Posted by snafu4u on 12/1/2016 4:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 3:55:00 PM (view original):
I've said, repeatedly, that I don't know if this was the right change. But change was needed. The top users/schools had an advantage that had to be negated. Perhaps a "softer" stick should have been wielded. I equate the problems related to EE now as ripping the band-aid off quickly.

This basically sums up the entire HD 3.0 change. Users like MikeT23 say "Its not fair, these other coaches are better than me and have built up programs that I don't know how to compete with. You have to do something so I am just as good as them. Its not faaaiiiiirrrrr!!!" Cry me a millennial river.

The statement that " The top users/schools had an advantage that HAD to be negated." is utterly ridiculous as this is the very point that most of the defenders of 3.0 have been arguing against. If your statement is true, then HD 3.0 amounts to am explicit punishment of successful coaches with the intent to redistribute the power structure of the game. AKA, playing god and eliminating actual competition, changing the rules to make sure the better players don't win too much and the worse players win more. Your head is so far up your *** you cant see when you are arguing against your own point. Again, cry me a millennial river. Your generation with be the downfall of America.

By the way, I do not mind better coaches than me, and what they had. I liked facing jbasnight at Syracuse or Vandy at Wake. I liked seeing Gillespie win at Kansas... If the game prevents the best to rise to the top ir consistently be tough to beat, then it's broken. You had to work your way in D1 and I was doing it.. Now, it's random deciding not me. And if you did not like the advantages top teams in top conferences had, you could play d2 or d3. Heck, playing JsaJsa or Jdno, getting a win was something really fun. I even got my team, my real shot at a NT get beat by the same better coach than me twice while I expected a win... It's fun to be able to compare yourself to top coaches. So to ne this was never the problem.

Posted by zorzii on 12/1/2016 7:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 12/1/2016 4:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 3:55:00 PM (view original):
I've said, repeatedly, that I don't know if this was the right change. But change was needed. The top users/schools had an advantage that had to be negated. Perhaps a "softer" stick should have been wielded. I equate the problems related to EE now as ripping the band-aid off quickly.

This basically sums up the entire HD 3.0 change. Users like MikeT23 say "Its not fair, these other coaches are better than me and have built up programs that I don't know how to compete with. You have to do something so I am just as good as them. Its not faaaiiiiirrrrr!!!" Cry me a millennial river.

The statement that " The top users/schools had an advantage that HAD to be negated." is utterly ridiculous as this is the very point that most of the defenders of 3.0 have been arguing against. If your statement is true, then HD 3.0 amounts to am explicit punishment of successful coaches with the intent to redistribute the power structure of the game. AKA, playing god and eliminating actual competition, changing the rules to make sure the better players don't win too much and the worse players win more. Your head is so far up your *** you cant see when you are arguing against your own point. Again, cry me a millennial river. Your generation with be the downfall of America.

By the way, I do not mind better coaches than me, and what they had. I liked facing jbasnight at Syracuse or Vandy at Wake. I liked seeing Gillespie win at Kansas... If the game prevents the best to rise to the top ir consistently be tough to beat, then it's broken. You had to work your way in D1 and I was doing it.. Now, it's random deciding not me. And if you did not like the advantages top teams in top conferences had, you could play d2 or d3. Heck, playing JsaJsa or Jdno, getting a win was something really fun. I even got my team, my real shot at a NT get beat by the same better coach than me twice while I expected a win... It's fun to be able to compare yourself to top coaches. So to ne this was never the problem.

This!

D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 4:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by fd343ny on 12/1/2016 4:26:00 PM (view original):
the "plan for it" argument has some weight in the longer term. Not a valid argument in the transition seasons. My primary complaint on EEs is the transition, where I think WIS knew people would be in a jam and just decided that that was fine given the small number of customers affected. They are entitled to make that decision about their product and their customers of course.

That's true that the problem, if there is one at all, is just in the transition. You're surely not suggesting that they wreck the long term game to favor those who have a temporary disadvantage for one or two transition seasons, are you?

I think the problem is severe in transition and worth an adjustment in the long term

I think a small tweak or two could mitigate the problem posed by uncertain or large numbers of EEs - for transition and for long term

BUT, I agree, I would not make major changes - cause I am convinced that tweaks could have fixed - which is why it is irksome.

I'll ask you a hypothetical - would you make a small tweak or two to mitigate the issue - if a good tweak COULD be found? that would not wreck the game?

Posted by texrangers18 on 12/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):
D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

This is a completely false statement.

Posted by johnsensing on 12/1/2016 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by texrangers18 on 12/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):
D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

This is a completely false statement.

Going into my second team with recruiting in 3.0, I'm still trying to figure out the value of prestige. What's interesting is that in the developer chat, I thought they had said that prestige hadn't changed, but the weight/value of recruiting actions had. Either way, it still diminishes the value of prestige.

Posted by fd343ny on 12/1/2016 8:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 4:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by fd343ny on 12/1/2016 4:26:00 PM (view original):
the "plan for it" argument has some weight in the longer term. Not a valid argument in the transition seasons. My primary complaint on EEs is the transition, where I think WIS knew people would be in a jam and just decided that that was fine given the small number of customers affected. They are entitled to make that decision about their product and their customers of course.

That's true that the problem, if there is one at all, is just in the transition. You're surely not suggesting that they wreck the long term game to favor those who have a temporary disadvantage for one or two transition seasons, are you?

I think the problem is severe in transition and worth an adjustment in the long term

I think a small tweak or two could mitigate the problem posed by uncertain or large numbers of EEs - for transition and for long term

BUT, I agree, I would not make major changes - cause I am convinced that tweaks could have fixed - which is why it is irksome.

I'll ask you a hypothetical - would you make a small tweak or two to mitigate the issue - if a good tweak COULD be found? that would not wreck the game?

I would ... very, very carefully ... if it improved the game overall.

Posted by johnsensing on 12/1/2016 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by texrangers18 on 12/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):
D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

This is a completely false statement.

It means a lot. Not everything, but a lot.

In Smith, Frank Myers just signed with A+ Arizona. He's a very good juco pg with 2 yrs left. As D+ Cal St Northridge, I went after him hard early. After 5 cycles, I had gone "all-in" and was briefly the only "very high" on his considering list. After 10 cycles, B+ Cal came knocking (I don't know how hard), and I was knocked down to moderate. Then after a few more cycles, Arizona came in and knocked Cal out of signing range, down to moderate. When he signed, CSUN was listed back at very low. Granted, I moved on after being knocked down to moderate, so he didn't get any attention from me after the 11th cycle. But up to that point, I had devoted 50 per cycle. We had a neutral to slightly positive preference profile - 1 VG, 1 G, 1 N, 1 VB (long time coach).

Attention points are weighted. I don't know exactly how, but they are not equivalent, and they do pretty heavily factor prestige.

"Now, it's random deciding not me."

If you believe that, it becomes true.

If you play the game that way, it becomes true.

For everyone else, of course, it isn't true.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/2/2016 11:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 12/1/2016 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by texrangers18 on 12/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):
D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

This is a completely false statement.

It means a lot. Not everything, but a lot.

In Smith, Frank Myers just signed with A+ Arizona. He's a very good juco pg with 2 yrs left. As D+ Cal St Northridge, I went after him hard early. After 5 cycles, I had gone "all-in" and was briefly the only "very high" on his considering list. After 10 cycles, B+ Cal came knocking (I don't know how hard), and I was knocked down to moderate. Then after a few more cycles, Arizona came in and knocked Cal out of signing range, down to moderate. When he signed, CSUN was listed back at very low. Granted, I moved on after being knocked down to moderate, so he didn't get any attention from me after the 11th cycle. But up to that point, I had devoted 50 per cycle. We had a neutral to slightly positive preference profile - 1 VG, 1 G, 1 N, 1 VB (long time coach).

Attention points are weighted. I don't know exactly how, but they are not equivalent, and they do pretty heavily factor prestige.

The fact that an A+ could only knock you down to moderate is problematic to me. A D+ school should get easily kicked to the curb by a A+ school in my opinion. Do we want the game to be realistic or not?

It's not what "we" want. It's what WifS can market.

Again, Duke is not knocking down CSNU. User A is knocking down User B. It's the user that is getting beat by a built-in advantage.

"Hi, join our game. All the really good teams were taken 10 years ago. But, if you work really hard, you can get in their division and lose all recruits to them and, as a bonus, get beaten by 50 on the reg. It will be great fun!!! Please hand over your money!!!!"

Posted by johnsensing on 12/2/2016 3:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/2/2016 11:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 12/1/2016 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by texrangers18 on 12/1/2016 7:14:00 PM (view original):
D1 is still an elitist division in HD. Prestige means everything in recruiting.

This is a completely false statement.

It means a lot. Not everything, but a lot.

In Smith, Frank Myers just signed with A+ Arizona. He's a very good juco pg with 2 yrs left. As D+ Cal St Northridge, I went after him hard early. After 5 cycles, I had gone "all-in" and was briefly the only "very high" on his considering list. After 10 cycles, B+ Cal came knocking (I don't know how hard), and I was knocked down to moderate. Then after a few more cycles, Arizona came in and knocked Cal out of signing range, down to moderate. When he signed, CSUN was listed back at very low. Granted, I moved on after being knocked down to moderate, so he didn't get any attention from me after the 11th cycle. But up to that point, I had devoted 50 per cycle. We had a neutral to slightly positive preference profile - 1 VG, 1 G, 1 N, 1 VB (long time coach).

Attention points are weighted. I don't know exactly how, but they are not equivalent, and they do pretty heavily factor prestige.

The fact that an A+ could only knock you down to moderate is problematic to me. A D+ school should get easily kicked to the curb by a A+ school in my opinion. Do we want the game to be realistic or not?

I got knocked to moderate by a B+, who in turn got knocked to moderate by an A+ (Remember, I was very low at the end - after going all in). That's entirely realistic, and exactly how it should work, IMO.

Maybe the solution is to just let the A+ schools recruit first. Then, when their rosters are full, the A schools recruit. Full then the A- and so on. That would be fun for everyone.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/2/2016 3:39:00 PM (view original):
It's not what "we" want. It's what WifS can market.

Again, Duke is not knocking down CSNU. User A is knocking down User B. It's the user that is getting beat by a built-in advantage.

"Hi, join our game. All the really good teams were taken 10 years ago. But, if you work really hard, you can get in their division and lose all recruits to them and, as a bonus, get beaten by 50 on the reg. It will be great fun!!! Please hand over your money!!!!"

Let's just get rid of prestige. and the team success preference. Everyone gets to start fresh each season.

Posted by Benis on 12/2/2016 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/2/2016 3:39:00 PM (view original):
It's not what "we" want. It's what WifS can market.

Again, Duke is not knocking down CSNU. User A is knocking down User B. It's the user that is getting beat by a built-in advantage.

"Hi, join our game. All the really good teams were taken 10 years ago. But, if you work really hard, you can get in their division and lose all recruits to them and, as a bonus, get beaten by 50 on the reg. It will be great fun!!! Please hand over your money!!!!"

Let's just get rid of prestige. and the team success preference. Everyone gets to start fresh each season.

Did you even read the scenario? Prestige is *very clearly a large factor*. Statements to the contrary have no basis in fact.