Posted by crabman26 on 4/18/2017 1:43:00 PM (view original):
So in Wooden I lost out on a top 100 recruit to a lower prestiged Sim school with 60/40 odds, why or how I lost to them is not why I am posting this (although I am really irked by it, a paying customer losing to a lower prestiged Sim school is ridiculous).

My issue is, EVERY single recruit that I have tried putting APs to after that has signed immediately on the next cycle. I have tried four recruits, and every single one of the recruits I have put APs to, signed the very next cycle.

I mean, Im talking recruits that didnt sign for 4 cycles, didnt have any one listed as high or very high, then I put APs on them and BOOM, they sign immediately the next cycle.

Am I just unlucky? Am I the only one having this happen to?

Honestly you should have no problem knocking a D1 sim out of signing range with a B prestige (that's the correct team right)? Just gotta knock them down and out quickly.

For your main issue - pay attention to signing tendency. Here's an example:

You're at D1 and it's start of 2nd session and you're looking for a backup guy to go after now. You see a player that only has a D2 player on him. He's offered a scholly but is moderate. You're confident you can beat him. However, the players signing pref is Early (or end of period 1). This means the player MUST sign in that first cycle of 2nd session. It's a guarantee. So if you sent APs after this guy, they are wasted.

So if you're in early 2nd session (1st or 2nd cycle) and going after guys that are late signers and they sign immediately, then yeah, that's bad luck. Otherwise, you're probably over looking the Early/EoP1 preferences.

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 6:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 4/18/2017 6:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 6:13:00 PM (view original):
If you're concerned about a small pool of players by limiting D3 to D2 and D3 players only then how about they just adjust the recruit generation to create more D3 players? Same sized pool of players as right now but instead of a stud player being 800 overall, they are 700 overall.

There's just no compelling reason to structurally "fix" a "problem" that exists because of gameplay with artificial caps or commodity inflation. This is a shared universe game.

Let's not pretend that any of this issue is about protecting the integrity of D3 and the new users who have to start there. The only way to do that is to make coaches move up, and that's not likely to happen (and I wouldn't argue for that anyway). This is an issue because some D1 users want backups to be easier to lock in, they want less risk in going all in on selected targets. They don't like all the moving parts of 3.0, they want it to be more static and predictable, less ambiguous.

I disagree on your suggested reason why people see this as an issue. I have never once complained about not having backup options for D1. Never.

Hell, at the start of Beta I hated the idea of D3 getting D1 players and I didn't even have a D1 team at that point.

Let's assume for a minute that there are users out there that want this change because they genuinely believe it makes for a better game overall.

Are D3 teams more dominant than they used to be? Are the dynasties more airtight? Where's the data to support this opinion?

New users don't come into the forums to complain about how good the top teams are. They don't typically care whether they get beat by 50 points by a 600 OVR team, or 60 points by a 650 OVR team. They either observe and try to get better, or they don't, same as ever. The whole point is that they have access now to all the players that fall through the cracks; cap divisional recruiting, even if you inflate the number of commodities they're competing for, and they still have to compete directly with veteran-coached teams with much higher prestige for the top talent if they want to move up.

You dont make it a better game by further divorcing it from reality. The idea that real life teams have some sort of cap on how good of a D1-neglected recruit they can land is absurd.

The "simple" solution is to remove projected levels. The market will sort it out.

Of course, that might be as bad as restricting levels.

"Are D3 teams more dominant than they used to be? Are the dynasties more airtight? Where's the data to support this opinion? "

You have to have data to support an opinion or else the opinion is wrong or a lie? Hm. Interesting thought.

New users barely come into the forums at all. So there's that. They have access to all players that fall through the cracks but have no idea that they can even get those players. They won't know that unless they come to forums... which most don't do.

I will add that if it can be shown that D3 dynasties are perpetuating more easily in this system, to the extent that it's a competitive balance problem, I would support one specific structural tweak, which is to establish that D1 projected players increasingly choose to go juco instead of dropping down divisions. It's a tweak based in realism, and doesn't mess with the shared universe vision of the game.

IMO, the biggest indicator that something is out of wack (and I don't care if it was like this in 2.0 or not) is that if I look at D3 teams and see players that would START on my D1 team, it's messed up.

Here's Brianxavier's Center on his D3 team. I'd take him on my team over my current starting senior PF for my NMSU team (which is ranked #18 and not a dumpheap btw).

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=3489866

Frankly I just think there should be a significant gap in talent between D1 and D3. There are A LOT of D3 teams that could compete in low major D1 conferences. It's just not how I would design this game.

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):
"Are D3 teams more dominant than they used to be? Are the dynasties more airtight? Where's the data to support this opinion? "

You have to have data to support an opinion or else the opinion is wrong or a lie? Hm. Interesting thought.

New users barely come into the forums at all. So there's that. They have access to all players that fall through the cracks but have no idea that they can even get those players. They won't know that unless they come to forums... which most don't do.

Not wrong or a lie, just unsupported by fact.

The players that rise rise up are the ones who pay attention and observe. You don't have to come in to the forums to notice who the top teams in your division are signing. They have access. That wasn't true in the previous version, where A+ teams could pull down players who were *much* better than new coaches could even talk to. Were you complaining about the disparity then?

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):
"Are D3 teams more dominant than they used to be? Are the dynasties more airtight? Where's the data to support this opinion? "

You have to have data to support an opinion or else the opinion is wrong or a lie? Hm. Interesting thought.

New users barely come into the forums at all. So there's that. They have access to all players that fall through the cracks but have no idea that they can even get those players. They won't know that unless they come to forums... which most don't do.

Nonsense. Again, "some" of you think you invented fire.

All roster are available to all users. Any user can look at the roster of the top 10 teams, say "Hey, where they gettin' those guys?" and figure it out.

So, Dr.Benis of HD, you're not doing anything special by pulling players from D1. It's easy to figure out. E.A.S.Y.

"So, Dr.Benis of HD, you're not doing anything special by pulling players from D1. It's easy to figure out. E.A.S.Y."

I don't even recruit D1 players at D3.

"Were you complaining about the disparity then?"

Yes I was.

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
"So, Dr.Benis of HD, you're not doing anything special by pulling players from D1. It's easy to figure out. E.A.S.Y."

I don't even recruit D1 players at D3.

Good for you? Is that why you don't want others to do it either?

Sounds like we found your incentive.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/18/2017 7:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
"So, Dr.Benis of HD, you're not doing anything special by pulling players from D1. It's easy to figure out. E.A.S.Y."

I don't even recruit D1 players at D3.

Good for you? Is that why you don't want others to do it either?

Sounds like we found your incentive.

Yup you got me.

Good talk.

How's the fam?

Posted by Benis on 4/18/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
"Were you complaining about the disparity then?"

Yes I was.

Careful, or the participation trophy brigade will figure you out.