Some questions if anyone could answer them, that would be helpful.

Assistant coach vs public camp at D-2. Since the assistant coach search has a value of $60 per player for each level and if I have 40 out of 100 recruits at D-2, which would come out to $60(hypothetically) per player, would the assistant coach be more effective since I can narrow my search for certain players, for instance within 200 miles or looking for a point guard? There were also some forum rumors that the assistant coach wasn't very good and would only scout weak players. Any truth to that?

Under preferences, if I have 2 very good and 1 very bad, does the 1 very bad cancel out the one very good?

Also, at D-1, has anyone found out what prestige is worth in terms or attention points, home or campus visits?

Last question, at D-1, if my prestige moves a whole grade(from C to B) after the national championship game and I'm trying to recruit a player that will sign late, despite being on him from the first cycle of the first period, does the recruit consider my prestige to be a C or a B? Or somewhere in between?

Using the assistant can be a good way to get some guys to the 2nd or 3rd level, since you can select to only scout guys existing in your pool, and it's cheaper than scouting select guys manually. I've not noticed that they only scout weak players, I'd like to hear the context behind that. I suppose if you're using them the find new players, they are looking at guys who didn't attend the camps you attended or hosted, maybe that's part of it? But you can select by division, so that doesn't make much sense.

The exact weight of each preference has not been disclosed. It isn't so simple as saying a very bad cancels out a very good, they're not weighted the same, and even within a given category, some very goods will be getting more credit than others (for example, if a player wants to play near home, 10 miles is better than 100, even though both are "very good").

Prestige is worth a little less than before, but affects the other actions, as before. The amounts haven't been (and won't be) disclosed.

As I understand it, as your prestige goes up, the amount of effort credit you get is increased. In real terms of a battle, it doesn't really matter if he considers you a C or a B, what matters is how much effort credit you're getting with him. So the credit you got while a C is there; but now you're getting the effort credit of a B each cycle. So a team that stays B throughout the season will get more effort credit cumulatively than a team that starts at C and moves up to B, all else being equal. That's my understanding, but others may look at this differently.

Good stuff pkoopman, thank you very much.

In regards to preferences, a "very bad" can still diminish the effectiveness of a "very good" despite them not being weighed equally? Is that correct? Is that what you were saying? Or for instance, let's say all 3 were weighted equally, is it possible the very bad and the very good can cancel each other out?

Yep, I had assumed that prestige was less of a factor, but was just curious if any of the coaches knew by how much.

I just heard a few coaches on the forums say the assistant coach feature wasn't very good, they didn't really disclose the reason at the time with the exception of one coach that claimed that the assistant only scouted weaker players. I just don't remember if it was in the BETA forums or in the HD forums, but it's also possible they made that correction during BETA.

Well, it depends. If you are at D-2 .. it looks to me like this (I just picked a world, in this case Tark). Here is the jayhawk classic:

33 DI Players
62 DII Players
$2,375

So in this case, if you were only interested in D-II players, it would be $2375 / 62 = $39 per player. IF you are also interested in DI players .. it is $2375 / 95 = $25 per player.

That is significantly less cash per level. BUT .. they may be farther away and any position.

If you host a local camp and $12,000, you get 200 players and 2 levels per player. So that would be {$12,000 / (2x200)} which is $30 per player per level.

So, both public camps and hosted camps can be cheaper than $60 per player per level. That is why I do camps first, then use the rest of my cash for assistant searches. The individual scouting per player is VERY expensive and is based on distance. It can be as much as $700 per player per level .. or as cheap as $100-$110 per player per level for guys who are very close.

That is what I was trying to tell some of the guys who individually scout players .. only do that AFTER you have done the other more cost effective methods on a very limited number of players.

At Mississippi Valley State (low level D-1 school), with one opening, I was able to get the following at scouting level 2 or higher for D-1 recruits:

Level 2: 61
Level 3: 48
Level 4: 254

So, I can fairly well estimate the potential of 302 recruits or take a shot on 61 guys at level 2. I still can individually scout about 15 local players if I need to.

In my top 25 rated PGs at scouting level 4 .. 20 of the 25 are in the overall top 100

There are many different methods.

In answer to your first one, I was actually finding the opposite. When I sent my AC out to search specifically for people who I had already scouted at D2, I was disturbed by the frequency with which he seemed to go scout the Top 100 guys that I would never dream of going after at D2 in lieu of the more reasonable pool of recruits I had been hoping to find additional information on.

Overall, I'm torn between whether the feature is worth using or if it is better to just target the people who get to Level 2 and do an individual basis. I pay more for the latter, but I also get to target it to specific players so I cut down on wastage that my AC creates by sometimes getting reports on people with visibly deficient ratings (F- WE's...F defenses...low ATH C/PF types...).

"In regards to preferences, a "very bad" can still diminish the effectiveness of a "very good" despite them not being weighed equally? Is that correct? Is that what you were saying? Or for instance, let's say all 3 were weighted equally, is it possible the very bad and the very good can cancel each other out?"

That is correct. WIS hasn't revealed which preferences are a bit stronger and which are a bit weaker, and I don't expect them to do so (and I hope they don't). That said, as a rough rule of thumb very bad = -2, bad = -1, good = +1 and very good = +2.

Thanks everyone for the helpful info.Very much appreciated.