Posted by zorzii on 6/22/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/22/2017 10:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/22/2017 10:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2017 9:09:00 AM (view original):
Or it would make the experience worse. Veteran users beat new users regardless of the rules/guidelines. FACT!!!

I am not, I have played under 2.0 and 3.0. I know some things are better this time around and I would not want to go back. I know there are flipped odds for recruits but competition is better this way around in recruiting at D1, which is good. AP prevents super classes these days, which is good. Scouting, the way it was implemented is complicated, but more logical and a tougher challenge, it's good.

I don't like D3 and D2 not being able to sign players from the start like D1, fix this. I want the complete experience.

I haven't been able to put much time into my teams this year with work... I am on autopilot. But recruiting I have always enjoyed and I want it to be the best possible so you feel in it from the start to the finish.

Now at least we're being honest, and dropping the pretense of concern for protecting new player led teams from established D3 dynasties. This is about you not wanting to wait until the final day of recruiting to sign D1 rejects, but feeling like you have to in order to keep up with the OVR Jones's.

The good news is that you don't have to wait until the last day to recruit, if you don't want to. I scout D2 recruits in Texas most years as cheap backups, and every year I do, I see a half dozen or more that would have fit in on my team just fine, but end up going to Sims or smart D3 coaches when I pass on them.

Be honest intellectually or don't discuss topic. You know we all check around for D2 players either as a fall back option or as a hidden gem... I said let me sign D1 players from the first cycle at D2 or D3.

You said "I don't like D3 and D2 not being able to sign players from the start like D1, fix this. I want the complete experience." It's literally right up there. I responded to what you said.

Now you're saying what you really mean is that you want to be able to sign D1 caliber players at D2 and D3 from the start. I'm sure Spud will be pleased to know he has a convert.

Either way, at least we've dropped the pretense of being concerned about new players here.

Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 11:20:00 AM (view original):
I was thinking a little bit about why I'm finding D1 recruiting more fun than D3 recruiting.

For me, it's the same reason that it's more fun playing in a fuller conference. You get to play against real live human beings. It's more challenging and you need to be more strategic. You can interact with the person and say "GG sir!" or "I'll get you next time you dirty rat".

And for me, this is exactly how I feel about recruiting. At D1, I'm constantly battling other human users. Every season I've had good recruiting battles.

But at D3, I'm battling sims 99% of the time. I realize you'll lose more battles if you're going against humans but isn't that the whole point? To compete against one another vs a computer? Isn't that what this game is supposed to be about? Population size is the cause of this a little bit but it's mostly the way the system is set up IMHO.

Still spot on, no battles, just location. Anyways, how many battles are there to take at D3? None. Money isn't enough. How many at D2, maybe 1 but make sure it's not against D1... Benis has a point.

Or, if you prefer the D1 game, play D1. I hear that some worlds have D1 openings.

Posted by shoe3 on 6/22/2017 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/22/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/22/2017 10:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/22/2017 10:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2017 9:09:00 AM (view original):
Or it would make the experience worse. Veteran users beat new users regardless of the rules/guidelines. FACT!!!

I am not, I have played under 2.0 and 3.0. I know some things are better this time around and I would not want to go back. I know there are flipped odds for recruits but competition is better this way around in recruiting at D1, which is good. AP prevents super classes these days, which is good. Scouting, the way it was implemented is complicated, but more logical and a tougher challenge, it's good.

I don't like D3 and D2 not being able to sign players from the start like D1, fix this. I want the complete experience.

I haven't been able to put much time into my teams this year with work... I am on autopilot. But recruiting I have always enjoyed and I want it to be the best possible so you feel in it from the start to the finish.

Now at least we're being honest, and dropping the pretense of concern for protecting new player led teams from established D3 dynasties. This is about you not wanting to wait until the final day of recruiting to sign D1 rejects, but feeling like you have to in order to keep up with the OVR Jones's.

The good news is that you don't have to wait until the last day to recruit, if you don't want to. I scout D2 recruits in Texas most years as cheap backups, and every year I do, I see a half dozen or more that would have fit in on my team just fine, but end up going to Sims or smart D3 coaches when I pass on them.

Be honest intellectually or don't discuss topic. You know we all check around for D2 players either as a fall back option or as a hidden gem... I said let me sign D1 players from the first cycle at D2 or D3.

You said "I don't like D3 and D2 not being able to sign players from the start like D1, fix this. I want the complete experience." It's literally right up there. I responded to what you said.

Now you're saying what you really mean is that you want to be able to sign D1 caliber players at D2 and D3 from the start. I'm sure Spud will be pleased to know he has a convert.

Either way, at least we've dropped the pretense of being concerned about new players here.

I also said to implement it with a cap.. and that D1 is not going to be beat by D3 with the economy of the game right now. So it will make for some D2 against D3... not much and it will make SIMS stronger all divisions.

"I also said to implement it with a cap.. and that D1 is not going to be beat by D3 with the economy of the game right now. So it will make for some D2 against D3... not much and it will make SIMS stronger all divisions."

Still mostly incoherent, but at least now we've got a skeleton of an actual proposal.

So you say you want "caps", but claim it's "one pool". Well no. It's 3 pools, with some overlap. It's one very large pool for D1, one smaller pool for D2, and one much smaller pool for D3. The concept is the same as what you were talking about earlier. Your bad idea would make recruiting much more difficult for new players. The most valuable players available to D3 teams are going to go do D3 dynasties, or up to D2. So for the fourth time, just to make this clear for anyone still following along at home, we have dropped the pretense that any part of this discussion is about the real gap between how good new player D3 teams are, and how good dynasty D3 teams are. This is just about the playing preferences of a few veteran players who want to stay parked in D3.

And proposing to divide the pools available for each division by overall, with no regard for cores or potential... in a thread about the gap between D3 dynasties and new player teams. I mean... Kudos for having the balls to type it out loud, I guess.

Yeah you are super duper brave zorzii. Shoe might try to mock you now!

Anything of substance to add, Duke?

Shoe - ever consider a career as a town crier?

Are the player pools not currently divided by overall rating? I stand by the idea of making D3 teams only able to recruit D3 players, but have no issue with the current D2/D1 split. I've heard the arguments against it, but maintain that it would provide a simpler experience for new users.

Posted by mbriese on 6/22/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Are the player pools not currently divided by overall rating? I stand by the idea of making D3 teams only able to recruit D3 players, but have no issue with the current D2/D1 split. I've heard the arguments against it, but maintain that it would provide a simpler experience for new users.

Or that, with a cap at D2 and signing from the get go.

Posted by zorzii on 6/22/2017 12:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 6/22/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Are the player pools not currently divided by overall rating? I stand by the idea of making D3 teams only able to recruit D3 players, but have no issue with the current D2/D1 split. I've heard the arguments against it, but maintain that it would provide a simpler experience for new users.

Or that, with a cap at D2 and signing from the get go.

Or, if you like D1 but not D2/D3, just play D1. I think most worlds have D1 openings. Anyone know for sure?

Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Shoe - ever consider a career as a town crier?

That's a no then. Sticking with obfuscations and red herrings. Got it.

Posted by shoe3 on 6/22/2017 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Shoe - ever consider a career as a town crier?

That's a no then. Sticking with obfuscations and red herrings. Got it.

You missed your calling brother. But it might not be too late for a change.

Posted by mbriese on 6/22/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Are the player pools not currently divided by overall rating? I stand by the idea of making D3 teams only able to recruit D3 players, but have no issue with the current D2/D1 split. I've heard the arguments against it, but maintain that it would provide a simpler experience for new users.

No, they're not divided by overall. D2 players reach up into at least the 530s (by OVR), D1 players reach down into the mid 400s (by OVR). There's no exact rhyme or reason I know of to discern how they are separated, except that it's related to a formula combination of OVR, existing cores, maybe overall potential (though not necessarily potential in cores), and maybe work ethic. And to some extent, maybe GPA, especially in cases of players that start ineligible.

Why is everyone concerned with holding new player's hands? I'm in my first season in Rupp and there is plenty of knowledge on this board to get up to speed on recruiting. I've looked at the top D3 teams in Rupp, but I've never been jealous that they have substantially better players. The point of a dynasty game is to reward talented players. I think the lack of stuff to do when you have a bad team discourages new players. I have a terrible team and every game is almost a guaranteed loss yet once the scouting budget is gone, there is very little to do on a day to day basis until recruiting.