Posted by mullycj on 3/16/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):
I never used the term "higher rated" so not sure if you are responding to my post.
In case you are. The Draft Big Board already adjusts the chance to leave by class so that is covered. I am fine with keeping a little ambiguity based on positions, so that the 43rd rated guard might leave while the 37th rated C/PF might stay. But certainly not variable to the extent it is right now.

But I would also be OK with no further adjustments by position. Maybe some years the NBA is looking for more guards while others they are looking for more SFs. Or maybe NBA teams are just grabbing the best player available and adjusting rosters through free agency or whatever.

Well actually...

“while other EEs that are higher rated stay”

Posted by mullycj on 3/16/2018 12:17:00 PM (view original):
This isn't real life. A good internet game means understanding what drives people to keep playing and what causes users to leave.

Increasing population is a poor argument in favor of making the game stupider and easier to manipulate.

Posted by mullycj on 3/16/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):
That's not really the point. And many of you are missing the point...and the argument about EEs.

It's not that teams are losing 3 EEs a season, its that teams are losing EE's that SHOULDNT be leaving while other EEs that are higher rated stay.
This would not be as much of a problem if Seble made ANY of the changes that have been suggested to fix this problem. (ie - EEs declare during the 1st recruiting session).

Assuming he never addresses the root problem...
I think EEs should be similar to the current post season projection report. If there are 35-40 EEs a season then the 1st 35-40 players on the draft big board should go. To have the 95th player on the big board go while the 40th player stays is moronic and only increases user frustration and an inability to maintain customers.

(so glad we finally got another EE thread this month!!)

"while other EEs that are higher rated stay."

I'll assume you meant "higher ranked".

Assuming you meant "higher ranked", one could argue that the rankings aren't perfect. I've only made cursory glances at the big board but I've scratched my head wondering why Player A was ranked lower than Player B.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/16/2018 12:17:00 PM (view original):
This isn't real life. A good internet game means understanding what drives people to keep playing and what causes users to leave.

Increasing population is a poor argument in favor of making the game stupider and easier to manipulate.

Not that poor of an argument. Businesses like to make money. When they don't, they close up shop. Those who enjoy HD won't have HD if that happens.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2018 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/16/2018 12:17:00 PM (view original):
This isn't real life. A good internet game means understanding what drives people to keep playing and what causes users to leave.

Increasing population is a poor argument in favor of making the game stupider and easier to manipulate.

Not that poor of an argument. Businesses like to make money. When they don't, they close up shop. Those who enjoy HD won't have HD if that happens.

It’s pretty poor. In fact, IMO it’s the dumbest point of contention on these threads since beta started, especially as regards EEs. In the worlds I play in, all the big 6 conference average 9-10 human coaches, which is right in the sweet spot. The short period of time following beta where you had lots of those conferences with 5 or fewer, because of attrition at the top, was a product of WIS’s failure to fix jobs as part of the release. They have eventually filled to what I think is probably close to optimal capacity.

In other words, there are plenty of coaches willing to deal with the EE/recruiting system as it is. People are still taking big 6 jobs. The people we’ve lost are, for the most, guys who were used to a system where they could game their way to success in perpetuity, and I’m not obligated to care about the kind of game those folks would prefer to play.

You seem to be missing my point. I'll re-phrase.

I don't give a **** about what has happened or is happening now. As a general rule, selling your product is a key component to running a business. When people cease to purchase your product, you close. If you don't think that is true, you do not understand how businesses operate.

Anyway, my guess is HD grosses less than 100k a year. (260 per world, less than $40 per year after discounts, credits, multi-season purchases). If Sportshub gives a damn about money, I imagine they'd like to increase that number. I don't think EE is turning people away in droves but finding out why people aren't jumping in to play would be a good idea.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):
Mully’s idea makes the game less intelligent and easier to game. You should never know exactly what a kid is going to do. Good coaching means understanding the probabilities and managing contingencies.

Dumb argument. On EES, your arguments have been dumb, dumb, dumb. 5EES... That is what the guy lost... He understood the probability, he managed contingencies... But the system does not permit such adjustments in the second cycle.

Another one was in the same spot as him and lost nobody. It happens also. Where is the logic? It makes for frustration and random, not strategy to reajust roster and act accordingly as you keep implying like somebody who is dumb.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/15/2018 12:14:00 PM (view original):
The game is designed to give more people a shot at winning. Whether or not that's a good thing is for you to decide. You had a LOT of success over the last several seasons. Odds are you'll have a LOT of success in the future. You just may have to tolerate a down season or two a long the way to that future success. That's the game design.

This.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2018 12:42:00 PM (view original):
You seem to be missing my point. I'll re-phrase.

I don't give a **** about what has happened or is happening now. As a general rule, selling your product is a key component to running a business. When people cease to purchase your product, you close. If you don't think that is true, you do not understand how businesses operate.

I’m not missing the point, mike. It’s a bad argument as it pertains to EEs, because high D1 isn’t where the population problem is. That’s the point.

Well, yeah, you are because you're talking about EE still after I clearly said "I don't give a **** about what has happened or is happening now."

From a business standpoint, SH needs to sell their product.

Posted by zorzii on 3/16/2018 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):
Mully’s idea makes the game less intelligent and easier to game. You should never know exactly what a kid is going to do. Good coaching means understanding the probabilities and managing contingencies.

Dumb argument. On EES, your arguments have been dumb, dumb, dumb. 5EES... That is what the guy lost... He understood the probability, he managed contingencies... But the system does not permit such adjustments in the second cycle.

Another one was in the same spot as him and lost nobody. It happens also. Where is the logic? It makes for frustration and random, not strategy to reajust roster and act accordingly as you keep implying like somebody who is dumb.

The system doesn’t want teams to be able to hoard elite commodities and maintain success in perpetuity. Elite talent is a commodity, it’s valuable, and it’s volatile. Anyone who continues to recruit only draft-worthy talent, and expects to be able to maintain success with full rosters in perpetuity, as teams were able to do previously, is banging their head against a wall. Is that dumb? Your call.

Plenty of people have found ways to play competitively, and consistently. Why haven’t you?

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2018 1:40:00 PM (view original):
Well, yeah, you are because you're talking about EE still after I clearly said "I don't give a **** about what has happened or is happening now."

From a business standpoint, SH needs to sell their product.

Mully brought this issue up, mike, and it was in terms of the EE argument, which also happens to be the context of the thread. I’m not “missing the point”, I’m staying on topic.

I dismissed mully's "EE is causing the world population problem" before I finished reading his post. You should have as well.

I was addressing the big picture, a lack of revenue for the owner of the game, not nonsensical griping cloaked as a world population problem.