I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't see how reducing options and choices you can to make will actually increase strategy and make a more fun game.

Posted by Benis on 4/22/2018 6:03:00 AM (view original):
I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't see how reducing options and choices you can to make will actually increase strategy and make a more fun game.

Very valid point as well and I guess it leads me back to removing restrictions and allowing us to spend as much as we want to on each recruit. This is WhatIfSports and I am certain that they are not telling Roy Williams that he can’t visit a recruit anymore because he has used his maximum visits...

LOL at the people who think “strategy” means hoarding and spending resources.

While I wish I had kept the data before, I am up for the challenge and will keep data from this point going forward to truly see how the recruiting odds truly play out...

Posted by kevbo65 on 4/22/2018 9:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/22/2018 6:03:00 AM (view original):
I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't see how reducing options and choices you can to make will actually increase strategy and make a more fun game.

Very valid point as well and I guess it leads me back to removing restrictions and allowing us to spend as much as we want to on each recruit. This is WhatIfSports and I am certain that they are not telling Roy Williams that he can’t visit a recruit anymore because he has used his maximum visits...

Let’s just be honest about what is being advocated here - a return to a terrible, non-competitive “recruiting” system that elevates a single “strategy” above all others - hoard resources and scare off competition so you don’t have to battle for anyone.

Recruits make decisions in real life, and they’re based on their own preferences, and the prestige and promises offered by the coaches who decide to go after them. Those decisions are not based on how many open scholarships Roy Williams has this year, nor are they based on how many times Roy Williams visits Mom for dinner.

Somewhat interesting that the question asked by the creator of this thread has not been directly answered up to this point.

The answer is no, WIS really does not care right now.

Now please, back to the dickering about winning and losing recruiting battles based on odds.

“The answer is no, WIS really does not care right now.”

Or in other words, “That’s how it’s intended to work.”

Posted by gomiami1972 on 4/22/2018 9:52:00 AM (view original):
Somewhat interesting that the question asked by the creator of this thread has not been directly answered up to this point.

The answer is no, WIS really does not care right now.

Now please, back to the dickering about winning and losing recruiting battles based on odds.

Do they care if people stop playing the game? Yes, probably.

Do they care that people don't like dice rolls in recruiting? No, probably not.

Posted by zagsrulez on 4/21/2018 10:22:00 PM (view original):
Wow y’all just suck at recruiting. I have yet to have a problem with 3.0 recruiting process after I learned the ins and outs

Well come back to us when you can get past the Sweet 16. Thanks.

Posted by l80r20 on 4/21/2018 11:28:00 PM (view original):
In all the whining-about-recruiting threads, I have yet to see a single thing pointed out in the game (either HD or GD) that prevents us from recruiting intelligently. I am beginning to think the problem may be with the recruiters, not the game. Ya think?

And tell us all of your success stories in HD, like accumulated 25 national championships using your system before retiring.

You don't really have a leg to stand on if you're telling us that recruiting is working fine with limited or no success.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/22/2018 9:35:00 AM (view original):

Posted by kevbo65 on 4/22/2018 9:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/22/2018 6:03:00 AM (view original):
I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't see how reducing options and choices you can to make will actually increase strategy and make a more fun game.

Very valid point as well and I guess it leads me back to removing restrictions and allowing us to spend as much as we want to on each recruit. This is WhatIfSports and I am certain that they are not telling Roy Williams that he can’t visit a recruit anymore because he has used his maximum visits...

Let’s just be honest about what is being advocated here - a return to a terrible, non-competitive “recruiting” system that elevates a single “strategy” above all others - hoard resources and scare off competition so you don’t have to battle for anyone.

Recruits make decisions in real life, and they’re based on their own preferences, and the prestige and promises offered by the coaches who decide to go after them. Those decisions are not based on how many open scholarships Roy Williams has this year, nor are they based on how many times Roy Williams visits Mom for dinner.

What we must remember though is that we aren’t allow to carry over monies from one season to the next so eliminating the cap on home visits wouldn’t revert us back to the old system but rather put us between what was and what is....

Posted by thewizard17 on 4/22/2018 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zagsrulez on 4/21/2018 10:22:00 PM (view original):
Wow y’all just suck at recruiting. I have yet to have a problem with 3.0 recruiting process after I learned the ins and outs

Well come back to us when you can get past the Sweet 16. Thanks.

Remember when thecheater17 almost won a NT with roided out 99 WE players?

I’d honestly happy to make it to a dice roll, because the majority of my recruiters are nabbed by D1 coaches in 2 or 3 cycles. Nothing more aggravating then watching an average D3 player nabbed by University of Kentucky. But you know the recruiting system, backups are a necessity. Especially for D3 coaches who are forced to recruit in higher pools to be able to be competitive.

Each dice roll is a completely independent event, the previous dice roll that you may have won or lost, bares no value to any future dice roll you may have. Once you have compiled data of 100 dice rolls then we can begin discussing whether the current system odds are not being represented correctly. Your extremely small sample size says nothing. Maybe the cheater17 can devote 12 or so hours tonight to break the recruiting system in your favor.

As others have said, no, WIS doesn't care. This is the game we're stuck with. This problem could be dealt with by making two relatively simple changes: (1) make it so you don't have a chance to win the recruit unless you're at very high (i.e., at over 40% chance); and (b) make preferences more meaningful.

Posted by zagsrulez on 4/22/2018 12:05:00 PM (view original):
I’d honestly happy to make it to a dice roll, because the majority of my recruiters are nabbed by D1 coaches in 2 or 3 cycles. Nothing more aggravating then watching an average D3 player nabbed by University of Kentucky. But you know the recruiting system, backups are a necessity. Especially for D3 coaches who are forced to recruit in higher pools to be able to be competitive.

Each dice roll is a completely independent event, the previous dice roll that you may have won or lost, bares no value to any future dice roll you may have. Once you have compiled data of 100 dice rolls then we can begin discussing whether the current system odds are not being represented correctly. Your extremely small sample size says nothing. Maybe the cheater17 can devote 12 or so hours tonight to break the recruiting system in your favor.

Its much different at D2/D3.