zorzi's recruiting cap issue Topic

I am okay with it the way it is. However for the sake of the discussion I will throw out a simple idea to consider for the discussion on the "problem" you are discussing.

Why not give a hit to the work ethic of a recruit if they go to a lower division team? It seems that a guy who thought he was D1 material and ends up at a lower division school would be less likely to work as hard and not listen to the coaches as much thus reducing his work ethic. That simple change would take care of the low starting high potential guys becoming dominant and also take care of the mediocre WE guys that slip down. Let's assume a conservative 20 point WE drop for D2 and 40 point WE drop for D3. Now a stud with 30 WE and good numbers still has his initial skills but only a 10 WE at a D2 school and 0 WE at a D3 school. A high potential guy with a 60 WE will take longer to develop at D2 with a 40 WE and at D3 with a 20 WE.

Maybe it is the worst idea in the world and I admit I am not familiar with all the ins and outs of the programming. However a simple drop in WE would seem to be the simplest "fix" for the issue being discussed.
6/21/2017 11:29 PM
Depends.. could there be negative WE?
6/22/2017 12:57 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
He talks about it in every thread so you have to know what it is.

Sarcastically, I suggested that improvement be capped on lower division teams based on Team Overall. Thinking about it, maybe it's not the worst idea ever if it's applied to individual players.

Maybe any D1/D2 recruited by D3 automatically changes "green/blue" to "black" for improvement. He's getting worse coaching(D3 coaches, in the real world, can't be as good as D1/D2) and inferior training facilities(same concept).

D1 recruited by D2 automatically changes "green" to "blue" for improvement. Same concept.

Thoughts? Solution to a non-problem?
Good idea. I'm in favor of this.
6/22/2017 2:52 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
He talks about it in every thread so you have to know what it is.

Sarcastically, I suggested that improvement be capped on lower division teams based on Team Overall. Thinking about it, maybe it's not the worst idea ever if it's applied to individual players.

Maybe any D1/D2 recruited by D3 automatically changes "green/blue" to "black" for improvement. He's getting worse coaching(D3 coaches, in the real world, can't be as good as D1/D2) and inferior training facilities(same concept).

D1 recruited by D2 automatically changes "green" to "blue" for improvement. Same concept.

Thoughts? Solution to a non-problem?
Why do you and zorzii always want to f*ck D3? Leave it alone. It is fun for new coaches.
6/22/2017 5:21 AM
Trust me, I don't. Hence the "Solution to a non-problem?" sentence.

But, as I noted, zorzi brings it up in every thread. Others agree with him. If something HAS to be done, I was making a suggestion.
6/22/2017 7:09 AM
Posted by rednu on 6/21/2017 9:33:00 PM (view original):
Some thoughts, just for variety's sake and to add to the discussion...

1. How about WIS applies the effects of potential BEFORE assigning a projected division level to recruits? As it stands now, we have recruits labeled D1 who REALLY ARE D3 level players...and in at least a couple cases I've encountered people I wouldn't even sign to a D3 program I coached...but they're sitting there at D1 and being recruited by D1 teams, generally Sim. WIS needs to recognize and apply the potential that's there (given how old potential is, it floors me that they don't already...), then apply their default Player Roles formula (which I'm thinking is a good chunk of how divisions are assigned now to generated recruits) and assign player division projections based off the scores using what the player could develop into with potential accounted for.

While this might sound insignificant, I think it would have an important subtle effect on the game -- Sim D1 teams would now attempting to draw players from the correct pool of recruits -- ones who will actually DEVELOP INTO D1 players. Human coaches still blow Simmy out of the water in most instances to win the top prizes, but now the D1 Sims are pulling more of the upper-echelon talent-to-be into their rosters, reducing their flow down to D2. Elite D2 human coaches with lots of openings and good location/preference advantages will still be able to out-battle Sim D1's for players, but I don't take that as an altogether bad thing from time to time. But they would likely encounter greater interference as the pool of Sim teams will now be funneled onto worthy players rather than getting sidetracked onto people that no human coach would ever consider for D1. The same would occur in D2 with D3 human coaches...humans will reach up but Simmy would pull from players that will actually develop into D2 caliber players within the engine. Sim teams get stronger overall within divisions and humans reaching up encounter greater resistance due to the distribution of Sims being on divisionally-appropriate recruits, where it should be.


2. I'd like to see a situation whereby the second session is staggered somehow so that D1 starts/ends 1 day before D2, which starts/ends 1 day before D3...D1 Sim teams that were unable to fill their scholarship allotments will pull the "best available" D1 identified players from the unsigned D1 player pool to fill their rosters...these players would still receive walk-on status. Human coaches could either receive the same or be victims of their own inability to fill the roster (or their strategy of not wishing to fill a roster up to 12) and receive the same randomly generated walk-ons that we get now. At the end of this D1 session, all remaining D1 players are automatically reassigned into the D2 pool as D2 recruits, allowing them to automatically be offered scholarships by D2 teams with no unlock necessary, and the process repeats itself in 24 hours as eligible D2 players are divvied among schools needing to fill out their rosters and all remaining players are then assigned D3 status for the final 24 hour window of recruiting. The start of D2 Session 2 and D3 Session 2 would similarly be delayed by 24 and 48 hours respectively from the start of D1 session 2, which allows for human D1 teams with new coaches and coaches dealing with EE's or a rough go things in Cycle 1 a chance to "catch up" to lower division coaches stopped at the red light between Sessions 1 and 2.

3. Sim AI needs to be more aggressive at attacking lower division coaches. As it stands now, I don't think a D1 Sim distinguishes between a D2 or a D3 when coming onto a recruit. It absolutely should.
This is spot on, and a very good post!
6/22/2017 7:15 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2017 7:09:00 AM (view original):
Trust me, I don't. Hence the "Solution to a non-problem?" sentence.

But, as I noted, zorzi brings it up in every thread. Others agree with him. If something HAS to be done, I was making a suggestion.
Well good news - WIS is going to literally do nothing so all these conversations serve no purpose other than to keep us entertained.
6/22/2017 7:19 AM
Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 7:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2017 7:09:00 AM (view original):
Trust me, I don't. Hence the "Solution to a non-problem?" sentence.

But, as I noted, zorzi brings it up in every thread. Others agree with him. If something HAS to be done, I was making a suggestion.
Well good news - WIS is going to literally do nothing so all these conversations serve no purpose other than to keep us entertained.
+1 Hibernation time
6/22/2017 7:43 AM
Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 7:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2017 7:09:00 AM (view original):
Trust me, I don't. Hence the "Solution to a non-problem?" sentence.

But, as I noted, zorzi brings it up in every thread. Others agree with him. If something HAS to be done, I was making a suggestion.
Well good news - WIS is going to literally do nothing so all these conversations serve no purpose other than to keep us entertained.
Well, we assume that but we know, at least recently, that they are paying attention,mostly to ***** fights, but someone might be making a mental note. So, when they update the game in 2023, all opinions need to be heard.
6/22/2017 9:07 AM
2023 sounds about right. But by then I better get to see some live action play by plays! At least Super Nintendo NBA Live '95 style graphics. Aw man that'd be so awesome.
6/22/2017 9:18 AM
Hopefully, this will satisfy you for the next 6 years while you wait:

6/22/2017 9:23 AM
Oh yeah I love it.

I would pay extra for it. Do you hear me WIS?! I will give you more monies!! Make it happen.
6/22/2017 9:32 AM
"1. How about WIS applies the effects of potential BEFORE assigning a projected division level to recruits?"

Wasn't it a cornerstone of HD3.0 that skills and potential must be discovered through wise scoutig? Why abandon that for a so-called problem that doesn't exist?

"2. 2. I'd like to see a situation whereby the second session is staggered somehow so that D1 starts/ends 1 day before D2, which starts/ends 1 day before D3"
"3. Sim AI needs to be more aggressive at attacking lower division coaches."

D3 coaches pay just as much to play as D1 coaches -- probably more, in fact. Quit trying to smash D3 coaches for a so-called problem that doesn't exist.
6/22/2017 1:53 PM
Posted by l80r20 on 6/22/2017 1:53:00 PM (view original):
"1. How about WIS applies the effects of potential BEFORE assigning a projected division level to recruits?"

Wasn't it a cornerstone of HD3.0 that skills and potential must be discovered through wise scoutig? Why abandon that for a so-called problem that doesn't exist?

"2. 2. I'd like to see a situation whereby the second session is staggered somehow so that D1 starts/ends 1 day before D2, which starts/ends 1 day before D3"
"3. Sim AI needs to be more aggressive at attacking lower division coaches."

D3 coaches pay just as much to play as D1 coaches -- probably more, in fact. Quit trying to smash D3 coaches for a so-called problem that doesn't exist.
1. I'm not sure you're grasping the essence of what I described. One would still have to scout the players in order to determine rating values and potential levels. Nothing changes in that regard. The sole effect of the change is that when the player is assigned a projection level (i.e.-"Projected D2") on the player card at the moment of recruit generation, the AI would now take into account what the player will develop into when/if maxed in order to make that determination rather than basing scoring only the player's pre-college ratings. A player with strong starting ratings but multiple red potentials in core categories scores as a D1-level recruit under the current system. It would not under my proposal (unless the starting values were REALLY, REALLY good...). And that's a good thing because it now directs the artificial intelligence of all Sim teams to pursue targets in the correct pool of players for their division level. D1 Sims would recruit actual D1-caliber players. That's a good thing. Human coaches would still have to scout players to be able to recruit them. They would still need to scout to higher levels to see exact starting values and potential levels. They would still be rewarded for locating diamonds in the rough, such as the SF who scores mediocre at that position but might evolve into a solid SG...). Nothing changes in that regard. Overall the division is strengthened and players are still available to fall through the cracks to arrive in D2/D3. How is that a bad or undesirable thing?

2 & 3. I realize your strategy dating back to beta has been to close both your eyes and your mind to anything that doesn't satisfy your myopic vision of the game, but you are in the extreme minority, perhaps even a minority of one, when it comes to your ultimate vision of what the game should be. There IS a difference between divisions. That difference IS the reason divisions exist, both within the game and the real world set-up which the game emulates. I know your optimal vision of the game is a world in which a D3 coach can recruit on equal terms with and even assemble a team of equal talent with that of a D1 program, but you have yet to demonstrate why that's remotely a good thing, much less a desirable status target, for the game.

Clearly, when a conversation has been as long-running as this one has, reappears in multiple threads and enjoys multiple voices, it is a little intellectually dishonest to claim it "doesn't exist." Remove your head from the sand, or at least add the qualifier that YOU don't feel it exists. And then preferably back that up with some sort of logical statement and evidence to demonstrate such so that you can at last be a productive part of these discussion threads.

Bringing up the dollar value paid is a red herring. That a D3 coach pays the same price as a D1 coach per season (rewards notwithstanding) does not mean the two players are purchasing the same game. In fact, quite the contrary, the two players are purchasing two separate products. HD is, by design, division and reward structure, 3 games in 1. The $12.95 paid by a D3 coach purchases a team at the D3 level. The obligation of the company, therefore, is to ensure that player's $12.95 buys as equal a chance to win AT THE D3 LEVEL as any other player's $12.95 AT THE D3 LEVEL. The company is NOT obligated to make your D3 team suddenly able to compete on a level playing field with a D2 or a D1 team. Again, 3 games in 1. As long as each team has the same opportunity against counterparts in its division, the game design is fair. If you view either of these proposals as "smashing" D3 coaches, I would invite you to show where it places D3 coaches at a disadvantage against other D3 coaches. If your criticism can't account for that, then the problem is not with the proposals, but with your perception of the game structure and what the company actually is obligated to provide users who purchase seasons with $12.95 at a D3 level vs. $12.95 at a D2 level vs. $12.95 at a D1 level.
6/22/2017 9:11 PM
1. I'm not sure you're grasping the essence of what you described yourself. Division projection would be a visible telltale of potential that is supposed to be invisible until discovered. "They would still be rewarded for locating diamonds in the rough" which would be no trick at all, based on unexpected high division projection compared to skill values. When two recruits with the same skill values have different division projections, you already know a lot about the supposedly invisible potentials.
2. and 3. Since you had no answer other than personal attack, you'll get no response here.

And BTW, when a conversation has been long-running around here, it usually revolves around a few guys obsessed with a meritless idea (like capping).
6/22/2017 9:54 PM
◂ Prev 123 Next ▸
zorzi's recruiting cap issue Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.