Announcements

Forum >> Announcements >> Greater player development/training variance...  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#19238	10/07/2022 9:46:10 am	Feb 19th, 2028	Ignore
RupaScoop Joined: 03/21/2021 Posts: 45 Inactive	So my understanding is we won't be able to predict how guys will develop? imo that takes a big chunk of the fun of the game away, to the point I may no longer be interested in playing. Sorry, don't mean to be rude, I love this game, but scouring for players and projecting how they'll turn out is my favorite part. Without that it becomes more like GM Games or something. No offense intended Steve, really have enjoyed this game for a long time, it's fantastic. One thought: would it be possible to give us more tools to develop players? Or more philosophies? Like playing guys in the right positions, individual development controls, etc? Maybe the better dev you have in your coaches the more training sessions you can have? Updated Friday, October 7 2022 @ 9:52:11 am PDT
#19240	10/07/2022 10:59:53 am	Feb 24th, 2028	Ignore
James Lebron Joined: 08/17/2021 Posts: 26 Florida Southern Moccasins VI.10	I agree with RupaScoop. With the increased competition for good or even just descent recruits that turn out good as the teams star adding this in will make it be even harder for teams (especially teams in the lower divisions) to acquire good players that will make their teams be competitive. As an example, try getting a good or even a descent tall player above 6-9? Doing that is not easy with the added competition and I'm not complaining about the competition from other humans. If I have a crappy team thats ok with me, it's my fault for not putting enough time in to it or planning properly, but it would be nice to have full confidence that at least one or two of your recruits will turn in to the teams star.. All in the name of making this be more of a GM game that tries to mimic a real life sport. Which will never happen by the way. If you want more realism why not put all of the teams in to their real life divisions / conferences? Having a game that encourages advancement in to higher and better divisions or leagues and taking away or reducing the possibility to do that doesn't seem to be a very good tactic to retaining players........ Updated Friday, October 7 2022 @ 11:02:01 am PDT
#19241	10/07/2022 4:19:29 pm	Feb 24th, 2028	Ignore
g10rsh-2 Joined: 05/29/2021 Posts: 6 Illinois Wesleyan Titans III.4	It sounds like the top end isn't changing for any skill a player has, but the amount they will gain year to year will be have more variance. projection will still be possible but will be more fuzzy. if a HS FR shoots up in some skills and stalls in others, the next year they may be slower, or just as fast. I think the same projection principles will apply, but if you want to look at development speed to estimate maxes, each extra year will give a more data of how they are trending.
#19242	10/07/2022 4:29:27 pm	Feb 24th, 2028	Ignore
Stromstar Joined: 09/05/2022 Posts: 21 Xavier Musketeers III.4	I love when a game has some hidden X-Factor within the players. Just a little variance makes the game more realistic. 4-star recruits can often not live up to the hype (Josiah Turner, Anthony Bennett) and others went overlooked and proved their worth later on (Chef, Norris Cole)
#19243	10/07/2022 6:34:55 pm	Feb 24th, 2028
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2385 Hardwood Administrator	The key word here is the variance is increasing, the mean is not changing. Steve
#19245	10/08/2022 4:22:57 am	Feb 24th, 2028	Ignore
electriceel883 Joined: 06/07/2021 Posts: 128 Wisconsin Badgers III.2	So the usual occurrence where a player typically gains at a much more rapid rate earlier in his college career may change to a slower growth in the beginning for some players, or a much more rapid growth later for some upperclassmen? So the historical growth rates have much less value (or none)?
#19247	10/10/2022 6:06:16 pm	Mar 4th, 2028	Ignore
El jefe Joined: 07/06/2018 Posts: 644 Temple Owls I.1	I'm understanding it as this (simplistic example): Player 1, 11 POT Current system HS FR - 40 SI HS SO - 55 SI HS JR - 70 SI HS SR - 85 SI COLL FR - 100 SI COLL SO - 115 SI COLL JR - 130 SI COLL SR - 145 SI New System HS FR - 40 SI HS SO - 60 SI HS JR - 70 SI HS SR - 92 SI COLL FR - 109 SI COLL SO - 129 SI COLL JR - 135 SI COLL SR - 145 SI So the "mean" SI increase is the same (and ending point in this example) but the journey to get there is much higher variance from year-to-year
#19251	10/11/2022 10:14:25 am	Mar 9th, 2028	Ignore
RupaScoop Joined: 03/21/2021 Posts: 45 Inactive	Ah okay I see.
#19252	10/12/2022 9:29:15 pm	Mar 10th, 2028
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2385 Hardwood Administrator	Good example El jefe! Steve
#19254	10/13/2022 10:39:38 am	Mar 11th, 2028	Ignore
RupaScoop Joined: 03/21/2021 Posts: 45 Inactive	Ah okay I see.

| |

Reply