Posted by gdog13cavs on 3/14/2019 8:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by rugburn on 3/14/2019 12:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 3/12/2019 3:13:00 PM (view original):
D2 and D3 look more and more the same. Check IBA brackets and seeds, some #1 D3 teams up to about #8 would be competing in D2 with all other teams. The new recruiting did this. I don’t see D3 teams on my recruits but they found other location or other strats that work pretty well.

My thoughts as well, which imo is not a good thing. The top DIII team in Tark had a higher rating (i know ratings don't matter, but for the sake of comparison it's important) than all the DII teams and would make a deep run into the DII NT. A DIII team should barely be able to make a DII NT if able to make the NT at all, let alone be able to win it. New guys are supposed to compete with that i guess though. Sounds like a fun environment to learn in.

Bad argument. D3 has never been a good environment to learn in. The best D3 teams have always been head and shoulders better than the bottom 50% of D2 teams. If the game is going to allow veterans to park in D3, D3 is going to be dominated by veterans, and the people with veteran mentors. End of story.

”Cap divisions” is a solution in search of a problem, and always has been, put forward by folks who just want teams to stay in their place. They don’t want to worry about teams “under” them reaching up, because they want those backup options in place without ever having to invest in them. They want the reward of loading up resources on top players without the risk of coming up empty.

Make D3 a free to play sandbox with no credit, and then cap away. But no one should be rewarded or feel accomplished for dominating a division where new players are forced to play, and can’t consistently compete for the top commodities, because of the inherent advantages vets have in experience, prestige, and built up preference advantages.

I disagree that D3 was never a good environment in which to learn. By sheer luck, when I first started this game, I ended up at a school in Wisconsin that just happened to be right next door to the0nlyis' recently established super conference in CCIW. Needless to say, this made getting top notched local recruits incredibly difficult. However, I learned a lot by watching what the successful coaches did in that conference. After five years, I managed to make the Sweet 16, which I took as a major accomplishment given the difficulties of having to recruit in their shadow. I learned a lot over those five season regarding the intricacies of what ratings and skills mattered due to having to assemble and experiment with teams of very imperfect players.

He said “New guys are supposed to compete with that i guess though. Sounds like a fun environment to learn in.” That’s the standard by which *this game has never been new player friendly*. You might have had different experiences, and new players now are having different experiences, too. The ones who seek and find mentors tend to do fine and enjoy themselves (unless they pick mentors who poison them with toxic attitudes right off the bat).

The point is that it’s a complicated game that takes time to learn. This stuff about newcomers now being chased away by big overall numbers is just nonsense, a problem invented by a few folks who really want separated, capped recruiting. Newcomers don’t care if the overall rating of the team beating them by 40 points is 550 or 650 or 1350.

“Having DIII teams that are good enough to make the DI NT is just dumb.”

Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

Like i mentioned before, my pre-3.0 championship caliber D3 team was beating SimAI big 6 programs by 40 points. That roster absolutely could have made the D1 NT from a mid major or low D1 conference.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 6:11:00 PM (view original):
That’s a romanticized version of the game that used to exist, and it’s not attached to reality. In reality, there was never a “cap”. There have always been pull downs and drop downs. High prestige teams had access to players that literally wouldn’t even return the phone calls or acknowledge the existence of other teams.

New players now have access to the exact quality of recruit that veterans have. They only have to know how to find them. A relatively new player (Sportsbulls) recruited one of the best players I’ve seen in D3 in one of his first seasons, in part because he was smart enough to reach out and ask questions. That’s always been the delineating factor between new players who exceed and new players who struggle, and it always will be.

Rather than open up the entire recruiting pool to allow DIII teams to recruit to the DI level, you just remove drop downs and pull downs. It's not that hard. Everyone would then have access to the same teams the top teams did and learning what recruits are realistic for your team is not an issue, because all recruits within your cap range are realistic. At that point it's just learning about how to battle for the top tier recruits. I feel like you're so stuck on pull downs and dropdowns as if that's all people want by placing caps, but in reality, most would have no problem removing dropdowns and pulldowns.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 9:00:00 PM (view original):
“Having DIII teams that are good enough to make the DI NT is just dumb.”

Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

Like i mentioned before, my pre-3.0 championship caliber D3 team was beating SimAI big 6 programs by 40 points. That roster absolutely could have made the D1 NT from a mid major or low D1 conference.

This is problem #2 for you. DI is what you love, but in reality, we can have it great at all levels and let people enjoy the game they want, not just the one you want. DIII should not have any impact on DI outside of moving up or down from jobs. So you can go enjoy DI and let others enjoy DIII. The game is Hoops Dynasty, not Power 5 Dynasty or DI Dynasty.

Posted by rugburn on 3/14/2019 9:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 6:11:00 PM (view original):
That’s a romanticized version of the game that used to exist, and it’s not attached to reality. In reality, there was never a “cap”. There have always been pull downs and drop downs. High prestige teams had access to players that literally wouldn’t even return the phone calls or acknowledge the existence of other teams.

New players now have access to the exact quality of recruit that veterans have. They only have to know how to find them. A relatively new player (Sportsbulls) recruited one of the best players I’ve seen in D3 in one of his first seasons, in part because he was smart enough to reach out and ask questions. That’s always been the delineating factor between new players who exceed and new players who struggle, and it always will be.

Rather than open up the entire recruiting pool to allow DIII teams to recruit to the DI level, you just remove drop downs and pull downs. It's not that hard. Everyone would then have access to the same teams the top teams did and learning what recruits are realistic for your team is not an issue, because all recruits within your cap range are realistic. At that point it's just learning about how to battle for the top tier recruits. I feel like you're so stuck on pull downs and dropdowns as if that's all people want by placing caps, but in reality, most would have no problem removing dropdowns and pulldowns.

No. That’s a bad idea. It was discussed in beta, and rightly rejected. It is unrealistic (there is nothing preventing any RL players from considering offers from any school, to say nothing of the absurdity of having pools in the first place), and it would further advantage veteran coaches parked in D3. A smaller pool of recruits enhances the power of prestige and preference advantages they have, along with the experience. Caps force the new player to fish in the same pool. So your answer is essentially for them to “know their place”, ie limiting upward mobility. **** that.

Pull Downs are important to the dynamics of a functional commodity game, which needs market pressure from above and below to facilitate a rational value structure. You don’t want to play a game where some teams can swing for the fences with no consequences for striking out. Prioritization has to matter. Coaches have to make choices, and those choices must have consequences.

Posted by rugburn on 3/14/2019 9:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 9:00:00 PM (view original):
“Having DIII teams that are good enough to make the DI NT is just dumb.”

Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

Like i mentioned before, my pre-3.0 championship caliber D3 team was beating SimAI big 6 programs by 40 points. That roster absolutely could have made the D1 NT from a mid major or low D1 conference.

This is problem #2 for you. DI is what you love, but in reality, we can have it great at all levels and let people enjoy the game they want, not just the one you want. DIII should not have any impact on DI outside of moving up or down from jobs. So you can go enjoy DI and let others enjoy DIII. The game is Hoops Dynasty, not Power 5 Dynasty or DI Dynasty.

It’s not a problem at all for me. I like D3 just fine, a little better than it used to be, when the top teams had access to players others couldn’t touch. In terms of how it is dominated by veterans at the very top, it is completely 100% no different from how it used to be. So GTFO with the “learning environment” crap.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rugburn on 3/14/2019 9:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 6:11:00 PM (view original):
That’s a romanticized version of the game that used to exist, and it’s not attached to reality. In reality, there was never a “cap”. There have always been pull downs and drop downs. High prestige teams had access to players that literally wouldn’t even return the phone calls or acknowledge the existence of other teams.

New players now have access to the exact quality of recruit that veterans have. They only have to know how to find them. A relatively new player (Sportsbulls) recruited one of the best players I’ve seen in D3 in one of his first seasons, in part because he was smart enough to reach out and ask questions. That’s always been the delineating factor between new players who exceed and new players who struggle, and it always will be.

Rather than open up the entire recruiting pool to allow DIII teams to recruit to the DI level, you just remove drop downs and pull downs. It's not that hard. Everyone would then have access to the same teams the top teams did and learning what recruits are realistic for your team is not an issue, because all recruits within your cap range are realistic. At that point it's just learning about how to battle for the top tier recruits. I feel like you're so stuck on pull downs and dropdowns as if that's all people want by placing caps, but in reality, most would have no problem removing dropdowns and pulldowns.

No. That’s a bad idea. It was discussed in beta, and rightly rejected. It is unrealistic (there is nothing preventing any RL players from considering offers from any school, to say nothing of the absurdity of having pools in the first place), and it would further advantage veteran coaches parked in D3. A smaller pool of recruits enhances the power of prestige and preference advantages they have, along with the experience. Caps force the new player to fish in the same pool. So your answer is essentially for them to “know their place”, ie limiting upward mobility. **** that.

Pull Downs are important to the dynamics of a functional commodity game, which needs market pressure from above and below to facilitate a rational value structure. You don’t want to play a game where some teams can swing for the fences with no consequences for striking out. Prioritization has to matter. Coaches have to make choices, and those choices must have consequences.

So it's unrealistic to have caps, but it's not unrealistic for a DI level player to sign on with a DIII school. I got news for you, this is game. It's not all going to be real. It doesn't advantage a veteran in any way. That's the whole point of preferences such as looking for a rebuild, looking for early playing time, playing far from home, offense and defensive sets. These likely will go against a vet. High level teams cannot offer playing time and starts whenever they want without ******* off other players on their teams. Preferences are luck, but just like there are benefits for a vet, there are benefits against them, also this helps create a balance that will not enhance the power of a vet or hurt anyone's upward mobility. What hurts upward mobility is playing against a team that doesn't belong in that division. **** that.

Your arguements make absolutely no sense and are often the opposite of what actually happens. your statement of pull downs being needed is absolutely wrong. There is plenty of risk remaining. If there are 3 or 4 top teams near a great recruit, they are going to battle for that recruit. The risk is you spend the money, but may lose the recruit, or lose the opportunity to get your backup option. Do you back off and fill your roster while the other guy gets studs, or do you go all in, but have less depth? You're making statements that are not only wrong in order to support your arguement, but you're discounting anything that does not support your statement. I get it, you love the new game, and that's great, but some balance changes need to be made.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 10:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rugburn on 3/14/2019 9:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 9:00:00 PM (view original):
“Having DIII teams that are good enough to make the DI NT is just dumb.”

Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

Like i mentioned before, my pre-3.0 championship caliber D3 team was beating SimAI big 6 programs by 40 points. That roster absolutely could have made the D1 NT from a mid major or low D1 conference.

This is problem #2 for you. DI is what you love, but in reality, we can have it great at all levels and let people enjoy the game they want, not just the one you want. DIII should not have any impact on DI outside of moving up or down from jobs. So you can go enjoy DI and let others enjoy DIII. The game is Hoops Dynasty, not Power 5 Dynasty or DI Dynasty.

It’s not a problem at all for me. I like D3 just fine, a little better than it used to be, when the top teams had access to players others couldn’t touch. In terms of how it is dominated by veterans at the very top, it is completely 100% no different from how it used to be. So GTFO with the “learning environment” crap.

This goes right back to pulldowns and drop downs. It's not needed. The one thing we'll agree on is the veterans are dominating, but by more than it used to be. First starting this game, i only had to compete with DIII teams that had DIII talent, with some occasional pulldowns/dropdowns. I could make deep runs in the NT before i even learned about dropdowns and pulldowns. Now DIII teams are competing with teams full of DI talent where not a single DIII talent is on the team.

There is no such thing as “D3” or “D1” talent. If a D1 team wants a player enough to spend the resources necessary to sign him, he’s a D1 player. If not, and he chooses a D3 team, he’s a D3 player.

If there are changes that “need” to be made, they are changes you need to make to your gameplay. You are making choices. If it isn’t working for you, make other choices.

Your argument boils down to wanting the game to narrow the range of choices we can make, in order to produce predictable results that meet your expectations. This is a competitive, multiplayer game. The results are the sum of our choices. The game doesn’t need to change to produce the results you want.

“Your arguements make absolutely no sense and are often the opposite of what actually happens.”

Cite examples. Be specific.

“It doesn't advantage a veteran in any way.”

Perhaps not any way you can think of, which makes sense for folks who don’t have the foresight or imagination to see beyond their own nose. In practice, it will absolutely hurt the new player, and advantage the vet. Anyone with a baseline elementary understanding of economics will understand why. Scarce commodities in small and limited pools are far more precious (and expensive) than abundant commodities in large pools.

If there are changes that “need” to be made, they are changes you need to make to your gameplay. You are making choices. If it isn’t working for you, make other choices.

Your argument boils down to wanting the game to narrow the range of choices we can make, in order to produce predictable results that meet your expectations. This is a competitive, multiplayer game. The results are the sum of our choices. The game doesn’t need to change to produce the results you want.

My gameplay is fine. This entire thread is about why we can't retain new players and why the current system does not promote new player retention. If you want to complain about the gameplay, the same applies to you pre 3.0. Everyone else seemed to adjust fine.

“Your arguements make absolutely no sense and are often the opposite of what actually happens.”

Cite examples. Be specific.

• -- "A smaller pool of recruits enhances the power of prestige and preference advantages they have, along with the experience. Caps force the new player to fish in the same pool. So your answer is essentially for them to “know their place”, ie limiting upward mobility. **** that."

Pools do not advantage veterans. It actually limits them significantly. It creates more battles, using more resources, and reduces the gap a top team can create between themselves and lesser teams. In addition we've already shown that just like there are preferences which may benefit a vet, there are preferences that benefit new players/rebuilds

• - You said "But no one should be rewarded or feel accomplished for dominating a division where new players are forced to play, and can’t consistently compete for the top commodities, because of the inherent advantages vets have in experience, prestige, and built up preference advantages." You then follow up with Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

So as long as it's in DI, it's ok for a top team to feel accomplished for dominating new players who are forced to only play in DI, because vets have experience, prestige, and built up preference advantages. Before you say, but they have DII, the same arguments would apply if the game were only DII and DI.

Perhaps not any way you can think of, which makes sense for folks who don’t have the foresight or imagination to see beyond their own nose. In practice, it will absolutely hurt the new player, and advantage the vet. Anyone with a baseline elementary understanding of economics will understand why. Scarce commodities in small and limited pools are far more precious (and expensive) than abundant commodities in large pools.

That first sentence, the same argument applies greatly to most of what you say. I'm not sure if you are intentionally acting ignorant or if you actually can't understand some of the things people are pointing out to you. Regarding the rest, read my response on how vets are not gaining an advantage. I'll try with my basic economic understanding, because my brain can't handle that much information, but in pointing out the scarce commodities, you're making my point for me. Top teams will have to use their resources much wiser and will not be able to hoard a team of top talent, because they will face competition from all the other coaches fishing in the same pond. How many fisherman do you know like to fish in crowded location? Probably not many, because it's less chance they are going to get the big haul.

Slow clap for rugburn. Its refreshing to see a logical and well thought out post. Don't see that much around here.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/14/2019 9:00:00 PM (view original):
“Having DIII teams that are good enough to make the DI NT is just dumb.”

Having D3 at all is dumb, but here we are.

Like i mentioned before, my pre-3.0 championship caliber D3 team was beating SimAI big 6 programs by 40 points. That roster absolutely could have made the D1 NT from a mid major or low D1 conference.

It's not dumb. It used to be really fun. I had as much fun at D3 than anywhere else. Now, it's just a broken recruiting system that make you wait forever… while you hope to get your D1 players to sign. And it's getting to a location where D2 and D1 teams won't annoy your recruiting too much.

• “My gameplay is fine. This entire thread is about why we can't retain new players and why the current system does not promote new player retention. If you want to complain about the gameplay, the same applies to you pre 3.0. Everyone else seemed to adjust fine.”

A lack of caps *is not the reason* the system doesn’t retain new players. No one I’ve mentored ever complains about being able to scout and recruit players from higher pools that get overlooked or passed over by higher level human coaches. There is no reason to think that closing off pools will benefit anyone other than vets, as I’ll lay out (again) below. *The folks who want caps are veterans who complain about lower level teams locking in players they would like to fall back on without investing anything.* That’s 100% true about every related complaint I’ve seen here in the past 2&1/2 years. I’ve yet to see a new player who knows how the system works complain about that part of the system.

• “Pools do not advantage veterans. It actually limits them significantly. It creates more battles, using more resources, and reduces the gap a top team can create between themselves and lesser teams. In addition we've already shown that just like there are preferences which may benefit a vet, there are preferences that benefit new players/rebuilds.”

Ok, so your example of something I say being “the opposite of what actually happens” really means “the opposite of what rugburn says should happen”. Or in other words, “You’re contradicting me!” Just so we’re all clear what words mean to you.

Smarter people than you discussed this at length in beta. What you think should happen is not how it will play out. Closed pools advantage vets in commodity games. Always. (Again, more on that below). Limited number of preferences for wants rebuild don’t mitigate that advantage for any recruits other than the few that have that advantage - and it is purposefully rare to see that advantage in players at the top of the pool - far more likely to see wants success. Regarding playing time, vets know how to mix in freshmen, promises are generally not an obstacle for 2-3 players in a class, so basically for most players.

Who *really* gets an advantage from closing pools? The vets in higher divisions who want to swing for the fences among players at the top, and have their backups waiting patiently for them to drop. That’s why *most* of the folks who want caps ignore the counter suggestions like having some players choose Juco after signing with lower division teams, or going to more aggressive and intelligent sim AI teams. If the idea was really concern for how intimidating top D3 teams are for new players, you should be jumping all over those ideas, because that gets you there without whacking the economics and prioritization.

• “So as long as it's in DI, it's ok for a top team to feel accomplished for dominating new players who are forced to only play in DI, because vets have experience, prestige, and built up preference advantages. Before you say, but they have DII, the same arguments would apply if the game were only DII and DI.”

This is nonsense, and hardly worth responding to, other than saying yes, I do think it’s silly that D3 is part of this game. No other college sport game ever created found it necessary to start down that low. It’s a novelty, and it’s fine, and I’m not suggesting it be lopped off. But it isn’t where you increase retention, because for the vast majority of folks interested in a college basketball simulation, D3 is not where they plan to play.

Now regarding the stuff at the bottom, let’s talk again about how closed pools advantage veterans, because if you’re not going to get this, you’re not going to understand this game (or basic economics) at all. A larger supply of resources, or commodities, is generally good for consumers. Prices are lower when commodities are abundant. When the supply of valuable commodities is suppressed, prices go way up. The folks with *means* are going to find ways to get that value, and in this game, “means” includes the inherent advantages of being a vet parked in D3. Prestige, experience with the geography and coaches around, all the vet-leaning preferences, which is pretty much everything except wants rebuild, a class structure maximizing recruiting value, etc. New players can compete for some of those commodities - but they’re going to have to battle veterans for them, and they’ll constantly be punching up and losing those battles. The other option is to stay away from battles, and accept lower class recruits, and then try to win with those. Good luck newcomer!

A new player should have two questions when thinking about the existential goodness gap between her team and the top D3 teams: 1) how do I get there?and 2) how long will it take? With the game that exists, the first answer is to learn how the game works as quickly and as well as you can; and the second answer is that you can start building that kind of team with your first recruiting class. The new player has the same access to the same large group of D1 and D2 pool players that will get passed over by higher level humans. Huge pond. Lots of places to find, where you *will not have to battle* veterans for those recruits if you don’t want to. The only issue is learning how and where to find those places in scouting.