This is just an example and did not actually happen to me yet.

Two DII teams go on a DI recruit (applicable for early, whenever, and end of period one--also very few lates) early period one. One team offers a 'ship and the next cycle another team follows suit. The first coach (and second coach also) notices that the first team is closer to the recruit and has a much better preference match. The first coach puts on three HV and jumps to moderate while the second team drops down to very low and stays there the rest of the first cycle--not putting on any effort. In the first cycle of period two the second coach puts in 20 HVs and a CV, going up to very high and dropping the other coach down to very low while signing that cycle.

Several fixes to address this were suggested in Beta. They decided to roll it out instead.

I don't have any problems with this. Put more effort than 3 HV's if you REALLY want him.

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/19/2017 5:48:00 PM (view original):
This is just an example and did not actually happen to me yet.

Two DII teams go on a DI recruit (applicable for early, whenever, and end of period one--also very few lates) early period one. One team offers a 'ship and the next cycle another team follows suit. The first coach (and second coach also) notices that the first team is closer to the recruit and has a much better preference match. The first coach puts on three HV and jumps to moderate while the second team drops down to very low and stays there the rest of the first cycle--not putting on any effort. In the first cycle of period two the second coach puts in 20 HVs and a CV, going up to very high and dropping the other coach down to very low while signing that cycle.

I don't see a problem here. It isn't an auction.

Yeah, I don't see that as an issue. If you want someone, put more than the minimum effort in.

I thought people had a problem with ebay style sniping in the previous version, not anymore?

My issue with it is that you KNOW when the recruit will sign. It's 100% guaranteed he will sign that exact cycle so you can snipe. I use this to gain an advantage all the time.

What about if the other team didn't even show up on the considering list because of the display limitations? Do people think that's a problem or no?

For arguments sake let's say coach A puts in 15 HVs total.

Posted by Benis on 6/19/2017 7:29:00 PM (view original):
I thought people had a problem with ebay style sniping in the previous version, not anymore?

My issue with it is that you KNOW when the recruit will sign. It's 100% guaranteed he will sign that exact cycle so you can snipe. I use this to gain an advantage all the time.

What about if the other team didn't even show up on the considering list because of the display limitations? Do people think that's a problem or no?

Second paragraph is what I mean. I think it's a problem in DI Top 100 but not much else. That being said, DI Top 100 are the 100 most important recruits in the game.

Not an issue. Just a problem with 10 teams list. And d2 not able to to sign anything in the first session.

Posted by Benis on 6/19/2017 7:29:00 PM (view original):
I thought people had a problem with ebay style sniping in the previous version, not anymore?

My issue with it is that you KNOW when the recruit will sign. It's 100% guaranteed he will sign that exact cycle so you can snipe. I use this to gain an advantage all the time.

What about if the other team didn't even show up on the considering list because of the display limitations? Do people think that's a problem or no?

The display limitation is a problem, and they should fix it. But even that problem is mitigated by the fact that both coaches have ample opportunity to extend visits in line with priorities and valuation. If coach A prioritizes the guy highly, he should set the value higher than 3 HVs. 3 HVs is an easy value to beat.

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/19/2017 8:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 6/19/2017 7:29:00 PM (view original):
I thought people had a problem with ebay style sniping in the previous version, not anymore?

My issue with it is that you KNOW when the recruit will sign. It's 100% guaranteed he will sign that exact cycle so you can snipe. I use this to gain an advantage all the time.

What about if the other team didn't even show up on the considering list because of the display limitations? Do people think that's a problem or no?

Second paragraph is what I mean. I think it's a problem in DI Top 100 but not much else. That being said, DI Top 100 are the 100 most important recruits in the game.

"DI Top 100 are the 100 most important recruits in the game."

Not at the D2 level. No way. There are too many fully red-core duds in that lot; the ones available to D2 programs are, generally speaking, not going to be the most important players that team will recruit.

The most important D2 players are the high potential guys ranked 50-200 at their position, just below the level of player a D1 is going to prioritize highly.

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/19/2017 8:10:00 PM (view original):
For arguments sake let's say coach A puts in 15 HVs total.

At 15 visits, if he really does have a preference advantage, he should be in the roll. And if he's going to invest that much, why not 20?

Do visits in line with how much you value the guy. If you want to try to get a guy for cheap, you are making a gamble, especially if the considering list is hiding teams.

I am not complaining because I got burned by this ****. One of the main reasons Seble himself said we needed 3.0 was to eliminate eBay style sniping. We did except for one division and one cycle. I abuse the **** out of this thing but it isn't that fun.

DII recruiting is this:

Put 1 AP on 35 guys. Pick the best ones with no DI to target. Put enough APs on to unlock Home Visit. Wait 5 days and check every 6 hours to make sure no DI team is on your recruits. Drop 10 HVs on two guys first cycle second session who have unsuspecting poor old DII guys on them who though they were safe. The poor coaches don't get a chance to respond. Why do I have all this money? Oh, because taking 1-2 walkons each year is ******* OP. I'm just going to run 10 guys slowdown with a walk on and redshirt each year now. Oh, what strategic fun!

Note: What takes this to another level is not offering a 'ship to make it appear you have no interest.

****** Moderate Yes
****** Very Low No

If you are the top team would you drop 10 HVs on all the recruits that look like this to be safe? NOPE!

Posted by cubcub113 on 6/19/2017 9:42:00 PM (view original):
I am not complaining because I got burned by this ****. One of the main reasons Seble himself said we needed 3.0 was to eliminate eBay style sniping. We did except for one division and one cycle. I abuse the **** out of this thing but it isn't that fun.

DII recruiting is this:

Put 1 AP on 35 guys. Pick the best ones with no DI to target. Put enough APs on to unlock Home Visit. Wait 5 days and check every 6 hours to make sure no DI team is on your recruits. Drop 10 HVs on two guys first cycle second session who have unsuspecting poor old DII guys on them who though they were safe. The poor coaches don't get a chance to respond. Why do I have all this money? Oh, because taking 1-2 walkons each year is ******* OP. I'm just going to run 10 guys slowdown with a walk on and redshirt each year now. Oh, what strategic fun!

Note: What takes this to another level is not offering a 'ship to make it appear you have no interest.

****** Moderate Yes
****** Very Low No

If you are the top team would you drop 10 HVs on all the recruits that look like this to be safe? NOPE!

As TJ has said, that's one strategy. But it's not the only one, nor is it the best.

Shoe, as you are a much better coach I will defer to you in this case. This may not be the only strategy or the best strategy, but it is a very viable strategy that is a pain in the butt to deal with. Everything is fine in DI because the system was cleverly designed so all the recruits didn't sign in the same cycle. All I want is a recruit to not sign the cycle:

1. A team goes from being non-considered to considered.