The root of the 'too many good players get unrecruited' problem

[Timeetyo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Timeetyo

I did that a lot the first year as a 1* with only 5000 points but i've actually had more overall success keeping 500 in as a 3* going after higher rated guys. The more I think about this, I think there are several components to the problem which compound into the wackiness we currently have: 1 - Only max points doesn't help matters (but would be a better strategy if they fixed the others) 2 - I've watched 5 CPU teams go 500 in for a good recruit and NOT back down when there was a team or 2 with a clear advantage over the others. I have no problem with 2 or 3 going hard after a guy, or even more in the early weeks - but when you are 500 down to BAMA and they are getting 100 more in bonus each week - just give up and put those points into someone you can sign. 3 - The CPU doesn't go out and LOOK for guys who are not being recruited. If they signed someone (or finally got locked out in scenario 2) they then move thier points into someone else on their board. They don't seem to do what any human would - take a peek at who else is out there (not on board) that we can maybe chase after and sign. I think these 3 issues are combining into the mess that you have and the worst of them is actually #3 as it lets guys go totally under the radar (not even on a board). Get the CPU to better assess if they can win a battle and to better re-alocate those points is fine - but if they aren't looking for the freebies they will always be there for the user to pick up.

Too add to this - #4 - too many 3* players doesn't help as these fill up roster slots with workable players and the CPU isn't looking for new talent to replace them.

[Timeetyo]

Quote: Originally Posted by BleedGreen710

Everyones making great arguments, nice. I think we can all agree though... that whether its a smart recruiting strategy or if its realistic or not, its not right for the CPU to be completely restricted to only assigning max points to recruits.

now how do we get a game changer in here to get this thread to EA...if only it were that easy.

[Dogslax41]

Quote: Originally Posted by BleedGreen710

Everyones making great arguments, nice. I think we can all agree though... that whether its a smart recruiting strategy or if its realistic or not, its not right for the CPU to be completely restricted to only assigning max points to recruits.

Agree 100% but you have to remember who you are dealing with here. The goal should be to make recruiting functional and lifelike, not necessarily realistic. When looking to EA for a solution to this would you rather them reprogram point distribution for the CPU or reduce the number of 4 and 5 star players.

Notice I said that it was a sound strategy not that it was realistic. Given the way that EA set up recruiting to work, creating code that would allow the CPU to evaluate all necessary components and weight options would be too intensive for the processor and the amount of time it would take the ram to process recruiting would be ridiculous.

I just think that given where we are at the quickest and lowest collateral damage solution would be to limit 4 and 5 star players.

[moneal2001]

I posted this in the other thread. I think it would help with the unrecruited player issue.

Quote: Originally Posted by moneal2001

I don't know if its really EA's fault on this one. I did look into the Fact that the cpu uses full points on their top 10-13 players on their board. That causes the Lower Guys to not receive any points. The CPU does this to counter the most likely strategy of players putting full points into all their recruits. I think they need to figure out a way to give bonus recruiting points to each school based on its prestige rating. a 1 star school should receive 0 bonus points for prestige. each star should add 1000 recruiting points each. This would allow bigger schools to recruit more players at a time.

Doing something like this would give even a level 1 coach at a 5 or 6 star school the ability to put full points into 18-20 players. higher level coaches would be able to fully recruit 20 - 25 players.

[Dogslax41]

Quote: Originally Posted by moneal2001

I posted this in the other thread. I think it would help with the unrecruited player issue. Doing something like this would give even a level 1 coach at a 5 or 6 star school the ability to put full points into 18-20 players. higher level coaches would be able to fully recruit 20 - 25 players.

This would also work. Anything that would work to increase that variance for better recruiting schools either reduce the pool or give top programs more influence on the pool. Right now the impact of a player happening to place high value on championship or tv exposure is not sufficient to influence a high % of top players to only look at top schools.

In reality a 4 star recruit may not be looked at by at top program early but they know to hold out for the possibly rather than always be wooed by a mid major calling them from day 1.

[JLoco11]

I was the person who made the guide when the game came out... and this was a problem I saw from the very beginning.

The CPU does not spread out points to recruits, nor do they manage their recruit point totals at all. It's ALL or NOTHING with them, however, they will offer a scholarship to all 35 players on their board no matter what.

At the end of the year, when you see the recruiting class grades, you will notice how badly skewered the results are. The biggest schools, were walking away with no more than 15 recruits per class. Mid tier schools were actually getting 20+ recruits, but mostly 1-2 star caliber players.

[Strategizer]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dogslax41

This would also work. Anything that would work to increase that variance for better recruiting schools either reduce the pool or give top programs more influence on the pool. Right now the impact of a player happening to place high value on championship or tv exposure is not sufficient to influence a high % of top players to only look at top schools. In reality a 4 star recruit may not be looked at by at top program early but they know to hold out for the possibly rather than always be wooed by a mid major calling them from day 1.

This is why the break into the top ten feature is problematic with the current system. Makes it way too easy and quick to get that big lead, even if you're umass.

[jmaj315]

Quote: Originally Posted by patsfan1993

Do you think maxing out some of the best coaches would help make it harder to get these recruits? I was thinking about editing the 15-20 coaches to max the recruiting. I figured the additional points along with the insta commit attribute would help them sign players quicker and thus recruit more of the 4 & 5 star talent.

Idk... we shouldnt have to do that.

Quote: Originally Posted by BleedGreen710

Agreed. Should have made the insta commit skill give a bonus chance of insta commits, but not require the skill to be had for you to get any insta commits..

Insta commit is like a 20% increase of committing when offered... i think