Posted by pallas on 1/12/2017 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by buddhagamer on 1/12/2017 10:48:00 AM (view original):
I believe this is the recruit the OP is talking about.

Correct. Colorado is a human coach, and really, really good, FWIW. A+ prestige. I don't think knowing if he did or didn't have a scholarship offered would've changed my actions in this situation. But I still think it's a really good point.

To this point maybe don't list the schools alphabetically, but rather list based on prestige regardless of a scholly offer or not...so if a bunch of schools are very low, the higher prestige teams should be listed 1st (not alphabetical listing like now). Point being, I'd much rather know if an A prestige school may be lurking (even if they haven't offered a scholarship) than just seeing a bunch of C and D prestige SIM schools that aren't going to do anything anyways.

I actually think both. Since there appears to be a field limit of 10 schools, I would suggest that the display rank schools by:
(i) considering status (VH/H/etc)
(ii) offer status within considering status
(iii) prestige letter grade within offer status
(iv) random within comparable prestige grade (at UCLA I shouldn't get a "lurk" advantage over Duke if we are both A+) -- or maybe something more uniform, like distance from recruit.

But this is in all reality pretty minor compared to the larger needed fixes.

Here's my biggest issue with this scenario. Many people said HD3.0 would remove the last minute poaching on recruits, but this seems to be the same case if not worse since they can hide below the top 10 before striking.

That seems to be a stretch. One example and it's a big problem?

C'mon. If you don't like 3.0, fine. But make a legit point.

i've been involved in the same thing a few times now...not just one instance of it happening.

Most recent one was Oklahoma on a recruit by himself at very high...he was in some other battles with human coached teams but no one else other than SIMS showing on this particular player.

So I decided to go after the guy I'd say 3 or 4 cycles before signings I started putting AP's on him. I opened the scholarship, offered it, and I still was not showing on the recruits list. Just a bunch of sims at very low were. Signing cycle came and I put in something like 10HV and the CV. Now LSU pops up on the guy and is in the lead all of a sudden. They were "lurking" and had not offered a scholarship even until the signing cycle. I ended up putting in the max visits next cycle but in the end was only able to get to "Moderate" after a cycle or 2 dangling at High before I guess LSU put in their remaining couple visits. Player signed with LSU.

Moral of story is if I had seen LSU "lurking" on the player's list I wouldn't have even considered the player because LSU had a higher prestige and better pref. match. So basically I wouldn't have wasted that cash and could have used it elsewhere but because of how they list the teams I couldn't foresee that LSU was going to do that.

Big problem? No, not in comparison to everything else. Problem? For sure...and I don't know anything about programming but I seriously doubt it would take much to tweak this.

That's really just a version of 2.0 where you knew if you could win or not. Pretty sure they wanted that out of the game in 3.0.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/12/2017 8:44:00 PM (view original):
That's really just a version of 2.0 where you knew if you could win or not. Pretty sure they wanted that out of the game in 3.0.

Well, I guess I worded it wrong for those like you that like to nitpick...maybe I could have won, maybe not. Point is if I had seen LSU on the guy's list I would have avoided spending my resources there and tried to find someone I could have a better shot at landing. I really don't see how this compares to 2.0.

2.0 you basically knew like 99% chance if you could land a guy in a battle

3.0 now you are just wondering if you can put enough resources on a guy to get to High or Very High but does not mean you win the guy

Completely different if you ask me

I'm pretty sure in 2.0 a 51/49 split always went to 51. And people would bail when they knew they couldn't win. I know in 1.0, I'd jump as soon as KY/Duke/UNC came calling because I couldn't win the recruit. Essentially battle-avoidance.

I think they wanted to do away with that. Am I not being clear? It could certainly be me.

Eh, it's not a one time deal. I had been at Very High on a recruit for the entire first session with noone else above very low, and noone else showing as having offered. To be fair, I moved my AP's to other recruits, and didn't put in much effort (5 HV's, a CV, and an average of about 20AP's per cycle), but in the signing cycle, another team offered and maxed out and I went from being the sole Very High and offer (that I could see) to him signing with another school and me being moderate in one cycle.

It is to the point where my intention on early signees, is to find a guy who is solely considering another school, and that school has multiple open schollies so I know he has focus other places. Placing just enough AP's to open everything up and then laying low until the signing cycle at which point I am going all in on that recruit and hoping to snipe. It's a legit strategy and a lot of coaches use it, I have had it used against me multiple times.

I really think the solution here, at least in part, is showing teams that have offered a scholarship in the list, regardless of interest level. I can get on board with most of recruiting being a calculated risk, especially at D1. And if you're going to leave much of the information dark, at least allow us to get a clearer picture of what we're up against.

I'm okay losing to Colorado. It had a huge prestige advantage and better matched the recruit's preferences. Fine, that happens. But give me some indication of the situation. All of this is assuming, of course, Colorado had a scholarship offered well before the 5 pm cycle.

I had a lead on this guy for a while, nobody else was above very low, then this other team got up to high and signed that cycle before I could respond. Something is wrong there.

See the same thing all the time in HBD free agency/international free agents. Except we don't know if ANYONE who is bidding on them. We're sitting there at high bid for days and BAM!!!!, he signs with someone else. Maybe this is why I don't see it as a big deal. I've been dealing with the same issue for 10 years and that's just how it works.

So, if you're going to argue "Everyone knows if LSU is after a kid", I'd counter "Everyone knows if the Yankees are interested in a free agent."

Everybody and anybody who cares about this point, you need to put is a CS ticket.

wait, if it's alphabetical, were there really 10 schools listed before Colorado? That seems very unlikely to me.

They need to fix Sim recruiting so you don't have 10 sims going for 1 guy and zero going for another. All of these sims fill up the considering list for no reason and cover up teams that might actually sign the recruit.