67 D3 coaches in Tark. 71 D3 coaches in Phelan.

Doesn't phelan have new coach sign ups now?

Posted by Trentonjoe on 2/19/2017 1:06:00 PM (view original):
Doesn't phelan have new coach sign ups now?

Yeah it ends in 3 hours.

I counted 89 in phelan

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 2/19/2017 12:17:00 PM (view original):
I like 3.0 way better than 2.0. Quite frankly I was ready to quit 2.0 because of the ceilings, math equations, and sniping. Prestige could be more fluid. I am fine with a higher floor for big 6 schools even though I only like maybe 3-5 of them enough to ever consider coaching. The top 100 available to everyone at the same rate? Could be interesting with 4-5 very highs on some recruits but then some will be complaining about the 'luck factor'. In 3.0 I can max out a five star recruit from the Midwest if I want. No way can San Diego State even dream about winning a battle in the Midwest in 2.0.

Jpmills is the king of the West Coast right now. I haven't seen too many people challenging him for recruits yet but some of us are making inroads to do it and throw in an occasional challenge at him to remind him the Mountain West and other conferences are here to play. He is A+ prestige and most on the West Coast outside of the PAC 12 were B- (maybe 3 teams) and lower (everyone else). Conferences were underdeveloped on the West coast in 2.0 in his world. The only developed conference on the West coast was the PAC 12. That is changing.

You are kidding, right? I have lost more battles than I have won. I lost a battle to Arizona just this round when I was a 74% favorite for the kid.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 2/19/2017 12:30:00 PM (view original):
I understand and respect many of the complaints against 3.0 but this is an example of history repeating itself. When they introduced potential a ton of users:

quit
complained that the game required less strategy

Disagree. I loved the introduction of potential. It added a ton to strategy. More thinking involved. Similar to preferences.

I think the trend in numbers is all WIS needs to see. Without propping up numbers through FREE HD credits, things are falling badly. This recruiting nightmare would be absolutely awful if the worlds were full.

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 2/19/2017 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Jpmills stay vigilant. Some of us are coming for your crown. In the past the only challengers were known to you in conference. Now we are everywhere: Mountain West, WCC, etc.

I wish everyone the best in recruiting and on court battles. Glad to have you all around.

I have always been cognizant of you guys. Had to go against UNLV this year already.

Posted by jpmills3 on 2/19/2017 4:49:00 PM (view original):
I think the trend in numbers is all WIS needs to see. Without propping up numbers through FREE HD credits, things are falling badly. This recruiting nightmare would be absolutely awful if the worlds were full.

A bunch of multi-team users quit when they didn't get their way. Others cut back when they didn't get their way. Taking a 6-8 month snapshot isn't indicative of anything but those two items.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 2/19/2017 12:30:00 PM (view original):
I understand and respect many of the complaints against 3.0 but this is an example of history repeating itself. When they introduced potential a ton of users:

quit
complained that the game required less strategy

Yeah but this time, they're not coming back...I wonder how much money WIS has already lost.

Posted by bbunch on 2/19/2017 4:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 2/18/2017 2:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jpmills3 on 2/17/2017 8:05:00 PM (view original):
i am playing on game credits, so at least it's not my money, but good gracious the new recruiting system is not good.

the cap on HVs and CVs has ruined strategy. No longer can a team go all in to secure their guy.

Now it's just get high or very high on x number of guys and hope to win the coin flip on 50%. Seriously dumb.

i have no idea why people prefer this over the previous system.

you want more preferences and different scouting things? Cool. You want to get rid of conference and rollover money? I think it has ruined conferences, but fine. You want to neuter prestige? Again, I disagree, but whatever, I will still find a way to be better than most.

But what we have now is boring and less strategic.

i say that having filled my 3 slots in the first session with 2 five stars and a four star, and the current number one ranked recruiting class too. Winning dice rolls hardly thrills me.

Absolutely agreed...when it comes down to it, the caps are why I left...that and in-season recruiting being the first session and not the second...the 2-session format in general sucks, but not having the offseason session be the main one, makes it worse.

Did you leave because of the existance of caps at all, or because the caps are too low?

I left because of the caps...everything is a coin flip nowadays...max out...promise a start and 25 minutes and cross your fingers.

1) Making promise minutes and promise start a top preference was a no-brainer.
2) Scouting is improved, looks more like reality and it seems strategy is important now.
3) Battles are on but there aren't always realistic. Rolls need to tone down, d3 winning against D1 should be impossible. D2 should have a tougher time.
4) Distance recruiting is not fixed, make top 200 recruitable to anyone at D1, for the same price. Keep D2 out of that.
5) Fix Ees.
6) Cap D3 at D2 recruiting so we have real strategy and recruiting.
7) Find ways to reduce rolls.

Not a lot to do and it will be a better game without a doubt.

They could cap AP at 40 for each cycle.

1. Would make it much harder for D3 to unlock D1/D2 recruits. Or at least pile on AP to make it harder for the "appropriate" level to catch up in RS2. Same would obviously apply to D2 on D1 recruits.
2. Would create an even playing field for teams with 1 opening vs teams with multiple openings.

Strategy means "a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim". In HD, strategy refers to more than just the tactics you use to get a single recruit. The major, overall aim for most is to field a team that competes for championships. With that in mind, the value of strategy - the set of actions and policies a coach undertakes to field the best team - has increased in 3.0.

The value of strategy increases as a larger and more diverse set of plans becomes viable. By contrast, when there is one dominant plan, the value of strategy decreases. In that latter case, the value of other, non-strategic factors, like simple longevity and the knowledge of special tricks and hacks that come with it, increases. I suspect some people confuse knowledge of those special tricks and hacks with "strategy". The value of knowing all those tricks from 2.0, like how to calculate your opponents' resources, the points of major price separation in distance recruiting, how much relative credit HVs and CVs had relative to scouting trips, arranging superclasses to maximize resources, etc. has decreased. That doesn't mean there is less strategy. Playing "rock-paper-scissors" isn't much fun when rock always wins. And knowing how to choose rock every time doesn't mean your strategy is valuable. When there are more viable options at each decision point, the value of strategy is increased. There are now lots of ways to approach team-building.