, important to keep them engaged. I recommend to those who like the game to stop trying to belittle those with issues about the update, and to start taking some of the concerns seriously. All the posting characterizing those who raise issues about the game as 'whiners' and 'haters' and such does nothing to help the game, and only adds fuel to the fire. There are some coaches who are doing a great job at looking forward and helping the game, the one that comes to mind who is worth copying is Chappel.

This can be said in reverse 1000 times over for a lot of the veterans that are leaving.

1000 times?

Seriously?

The point again was to try to keep the fence sitters. IMO the fence sitters are on the fence due to issues with the game, in many cases the same issues that the unfairly characterized 'whiners' and 'haters' raised.

And, since 25% of the coaches are gone, there is very little point in worrying about the 'reverse' position, they are basically not going to matter soon.

Oh well, I tried.

Yes, seriously. If you don't see that, then you are looking at things with rose colored glasses.

ard, you were never an idiot in my experience, and i'd recommend you keep it that way. without question, some folks on both sides of the issue have been whiny little children. its kind of like this election. everyone has bias, and you might think one side has more whiny idiots than the other, and thats OK - thats human. but if your head is so far up your rear end, that you think ONE side is full of whiny idiots, and the other is full of enlightened gentlemen, then you need to take a really good look in the mirror, so you can get a better picture of what an idiot really looks like. the HD battle is not one iota different in that regard. its easier to stomach the idiots who happen to agree with you, none of us are immune to that - but being closed minded and right makes you no less a fool than the person who is closed minded and wrong, and you may be falling into that trap.

all OR is saying is, maybe the best reaction to the idiots on the other side, is not to act like an idiot yourself. its good advice. 100% agree with the props to chap and other folks going about the situation in that manner.

I have no ill will toward anyone leaving or staying. Don't like the product, don't play it. But, don't try to tear it down for others.

I have a ton of respect for OR and yourself. Tried to study what you guys do, failed some as the system was changing with potential, etc. had some huge success as well. That's how it goes, evolve as the game does. Some do it better.

What has happened since the announcement of the change and the beta is constant tearing down of the product and other players by users on both sides of the fence. The forums have never been a friendly place to begin with and it has been utter rubbish since the beta and change. A lot of the forum attitude has carried over from a lot of the vets, as they have fostered a lot of the vitriol on these boards for far too long. I really don't see how anyone can dispute that.

the big difference is the vets tend to criticize the game, the other side launches personnal attacks on the vets. Now the vets have eventually fired back in kind with attacks, which is unfortunate, but yet completely predictable. It happens on near every internet board.

The game criticism is being done by folks or vets who in many cases have done game plans and such DAILY for almost ten calendar years, have put blood, sweat and tears into the game for a long time. If those who don't like the message the vets are conveying concentrated on refuting their message rather than attack them as people, there would be no vitriol on these boards.

So yes, I can effortlessly dispute what you said. Your POV is almost comical to me actually, and is so far off base that if it wasn't so funny, I'd call it pathetic. Again, you are not pathetic, your POV is. So I challenge you to refute the content of what the vets have said, rather than pointing a finger at them as 1000 TIMES WORSE which is plain and simply BS. Can you see now 'How anyone can dispute your POV?'

You are talking about just the change over. Fine.

I'm referring to the state of the forum as a whole. We cannot expect that the forum would be a reasonable place to have a conversation about a major change like this, when we cannot have a conversation about anything on the forum without it being some kind of nasty back and forth. This is not a new problem. I've been on this site for well over a decade and look at how many posts I have to the forum. When I first started, I avoided the forum like a plague, because of the constant nastiness. That isn't a pathetic POV. That is fact.

I still don't like coming to the forum. Just look at the various topics and the bickering and name calling. Again, not a new problem. The ground work for how people conduct themselves on the forum was laid a long time ago. Cannot expect it would change when something this major comes about.

Those that want to fight the good fight, will, but very few and far between.

When I started this game many years ago, the forums were a place you could ask a newbie question and get significant feedback from the "originals" that helped me learn the game. Old timers will remember furry nips and that is when the forums turned very bad....bad to the point that my posting yesterday was probably the first post in at least seven years, if not longer. As bad as furry was, I see much worse now as I peruse the forum looking for information on 3.0. I did not participate in the Beta, and I am really regretting it now.

Posted by CoachSpud on 10/9/2016 8:45:00 PM (view original):
That seems like a thoughtful post ... until you start to spot the outright fallacies, such as "Then, at the end of the day, if you actually do want to go after a player, and recruit them heavily, if anyone else went after them to the point where you are at least relatively close, whether or not that player signs with you its a totally random end game outcome." Once you see the spin, the post is just another "I don't like it" post from someone who hasn't taken the time to learn the game, for whatever his reason. I offer thread below as the counterpart, written by those who have taken the time and have learned the game.

https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=495608

Thanks for the link, Spud. If you took the time to actually fully review what you're linking to, though, you'll see that I actually posted the very first question in response to Chapelhillne first putting this out because I was so eager to learn as much as I could about 3.0 since I didn't participate in the beta.

I do fully admit, though, that I am a long ways away from having learned the game. The process of learning more about the game and how it works, and how to better operate a team is what has been a big part of what has made HD such an enjoyable experience. The problem I have is that the more I have learned how scouting works in 3.0 in terms of trying to optimize your efforts, the less enjoyable it becomes, because, as Benis said in another thread, you can get 85% of the way there in 10 minutes, but that remaining 15% is, in my opinion, excruciating.

On the other hand, the way the actual recruiting process functions now actually has a lot of interesting elements (I actually like having APs - although to me I think APs could have been better used as a way to solve the carryover "problem" without actually limiting carryovers, by making the number of APs available to each team each year fixed, with only the cash being allowed to carry over and vary by success, but I digress - and preferences could be a really interesting factor - if implemented with more equity for different play styles and with more reasonable thresholds that should have been better balanced in the beta process). However, as someone who very much likes playing, but doesn't want to devote too much time each day to this game, just the extra time burden of adding on recruiting during the season when you are also game planning (which is something I really enjoy doing and trying to optimize, even for games when I wouldn't necessarily need to do it and even though I'm not that great at it) is a significant disincentive, not to mention all the problems that were introduced by having a split recruiting session (the biggest one, actually, I think, is that it serves as a big disincentive for new coaches who won't get a chance to sign a large percentage of recruits when they first join because they're already signed and/or heavily invested in by other teams; while there's an element of realism, and first year coaches often don't make the best recruiting choices anyway, I would worry significantly about new coaches feeling cheated by this process, but once again, I digress).

The point I was trying to make with the sentence you refer to is that, personally, if I'm going to invest the extra effort that is required by the new system, having the final result be determined by one draw from a random number generator (given, based on parameters that are determined by the actual amount of work put in by the various teams involved that impacts how likely a team is to win as a result of that draw) makes it much harder to justify to myself that the effort is worth it. Then again, I'm one of the relatively few who actually reads through the play-by-play for each game; I wouldn't enjoy the core game if all I got at the end of a game was a total score based on a single draw from a random number generator based on overall team rating and team settings for the game. You are right, though, Spud, that this sentiment is in fact nothing more than a personal dislike for the structure of how the randomness is implemented, accompanied by how I would structure it to still incorporate randomness while making the result more appealing to me, personally.

By the way, Chapelhillne and Benis have my immense gratitude for all of the effort they put into preparing the 3.0 guide. I would have been completely lost without it. You deserve a commission for your work, as it effectively functioned as the release documentation.

"... you can get 85% of the way there in 10 minutes, but that remaining 15% is, in my opinion, excruciating."

Sounds a lot like learning chess. Widely popular game. Maybe WIS ought to consider how to attract chess players.

Posted by CoachSpud on 10/12/2016 12:47:00 AM (view original):
"... you can get 85% of the way there in 10 minutes, but that remaining 15% is, in my opinion, excruciating."

Sounds a lot like learning chess. Widely popular game. Maybe WIS ought to consider how to attract chess players.

I've had you on ignore for 3 weeks. Unfortunately, people quote you, so i can't avoid reading your posts. If there are any people unsure if they want to stick with HD 3.0 and take the time to learn it, you are absolutely driving them away and are contributing to decreased world populations. If you want to build HD back up, you need to STFU.