Posted by Benis on 4/25/2017 7:03:00 AM (view original):
The participation trophy comment is aimed at D1 I think. So your example doesn't really count.

The whole idea is that you start at the bottom and work your way up over time. This includes starting at low D1 and then moving up to mid major and then finally getting to B6. From there you build up a program that has been mediocre and turn it into a contender.

It's much different now. Take my NMSU team for example. Took me 5 seasons to reach the S16 after starting with D- prestige. This would have been A LOT harder to achieve in 2.0 than 3.0. I didn't need to put in my dues and work my way up. You can just join D1 at any level and be successful. For those that spent real life years working their way up 2.0, this would understandably rub them the wrong way.

"You can just join D1 at any level and be successful"

No, you cannot. My example was really aimed at showing that people play the game, they learn the game, they get better. It applies to all levels. Now that those mid-majors, or bottom-feeding B6, can land good recruits, the playing field has been leveled. Prestige still matters but it can be overcome. No one, at any level, is being handed a participation trophy. They have simply gotten better at a game that creates a somewhat level playing field for all.

Sort of what a SIM GAME should do.

Some people don't like how they made D1 similar to D2/D3 in that regard. They used to be pretty different games. Not as much anymore.

Its a matter of preference and some people don't like the change.

The game can become tougher. And to be honest, location has gotten a lot more important. In WNMU D2 Rupp, I had to go internationally to get a recruiting that is enough to compete. Arizona : filled, Colorado filled, Texas filled, Utah owned, UNLV owned. When I shoot for D1 players, I get in battles with D1 teams... They fill their bench or rebuild with my hopefuls. I still think you need some sort of cap to make it fair and not a location thing.

D1 should take players from D2. We had this discussion a few days ago.

Anyway, by the time a user makes it to D1, he's not clueless. He may not know exactly what players he needs for D1 but, again, it's not hard to figure out. Before, he just had to take his beatings, bide his time and hope someone died so he could get a competitive B6 team. That's a terrible game to market. This is better and there are no participation trophies.

Unless someone wants to produce a couple of D1 users who were constantly finishing 5-22 for years on end and are suddenly Final Four teams.

Posted by Benis on 4/25/2017 7:03:00 AM (view original):
The participation trophy comment is aimed at D1 I think. So your example doesn't really count.

The whole idea is that you start at the bottom and work your way up over time. This includes starting at low D1 and then moving up to mid major and then finally getting to B6. From there you build up a program that has been mediocre and turn it into a contender.

It's much different now. Take my NMSU team for example. Took me 5 seasons to reach the S16 after starting with D- prestige. This would have been A LOT harder to achieve in 2.0 than 3.0. I didn't need to put in my dues and work my way up. You can just join D1 at any level and be successful. For those that spent real life years working their way up 2.0, this would understandably rub them the wrong way.

Requiring users to wait real life years before they are able to play the game they signed up for is not a good game model. Bright and resourceful users should be able to compete. There should not be an obligatory "dues paying" period, especially not after users have already spent the requisite amount of time in lower divisions before being eligible. I was on the verge of giving up all teams on both handles before 3.0 was announced. I had paid dues aplenty. And then you get to Big 6, and it was still a game of outlast, even with a decent baseline team like Virginia. I had to wait for Stewdog to leave Va Tech before I could get any recruiting elbow room in the old system. It's not realistic, and it's bad game design. I don't resent *at all* the fact that players no longer have to put up with that in order to play competitively.

Odd analogy, but germane, I think. Think about merging lanes due to upcoming construction on a freeway. In most states, it is perfectly legal to use all open lanes up until the merge, and then take turns at the merge. This is called the zipper merge. In Minnesota, it's actually law. This enrages some drivers who are generally just ignorant of the law, and why it exists. It reduces gridlock, because all valid real estate is being used, instead of a half-mile of perfectly usable lane just sitting open. It's also safer, because people aren't squeezing in to tighter spaces at faster speeds. But road ragers don't typically care much about that, even though it's undeniably a better system for everyone by every measure. They just see someone "cheating", who isn't taking their turn, or "paying their dues".

Resentment is a poor basis for public policy, and game design.

PK- your teams seem to be doing about the same in 3.0 as 2.0 so I don't understand your elbow room comment.

Posted by Benis on 4/25/2017 8:16:00 AM (view original):
PK- your teams seem to be doing about the same in 3.0 as 2.0 so I don't understand your elbow room comment.

Stewdog left Va Tech long before 3.0 came out benis. You want another shot at that one?

Okay so what's your point?

Just looked up Stewdog's VaTech teams and they weren't even good. So now I REALLY don't see your point.

He left year 88. The recruits I got that year were the basis of my first decent team in that conference in year 91 (last 2.0 season). My point is what I said above. I had "paid dues" to get there, then as the doormat that had been sim AI and near winless in conference for 4 years, I had to wait until someone above me left before I had access to decent ACC level recruits in my own state. That doesn't happen now. 51 doesn't beat 49 100% of the time anymore in recruiting.

The recruiting system used to be non-competitive, and favored the risk averse. Now it's competitive. I don't enjoy 3.0 because my teams are so much better than they used to be. I enjoy 3.0 because it's more fun to play.

"participation trophy" = "why, back in my day we had to walk uphill both ways!"

i don't think it applies, because the top teams in this game have not changed from HD2. i find it really difficult to believe that giving mid-majors a chance to occasionally make a tourney run is the end of civilization as we know it. my high D1 teams are still high D1 teams and my midmajor team is still decidedly a midmajor team.

also, the participation trophy thing has become a pretty politically charged characterization, so i really wish people would drop it when talking about a game.

I have suggested a simple answer before. The change is obvious:

Allow new users to a world to "purchase" a history as a Big6 assistant coach; D1 assistant; or D2 assistant. $25; $15; $12.95 (no discount- no using prior credits).

At the same time, increase firings at the D1 level. When someone gets fired, make sure they are still eligible for a D1 job and give them a credit like they made E8. With D1 as empty as it stands, the only firings should be ghost ships.

Posted by zorzii on 4/25/2017 7:51:00 AM (view original):
The game can become tougher. And to be honest, location has gotten a lot more important. In WNMU D2 Rupp, I had to go internationally to get a recruiting that is enough to compete. Arizona : filled, Colorado filled, Texas filled, Utah owned, UNLV owned. When I shoot for D1 players, I get in battles with D1 teams... They fill their bench or rebuild with my hopefuls. I still think you need some sort of cap to make it fair and not a location thing.

D2 location was always dependent on what D1 schools near you were filled....

Posted by rogelio on 4/25/2017 9:24:00 AM (view original):
I have suggested a simple answer before. The change is obvious:

Allow new users to a world to "purchase" a history as a Big6 assistant coach; D1 assistant; or D2 assistant. $25; $15; $12.95 (no discount- no using prior credits).

At the same time, increase firings at the D1 level. When someone gets fired, make sure they are still eligible for a D1 job and give them a credit like they made E8. With D1 as empty as it stands, the only firings should be ghost ships.

this, or something along these lines, is a good idea. I've long advocated somehow giving new players a chance to just start at D1, because you learn in a mostly-empty low D1 conference as much as you can in D3, but a lot of people are much more interested in coaches schools they've heard of.

if i ran this game, i would just contract D3 altogether. even more so in HD3, it seems like it's basically the same game as D2 with a few great coaches that take home all of the credits. what's the point? but that's just me.

Posted by bathtubhippo on 4/25/2017 9:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 4/25/2017 9:24:00 AM (view original):
I have suggested a simple answer before. The change is obvious:

Allow new users to a world to "purchase" a history as a Big6 assistant coach; D1 assistant; or D2 assistant. $25; $15; $12.95 (no discount- no using prior credits).

At the same time, increase firings at the D1 level. When someone gets fired, make sure they are still eligible for a D1 job and give them a credit like they made E8. With D1 as empty as it stands, the only firings should be ghost ships.

this, or something along these lines, is a good idea. I've long advocated somehow giving new players a chance to just start at D1, because you learn in a mostly-empty low D1 conference as much as you can in D3, but a lot of people are much more interested in coaches schools they've heard of.

if i ran this game, i would just contract D3 altogether. even more so in HD3, it seems like it's basically the same game as D2 with a few great coaches that take home all of the credits. what's the point? but that's just me.

It's not just you.

https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=500020