Posted by zorzii on 12/1/2017 3:36:00 PM (view original):
I don't think there are less people interested in college hoop, the game has lost something, Mike.

I'm DYING to hear what it lost.

Enlighten me.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 12/1/2017 3:36:00 PM (view original):
I don't think there are less people interested in college hoop, the game has lost something, Mike.

I'm DYING to hear what it lost.

Enlighten me.

Humans.

Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"Businesses are in business to make money"

Wow. We actually agree on something.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

Good.

With that agreed upon, I think we can also agree that it doesn't matter if I like 3.0 or you like 2.0, what matters is what the owners of the game want to sell us. After all, it's their game. The game does not belong to us or jimjoebob who has been at UCLA-Smith since S16.

One could guess that WifS did not see the old model as fiscally worth selling to us. So they changed the model in hopes of getting more new users than lost old users. Maybe it didn't work. Maybe it's too early to tell.

Posted by Rishado on 12/1/2017 2:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 12/1/2017 12:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 12:31:00 PM (view original):
The ONLY reason I wouldn't do away with D3 is because people are there. Once again, people hate when you take their ****. HATE IT!!!

This game no longer supports 10,000+ school options. It doesn't even support half of that. There really is no need for 10 worlds, 3 levels of 300+. There simply is not.

I’ve said this a bunch of times, I think from a user experience standpoint, there is a sweet spot for population, and it is by conference and region, not by world. In a commodities game, you don’t want to feel crowded, especially if you’re stuck on the bottom. I think the sweet spot is generally 8-10 for Big 6 conferences where the teams have a higher baseline prestige to work with; 5-8 for conferences that want to be “mid-major” caliber; and <5 for low D1. So the sweet spot for a world is probably going to be south of 50% full overall for D1.

The way I heard it when I started was that the sweet spot was 8-10 humans for every conference. That's why some Big 6 conferences are terrible and some Mid-Major and Low D1 conferences are dominant. Is that wrong shoe?

I think big 6 conferences can get a little more full without hurting the experience because the baseline prestige is higher. A tightly packed OVC or MEAC is going to be rough for a doormat, because not only will they have no recruiting elbow room, they won’t have an easy time lifting prestige by beating sims in conference. Right now, when you see a terrible Big 6 conference in a world, it’s because those higher baseline prestige teams are programmed to prefer walkons to recruiting lower caliber players. So they compete for, and get routinely beat for better players than the OVC sims. But once a human steps in to those schools, they can be turned around within a few seasons.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Good.

With that agreed upon, I think we can also agree that it doesn't matter if I like 3.0 or you like 2.0, what matters is what the owners of the game want to sell us. After all, it's their game. The game does not belong to us or jimjoebob who has been at UCLA-Smith since S16.

One could guess that WifS did not see the old model as fiscally worth selling to us. So they changed the model in hopes of getting more new users than lost old users. Maybe it didn't work. Maybe it's too early to tell.

I don’t know what the long game was/is, but if they didn’t expect significant attrition - I always said around 25% - they were foolish. The good news is that there is still an obstacle in place to new user expansion and retention that hasn’t been addressed yet (hiring and stratification). So there’s room to move.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Good.

With that agreed upon, I think we can also agree that it doesn't matter if I like 3.0 or you like 2.0, what matters is what the owners of the game want to sell us. After all, it's their game. The game does not belong to us or jimjoebob who has been at UCLA-Smith since S16.

One could guess that WifS did not see the old model as fiscally worth selling to us. So they changed the model in hopes of getting more new users than lost old users. Maybe it didn't work. Maybe it's too early to tell.

The new model is incomplete. That is obvious.

Posted by grimacedance on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

I've said this many times that they've got their entire financial model flipped upside down. The cost to entry for new people is too high while the people who are "hooked" pay very little or nothing (or even some MAKE money!). For about the 100th time, Why are you still giving away amazon gift cards for reward points WIS?? That's the dumbest thing ever. I think there is one user on here who plays this game for the amazon cards (ab90).

I actually bought a card for my wife last year just to prove coaching HD basketball was a real paying job!!

Posted by Benis on 12/1/2017 4:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):
Good.

With that agreed upon, I think we can also agree that it doesn't matter if I like 3.0 or you like 2.0, what matters is what the owners of the game want to sell us. After all, it's their game. The game does not belong to us or jimjoebob who has been at UCLA-Smith since S16.

One could guess that WifS did not see the old model as fiscally worth selling to us. So they changed the model in hopes of getting more new users than lost old users. Maybe it didn't work. Maybe it's too early to tell.

The new model is incomplete. That is obvious.

Maybe. It would make sense as the game was sold in the summer. None of us know how long negotiations took.

But it's folly to stick around in hopes of a "different" game in the near future.

Here is my proposal. They should create a new D1-only world named Calipari. You must have 5 winning seasons at D1 (from any world or combination of worlds) in order to enter this game.

When you begin, no matter how much success you have had in other worlds, you can only apply for jobs at schools with D+/D baseline prestige.

Coaches will get fired -- each baseline prestige level has certain expectations. You must meet this expectation at least once every 4 seasons or you are fired:

A+ = Regular season conference championship and conference tournament title, Final 4 appearance
A = Regular season conference championship and conference tournament title, Elite 8 appearance
A- = Regular season conference championship and conference tournament title, Sweet Sixteen appearance
B+ = Regular season conference championship or conference tournament title, Sweet Sixteen appearance
B = Regular season conference championship or conference tournament title, win a NCAA tournament game
B- = Conference title or 20 win regular season, and win a NCAA tournament game
C/D+/D = Conference title or 20 win regular season or appear in NCAA tournament

If you fail to meet these criteria at least once every four seasons, you are fired and only qualify for D+/D jobs for the next season. For A+/A/A- prestige schools, after season 4 at that school, any season with an overall losing record gets you fired.

All credits for success are:
No NT trip = $1.00 credit
NT trip = $1.50 credit
1 NT win = $2.00 credit
S16 = $3.00 credit
E8 = $5.00 credit
FF = $7.50 credit
Runner-up = $10.00 credit
Winner = $12.95 credit

This world will be brutally hard and recruiting would be nasty. I would sign up in a heartbeat.

Love it! Except the world name. Give me Izzo or something.

Why pretty much no credits?