Posted by indyrider123 on 5/3/2020 12:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/2/2020 10:16:00 PM (view original):
I like 3.0 significantly more. Most of the guys who like 2.0 more either adapted or quit. A lot of them quit.....

My biggest issue with 3.0 is lack of humans but that's always been an issue.

I think they could fix the issue of lack of human coaches if they let first time coaches recruit in their first season.. If your a new coach and randomly pick a team that is terrible and have to go thru a 7-21 season with no post season play...bye bye.

Agree with indyrider. A quick simple fix is allow New Coaches who reserved a team to Recruit in RS2. We have picked up many new Coaches with that last promo, and I for one would like to keep some of them.

I'm on the fence with it all. I played 1.0, and did not play 2.0. I was TERRIBLE. Never made a S16. Now that 3.0 is out, I've figured out how to contend every season and win lots of titles at the lower levels. But when I think about HD, I always base my opinions on how I think D1 should be ran.

From what i discuss with others about earlier versions, the conference cash needed to go. Very bad style of gaming. But I do remember being "the little guy" and I could not improve much. But now that I HAVE gotten better, i now believe some of the things that have allowed me to get better are bad for the game. In my opinion, if a Big 6 school wants a recruit, they should get that recruit over a D2/D3 team each and every time. I think it's kinda dumb that I can win a battle against a Rutgers in the right situation, from D2. The rich should stay rich, as far as Big 6 programs. Because no one in real life will turn down a Clemson scholarship to go play at Coker D2 just because the D2 coach really liked that player.

And keep in mind, I'm the one that benefits from this new system! Two recruiting sessions creates random unfair advantages that happen sometimes. I could be battling a D1 school for a player that I probably have no business signing at D2, and that D1 human leaves for a better job. When the 2nd session comes, I have an easy path to that player now. While no one else had that advantage for the player(s) they were targeting. So there's just a lot of random luck involved with 3.0.

I'm not sure what my opinions steer towards, but I do know that 3.0 is absolutely fun and playable. For anyone to quit just because it's not 2.0 is silly. 3.0 is a great functioning game just as I'm sure 2.0 was. So just invest the time to play 10 seasons or so and you'll see for yourself. OP still has interest in playing, and that's what made him create this thread. Play it and find out! You're always welcome back!

Yeah. Something needs to be done with recruiting, get less random at the end of the resources... make them sign altogether... the randomness of whenever (get rid of it), late (get rid of it). Change for 2nd session, with a definite deadline. Make early sign first tick, end of the 1st, last tick.

Posted by oldave on 5/2/2020 10:30:00 PM (view original):
the rankings are much better in 3.0

is it possible im not as funny as i think i am?

To me, 3.0 is way better than 2.0. I never played 1.0.

I played all of them and I think that 3.0 is better simply because of the player availability. Granter there are outliers (a rare 5* going to a d-II school and examples like that) but being able to recruit anyone anytime is a fun strategy and doesnt depend on previous success. This game is tricky because do you please the masses to promote retention (make the game easier but not realistic), please the long term coaches (game harder to win but more expensive for the average coach who simply isnt as good), or have something in between (which is pretty much what we have now). When you have such a wider user range in terms of experience theres no way to please everyone and make the game affordable (more worlds = more cost to maintain). so while "going back" is good to think about and be nostalgic, thats also saying give up on the growth the game has already gained since 2.0. I doubt more coaches come back if we did. I would not - I left because 2.0 was a drag.

“if a Big 6 school wants a recruit, they should get that recruit over a D2/D3 team each and every time. I think it's kinda dumb that I can win a battle against a Rutgers in the right situation, from D2. The rich should stay rich, as far as Big 6 programs. Because no one in real life will turn down a Clemson scholarship to go play at Coker D2 just because the D2 coach really liked that player.”

If they got rid of effort and resource allocation as the primary mode of recruiting, I absolutely agree. That’s what I said they should do from the start. But right or wrong, TPTB judged that too many users were tied to effort. So it has to mean something.

If Clemson and Coker put the same amount of effort in, Clemson does win, every time (assuming Clemson is not a D+ level mess at the time). If Clemson puts in half the effort, Clemson wins most of the time. It’s only when Clemson comes to a recruit late and desperate, and puts in minimal effort, that a D2 School will win the recruit. And even then, the D2 school will have to have invested some amount of effort to get out of reach of a late scholarship+minutes from a Big 6 program. Is it entirely realistic? No, probably not. But neither is it realistic to do 20 home visits, or to have a travel budget based on open scholarships. Given effort/resource allocation model, it’s the only workable gameplay setup. And when in conflict, gameplay>realism.

3.0 is slightly better IMO. The pull-down thing in 2.0 was pretty ridiculous. But 3.0 has some glaring problems.

Is it really good for the game that EEs don't declare before RS1? Does anyone think that would be either (a) a bad change or (b) hard to program?

Is it really good for the game that people can lose rolls 80-20? Do you guys know what loss aversion is? People hate losing rolls 80-20 much more than people like winning rolls 20-80; it just makes people in the userbase less happy.

Pull downs and postseason conference cash were the biggest issues I ever saw regarding 2.0 (outside of DI and jobs). Both were easily fixable without a revamp.

-I do like scouting with the camps and all, but it would be nice to have 1 less level. Remove Level 1 altogether imo. Level 2 should be level 1 finding the recruit. Paying for any basic scouting report would be able to get you to Level 2 automatically, otherwise it's a garbage scouting service.

-As far as effort is concerned, there are very easy ways to make an effort based system modified by things already in place and remove random dice roll recruiting. The strategy absolutely should be based on preferences. Get rid of random decisions, and place a higher modifier to preferences. People can take the gamble of going after a recruit who doesn't fit their preferences or play it safe and get the guys they know they have the best shot at.

-I'm absolutely against recruiting across divisions. This just makes it so the people who are good stay good while the people who are new find it even more difficult to figure out what they are supposed to be doing.

Me having multiple teams at different divisions It almost doesn't matter what division I am in because now their isn't a clause that you have to leave like other games and public games. Makes more sense for making money to help with the business. The only thing I have to find the time to do it. However every other game had the rule of staying too long. However job hopping should be slattered by having the team ban from post season and or conference tournament. Its very difficult to manage three teams along with co ops blaming the opposition at the same time have a higher winning record and a longer time on here. It typically does not make sense what any of the new success is actually saying.

Posted by colonels19 on 5/2/2020 8:36:00 PM (view original):
Hey All,

I played HD for 8 or 9 years consecutively and stopped in 2017 when HD 3.0 debuted.

I feel like if they ever brought HD 2.0 back, I would be back in a heartbeat. Do you guys feel the same way? Do people still want/clamor for HD 2.0? Just curious. Take care all.

Trevor

hey colonels, you joining us? figure you had to put in for a season to get your forum posting rights, it has to be more than 2 years since you left?

i left mostly due to general burnout, wasn't up to engage in learning something new, but definitely was not excited about the changes. i figured i'd give it a shot. its ok, i mean, i think too many battles go to coin flip and the game is a little unbalanced in that way. but i also saw the clear issue with the way recruiting was, where the top team could spend 1% more effort and have 100% of the signing odds - it just made it too hard for the little guy, and it made everything too formulaic. not that i had a personal complaint with either of those, i liked being lazy and had no issue competing at the little schools. but i agree those things were bad for the game generally!

i think as a whole, today's d1 recruiting would probably best be described as clunky but an improvement. its way less predictable, breaking down the distance barriers was good, there's a lot of improvement there. the weirdness of new coaches not getting to recruit for the most part sucks, but i mean, there's a lot of good stuff too. not exactly my personal cup of tea, but still.

I left when HD 3.0 debuted because I was burned out after so many years and really did not want to learn a new system of recruiting. When I came back I found it wasn't nearly as difficult to pick up as I had feared. Additionally, I think there are many more layers of recruiting strategy to utilize depending upon a whole lot more factors than before. 2.0 recruiting had become formulaic for me, Now I am discovering new team-building, scouting, and recruiting strategies that I can adapt to each team individually.

To generalize, the issues many people had when 3.0 were:

1. It was new and different and they liked what was old and known. Plus, some were very good at the old system, so transitioning to something new would require effort and there was a chance they would not be as successful as it was before.

2. They don't like 'losing' when they were 'winning' in recruiting. Honestly, I think this was a just an extension of #1. They hate the "coin flip" aspect. What I always found funny was that the REALLY good players didn't really call it a coin flip because almost all those guys understand basic probability. It was the less good guys who called it that.

3. The changes didn't do everything they wanted or made things worse in some way. This is the "preferences should be this way" or "split recruiting is a debacle" or " D3 shouldn't be able to sign D1 guys" group. Ironically, the one time they listened to me, I made things worse. As much as I think mully is a grognard, I was fully behind him when he suggested the % be released after signing. To paraphrase he said "more information is always better" which I completely agreed with. Until I didn't. If people didn't know that High could be 20% and Very High 80%, I don't think people would have complained as much AND it would have created more competitive recruiting. The law of unintended consequences is a *****.

4. Group think set in early and fast. There was the "this is a huge mistake" group, "this is ****ing huge mistake" group, and then the complete loss of sanity by one prominent user. There was also the "I have lost X # of battles in a row" group, the "I have lost X battles in a row as VH vs H" group, and then the "I have lost so many battles, my team is ruined, my money is wasted and I want a refund" group. At one point there were like four 3.0 defenders, and at least two of them were pretty much wack jobs. It wasn't pretty. If it wasn't for chapehill and benis making the 3.0 guide, I don't think the game would have survived. There was a lot of angst and it bred anger.


Honestly, I don't think most people wanted a massive overhaul. I like new crap so I was on board from the get go. I thought they did a good job listening in beta, many of the tweeks they made were good (there was an ebay style, free form, auction style recruitment process that was a mess) but people felt it should have gone longer.


Such is life, I really like the new game, I am glad it changed. I miss a lot of the old guys but it is what it is.......

I think that only a small percentage of coaches post in the forums, and the rest, by virtue of their continued participation, could be considered a vast silent majority of 3.0 defenders. While the game may not be perfect, it is good enough for current coaches to keep plunking down $100/year to keep an active team.

The whiners, thus, are a very small percentage of the users of this site. We should treat them with the disdain they deserve.

I would still take 2.0 back in a heartbeat. If I ever had to pay more than $5 for a 10-pack of seasons I would be gone. With D3 populations being what they are, that may never happen.

Unlike most of the coaches in this game, I don't enjoy recruiting. It is by far my least favorite aspect, in all generations of the game. I'm really only interested in figuring out how ratings interact with one another and result in statistical distributions of outcomes. So I like optimizing my practice plans, player game plans, lineups, defensive positioning, etc. I think there are only a small handful of other coaches who can do a better job than I can at getting the most out of their guys. Unfortunately, a big part of the game - arguably the biggest below high D1 - is just getting the best possible guys. I lose all the time in the late stages of the NT to guys whose team planning and gameplanning are far from optimal, but who have 5+ guys with 700+ overall ratings and I just can't hang, even if sometimes 4 of those guys are guards and none of them are great shooters. Teams will appear to overperform when built and run well, but there is a limit to the width of the talent chasm you can leap with that.

Recruiting in 3.0 lasts foreeevvveeerrrrrrrr. And if you decide to gamble of targeting a guy with an earlier signing preference, you pretty much have to check in every cycle or risk losing him to somebody from a higher division. I hate that. I don't want to be checking on recruits 4 times a day 30% of the time. In 2.0 recruiting was a few days and then it was over for a month (or 2 months in a 1/day world, but I haven't played in any of those lately).

My problem isn't with "coinflips" (I did somehow lose, IIRC, my first 17 contested recruits at the very beginning of 3.0, most of them as the favorite, and it almost drove me away, but that luck has predictably evened out over time). My problem isn't with the nature of the new recruiting system, or the 2 recruiting periods, or the loophole, or any of that. It's purely based on how obnoxiously long recruiting lasts now. If there weren't so much momentum in just holding onto my team that keeps making sufficiently deep tournament runs to be free, I would leave.