Posted by grimacedance on 10/4/2017 7:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by shoe3 on 10/4/2017 7:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 6:51:00 PM (view original):
Sigh. I was one of those "few". I've already explained why I stuck around.
I'm obviously pulling from my HBD experience but virtually every new user to a world, n00b or vet, wants to "rebuild" or "put my stamp on the team" or "build it in my image". I know this because I've fielded thousands of questions about HBD since it originated. Since I believe the guy who likes HBD is some sort of blurry image of a guy who likes HD, or vice versa, I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe the HD guy doesn't want to "rebuild", "put stamps" or "image build".
Maybe I'm completely wrong. Maybe HBD and HD are like comparing goats and apples. I just don't think so.
Your obligation to HD is to purchase a team or move along. But this is an open forum and I think MOST of us would like to see more people playing and a better game. You are not obligated to contribute to those discussions. But you do. Why?
Because I enjoy the game that exists. There are presumably hundreds of others that do as well, as I’m in a number of pretty full and competitive D1 conferences. Some irritating things that can and should be fixed, sure. But eliminating in-season recruiting is not among them. I participate in the discussion, because someone needs to, or people get the wrong idea about consensus and all that.
Our experience is different. The first team I signed up for, Martin Luther, I specifically chose a team with a lot of returning players and an empty conference. Not because I’m concerned about a pristine record, but because I (mistakenly) assumed success that first year might help me move up faster. But even still, a veteran team in a sim league is a great place to learn the mechanics of the game. It was 2.0, so there was some recruiting, which I totally botched, but being in an empty league with a veteran team, it didn’t matter much. I could have done without either of those recruits, because I never intended to stay at D3 longer than I had to.
"It was 2.0, so there was some recruiting, which I totally botched, but being in an empty league with a veteran team, it didn’t matter much."
Recruiting is why 2.0 was more fun for brand new coaches than 3.0. Everyone botched their first recruiting class, unless they were tutored by an existing, successful coach before joining. Every single coach learned recruiting through trial and error (plus reading the forums). But recruiting in HD ... even when it is botched, it is still fun (insert inevitable comparison to sex and/or pizza). The first players I recruited were crappy players, but I didn't know that and I was really excited when they signed with me. And I had an emotional investment in them throughout the season and their careers.
And 3.0 has made coaches wait a full season before they get to experience that.
I agree with this entirely. Of the 3 recruits I signed in my first season, only one ended up being better than an average SIM player, but those three guys were my guys and I was incredibly vested in how they progressed and developed. I originally had planned on jumping to DII as fast as possible, but I was so driven to follow those guys all the way through that I stuck arounf until the last one graduated. My second season of recruiting was drastically improved, and I managed to bring in a class that eventually resulted in a Sweet 16 run, despite my team being in the shadow of a super conference put together by Only. In many ways, I enjoyed that run and the results almost as much as the DII title runs I had, as I actually think it was much harder, and didn't rely on the fact that I got two lucky dice rolls... admittedly though, only almost as much.
Anyway, the primary point is that taking away a chance to recruit in your first season would have been a terrible disincentive for me to stick around. I might still have done it because I loved the actual game planning aspect, as well, but it would have taken a big part of that first season away. On the other hand, unless we go back to single session recruiting, I'm not sure it wouldn't be worst to only allow new coaches access to session 2. With so little time to get up to speed and so many good players having already been taken or going off the board before they even get a chance, it might be even more discouraging. Not sure though.