Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 11/1/2017 9:49:00 PM (view original):
You're siding with me?? Have you seen the light?

It's 20ish cycles 1st session. Don't say I never helped you out.

Probably not. I'm just pointing out the facts.

It's a good place to start. Some people aren't fans of math though. Might take awhile for it to sink in.

Posted by buddhagamer on 11/1/2017 9:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
If I'm siding with benis, it's not because I want to, it's because facts are facts.

I don't know how many cycles there are in RS1. I'm going to say 10. In my 1st scenario(1 SR, 1 EE), that equates to 400 AP. In my 2nd scenario(2 SR), it equates to 600. For simplicity sake, 10 cycles in RS2. 1st scenario is 600 AP, 2nd scenario is 600 AP. Math sez 1000 AP to fill two spots(SR/EE) vs 1200(2 SR) to fill two spots. Math don't lie.

There are 22 cycles in the first recruiting session and only 10 cycles in the second one.

So for pkoopman, you can have your 3K $$$$ and I'll take the 20 AP and we can fight for a late signing 5 star in the Congo and see who comes out on top....

Sure, distance changes the equation. I thought it was implied to be somewhat local in the hypothetical, as I settled on 12 HVs, meaning the 250$ variety HV, not the $700. APs mean most in battles where no visits are done. They mean the least in battles where teams do max visits and promises. I think we all understand that.

I don't know where shoe is going but there is a hole somewhere.

That's some benis-like goalpost moving there.

To be clear, I don't care that EE losers are put at a disadvantage. It's the design of the game and it's there for a reason. You got the reward, you knew the risk. Tough ***** said the kitty.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):
Recruiting really good players gets rewarded, no?
However, the risk exists that you will only get them for 1-3 seasons, no?

Has anyone ******* that they have too many good players for too many seasons? No?

Crawl back in your hole, JSS. There's a reason I blocked you. You're respected by the masses but dirt is insulted when I say "you're as dumb as dirt." People don't have to actually use the words "I don't like risk, I only like reward" to say it.

Insults are the last refuge of a losing argument, Mike. And what was the reason you blocked me? Was it because I ethered your clownishness a few months ago when you kept vomiting all over the forums? It's pretty funny that you keep telling me you blocked me, yet respond to my posts. You seem a little insecure -- but if I had your resume, I would be too.

And if I'm "respected by the masses" (don't know how you'd even know that, but thanks, I suppose), it's probably because I know what I'm talking about.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
If I'm siding with benis, it's not because I want to, it's because facts are facts.

I don't know how many cycles there are in RS1. I'm going to say 10. In my 1st scenario(1 SR, 1 EE), that equates to 400 AP. In my 2nd scenario(2 SR), it equates to 600. For simplicity sake, 10 cycles in RS2. 1st scenario is 600 AP, 2nd scenario is 600 AP. Math sez 1000 AP to fill two spots(SR/EE) vs 1200(2 SR) to fill two spots. Math don't lie.

But you’re not actually siding with Benis. You’re letting him tell you what I meant.

I am not claiming, nor have I ever claimed that you get the same total amount of APs to spend. That has never been part of my argument. I explicitly acknowledged that in the next sentence past what Benis focused in on, where I said you need to target some late recruits, and be judicious in your first session AP use.

My premise, which is actually testable, is that the 3k is far more valuable than the 20 APs. And unless we assume the team with expected EEs is brain dead and targets elite international recruits to replace expected EEs, I believe my premise is holding up well.

Posted by CoachSpud on 11/1/2017 6:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 11/1/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 11/1/2017 12:09:00 PM (view original):
"I am only top 165 this season because EES are not fair."

"Elite talent is a commodity. It costs what it costs. You know the risks when you recruit elite talent, and everyone plays under the same conditions. It is not unfair."

Those two posts separate the wheat from the chaff.

As usual, spud misses the point. In any event, 90 on the EE board is not "elite talent." Although I do agree that "fairness" is the wrong metric to be looking at here, since it's entirely subjective.

Two easy changes remove this issue, and also (much more importantly) make it easier for coaches to move to new programs and recruit in session 2: (1) lessen the comparative power/value of APs; (2) make many recruits have a "late" signing preference. Boom -- problem solved.

LOL, you're such a moron, still seeing ghosts. I haven't posted in this thread anywhere.

By the way, understanding the risk/reward of your strategies for recruiting a valuable commodity is a sound idea, and when you're older you may understand it. If you did understand it, you would realize that EE's are not a problem except to such as zorzii, who expect to practically be indemnified for zany EE's. I think Seble understands this, too, and will hopefully leave well enough alone.

Cheers!

Ah, spud, keep pretending you have only 1 username -- it never gets old. And your reading comprehension is as bad as mike's -- I actually don't think EEs are as big a deal as others do (although I think there should be fixes), especially compared to some other problems. If you'd taken the time to read the post you quoted, the issue to me is that same "EE replacement" problems also hit coaches who take over new teams, and hit those new coaches much harder -- that is a major problem that the powers that be need to fix.

Maybe I'll take the time someday to post what I think all the problems are with 3.0 and how I'd fix it (it'll be too long for mike to read/understand).

Posted by pkoopman on 11/1/2017 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
If I'm siding with benis, it's not because I want to, it's because facts are facts.

I don't know how many cycles there are in RS1. I'm going to say 10. In my 1st scenario(1 SR, 1 EE), that equates to 400 AP. In my 2nd scenario(2 SR), it equates to 600. For simplicity sake, 10 cycles in RS2. 1st scenario is 600 AP, 2nd scenario is 600 AP. Math sez 1000 AP to fill two spots(SR/EE) vs 1200(2 SR) to fill two spots. Math don't lie.

But you’re not actually siding with Benis. You’re letting him tell you what I meant.

I am not claiming, nor have I ever claimed that you get the same total amount of APs to spend. That has never been part of my argument. I explicitly acknowledged that in the next sentence past what Benis focused in on, where I said you need to target some late recruits, and be judicious in your first session AP use.

My premise, which is actually testable, is that the 3k is far more valuable than the 20 APs. And unless we assume the team with expected EEs is brain dead and targets elite international recruits to replace expected EEs, I believe my premise is holding up well.

I hardly read benis' posts if they exceed one line. I'm just doing math.

Posted by pkoopman on 11/1/2017 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
If I'm siding with benis, it's not because I want to, it's because facts are facts.

I don't know how many cycles there are in RS1. I'm going to say 10. In my 1st scenario(1 SR, 1 EE), that equates to 400 AP. In my 2nd scenario(2 SR), it equates to 600. For simplicity sake, 10 cycles in RS2. 1st scenario is 600 AP, 2nd scenario is 600 AP. Math sez 1000 AP to fill two spots(SR/EE) vs 1200(2 SR) to fill two spots. Math don't lie.

But you’re not actually siding with Benis. You’re letting him tell you what I meant.

I am not claiming, nor have I ever claimed that you get the same total amount of APs to spend. That has never been part of my argument. I explicitly acknowledged that in the next sentence past what Benis focused in on, where I said you need to target some late recruits, and be judicious in your first session AP use.

My premise, which is actually testable, is that the 3k is far more valuable than the 20 APs. And unless we assume the team with expected EEs is brain dead and targets elite international recruits to replace expected EEs, I believe my premise is holding up well.

I think you way underestimate what an AP is now worth versus HVs/CV. Seble said during BETA he didn't change the recruiting value of HVs/CVs and initially pegged AP to be about somewhere between an HD 2.0 phone call and letter. Initially cycles were every 3 hours but when people complained they had to check in so often, he cut the # of cycles, but then doubled the recruiting value of AP.

You go run your test of how much 12 HVs is worth in equivalent AP and you will find it is less than how much you gain over an entire RS1 for a single opening.

He doubled the recruiting value of per cycle AP because he’d just halved the number of cycles. That didn't increase the effect, it just changed the frequency it could be adjusted. To borrow from another useless analogy, it’s essentially the difference between paying me $500 every week, and $1000 every other week, because it’s not convenient for me to go to the bank every week, or something. You’re not paying me more money just because each paycheck is bigger.

A lot of people operate under the impression that a certain # of APs is equivalent to a certain # of home visits. I don’t know if that’s true or not. I do know that trying to overwhelm opponents with APs on a few select recruits is a way to play, but it’s not the only way. it is entirely possible to unlock actions for recruits in the first session, and then use the resources from an early entry to get into signing range in the second session. I’ve done it many times, and I very rarely spend over 40 APs per cycle on a single player. Not that he will have read this far, but for Mike’s benefit, at the upper levels of D1,it takes roughly 50 APs total to unlock actions on an elite recruit, give or take a couple depending on preferences. For high A+ teams, I presume it’s even lower. It’s not some gargantuan investment needed to unlock actions for teams that typically have lots of potential EE candidates. The value of their APs is already quite a bit higher than your typical Miami (OH).

APs are quite valuable until you get to promises and visits. Once battles go into visits and promises, the relative effect APs have on a battle drops progressively.

This thread has everything. So good.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 10:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 11/1/2017 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/1/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
If I'm siding with benis, it's not because I want to, it's because facts are facts.

I don't know how many cycles there are in RS1. I'm going to say 10. In my 1st scenario(1 SR, 1 EE), that equates to 400 AP. In my 2nd scenario(2 SR), it equates to 600. For simplicity sake, 10 cycles in RS2. 1st scenario is 600 AP, 2nd scenario is 600 AP. Math sez 1000 AP to fill two spots(SR/EE) vs 1200(2 SR) to fill two spots. Math don't lie.

But you’re not actually siding with Benis. You’re letting him tell you what I meant.

I am not claiming, nor have I ever claimed that you get the same total amount of APs to spend. That has never been part of my argument. I explicitly acknowledged that in the next sentence past what Benis focused in on, where I said you need to target some late recruits, and be judicious in your first session AP use.

My premise, which is actually testable, is that the 3k is far more valuable than the 20 APs. And unless we assume the team with expected EEs is brain dead and targets elite international recruits to replace expected EEs, I believe my premise is holding up well.

I hardly read benis' posts if they exceed one line. I'm just doing math.

Stop letting me manipulate you Mike.

I read all of that one.

Mike : I don't mind ees being penalized. I am all for the penalties being the same. That's my point. And I am not competing against D2 teams or C+ and under prestige team, not sure in Phelan b, b- get ees. I am competing against top teams. Make it the same hassle for everyone so probabilities do not decide the fate of the teams.