Based upon how many threads have been deleted recently, it looks like someone is actively monitoring the forums.

So can we get an update on Jobs please? It was announced back in October that the next big change was going to a big job overhaul.

Is this being worked or did WIS just give up?

Job Logic Changes

While firings would probably help me in Rupp, it's gotta be a last resort. Dumping someone for being 12-15 season after season is realistic in the real world but this is a sim. Paying customer, blah, blah, blah.

With all the gnashing of teeth over users who forgot to renew(clearly on them) and didn't get their team back, it's obvious people don't like losing their team even if it's their fault.

I don't know that anyone still thinks the problem to fix right now is not enough firings. If people are holding on to that, they're not thinking very clearly about the current game. That was one answer to the high D1 logjam problem that existed in the previous version of the game, but that's been addressed through 3.0 attrition. There is no more high D1 logjam. I could go along with the elite baseline teams having a shorter fuse, but that's about all, and it's not a high priority.

Now the problem is that those vacated jobs sit empty until the team is absolutely decimated, because the only people "qualified" to take them before they tank are other coaches with more successful D1 programs. And high baseline prestige D1 sim teams are apparently coded to take walk ons instead of reaching for available lower tier talent. So they fall down hard. Get a couple of those types of teams in your conference, and suddenly your half full Big 6 conference has a worse RPI than a completely empty low D1 conference, because at least those teams are filling their rosters.

The overall experience requirement for low D1 should be lowered to 3 seasons. That requirement can be higher for higher baseline teams, but in general, Big 6 jobs shouldn't sit sim if there are coaches with 5-6 seasons invested that want to take them over.

I'm mostly fine with the firing staying the way it is. I get it - for the reasons you said.

I'm more concerned about the hiring process. There have been a few threads lately about users getting beaten out by inferior resumes because of 'experience'. I think that is pretty silly (esp in BH's example where he lost to a coach who wasn't even in the world for the previous 5 seasons).

I'd love for a quicker path to D1. To qualify for a C prestige D1 school takes at least 5-8 total seasons. Filling Rupp D1 would be A LOT quicker if this were changed.

There are other ideas and most are covered in the thread I linked.

A more radical idea is that if you're currently at D1 in other worlds then you qualify for all D prestige D1 teams in all worlds.

I'm sure there are unintended consequences of this but I think D1 would fill up very fast if you could go straight there and not have to spend a YEAR in real life getting there. Some people don't mind that or like working their way up but others just don't want to deal with it. So this could lead to more teams for current users.

"So they fall down hard. Get a couple of those types of teams in your conference, and suddenly your half full Big 6 conference has a worse RPI than a completely empty low D1 conference, because at least those teams are filling their rosters."

Bingo.

It also makes moving up to B6 from mid or low-major less desirable since you are now committing yourself to a complete rebuild.

Quicker path to D1 has long been an urgent need. Few users sign up dreaming of a long, expensive career in D2. And WIS has always marketed the draw of D1 as the reason to play.

They'll probably overhaul recruiting again first though.

completely agree with pretty much everything said so far: firings are no longer a significant need since the high D1 logjam has been cleared, high D1 sim recruiting is a disaster, and the road to D1 is much too time-consuming.

IMO you should absolutely be able to start in low D1 if you are D1-qualified in any world, and otherwise, it shouldn't take more than a season each at D2 and D3. honestly, i think new players could learn just fine from starting in a low-level D1 conference since the recruiting experience is pretty different at D1 vs D2/D3 anyway but whatevs.

Winning season at D3, two at D2, qualify for D1. I know the "pay your dues" people would hate it but no one wants to wait a full calendar year to reach some crappy D1 school.

from a marketability standpoint, i think there are a lot of college basketball fans out there who are only interested in playing D1 and don't re-up after their FREEHD seasons when they realize they are stuck in D2/D3 for awhile.

Posted by bathtubhippo on 5/22/2017 12:55:00 PM (view original):
from a marketability standpoint, i think there are a lot of college basketball fans out there who are only interested in playing D1 and don't re-up after their FREEHD seasons when they realize they are stuck in D2/D3 for awhile.

I suggested this quite some time ago and was called a delicate snowflake who didn't want to "earn" anything because I wanted everything handed to me. By at least half a dozen users.

there is nothing worse than when someone opposes an improvement on the basis of either (a) being against all change, period, or (b) the attitude of 'i had to suffer, so everyone else should too, as that's only fair'...and both are illogical attitudes to have when they stand in the way of potential improvements for everyone (ie, increased users in the game would make this a better game).

besides, it's not like we're saying hand a new user Syracuse or Duke. but why shouldn't they have Portland State, if it's just a sim anyway?

I think the 'paying your dues' attitude isn't necessarily about being able to move up to D1. It was having a really successful team, off the bat. In 3.0, it's easier to build a good team when starting from low D1.

But I digress... let's not get too off track about that..

Fix jobs! Yay! Go HD!

As I recall, I simply suggested that people sign up to play as a team they see in the tourney. Very few want W. Conn St. I didn't suggest that anyone start at even low level ACC just that starting at Portland St made the goal of ACC seem more realistic within a reasonable time frame. I have no idea what the real time frame is but 10-12 seasons is two years. And, if it takes 12 seasons to reach the low level ACC, that's a tough sell.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/22/2017 12:26:00 PM (view original):
Winning season at D3, two at D2, qualify for D1. I know the "pay your dues" people would hate it but no one wants to wait a full calendar year to reach some crappy D1 school.

Two winnings seasons or a post season appearance in D2*

I'm all for "pay your dues", but I would much rather that be at lower D1 schools.

I have a D2 team right now, because I dropped my D1 team and now I have to "requalify". I HATE D2. It's so boring to me. But, here I am, giving them money just so I can qualify again.