Posted by cubcub113 on 12/1/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
Why pretty much no credits?

As I said earlier in the thread, it makes no sense that the most devoted users pay virtually nothing to play this game while new customers pay close to full freight.

Posted by mullycj on 12/1/2017 5:00:00 PM (view original):
I actually bought a card for my wife last year just to prove coaching HD basketball was a real paying job!!

Lol

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Could they not open more worlds if needed? I think they could.

Of course they could. It would be a great way to empty out the existing worlds even further.

Why?

Posted by grimacedance on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

Apparently most of the people posting in this thread weren't here when WiS "did" cut the incentive awards back at D2/D3. It went over about as well as you'd expect. Lots of coaches got angry and dropped teams (because as Mike has so succinctly put it, "People hate it when you take away their ****"). The intended effect was to basically force coaches to move to D1. That didn't work either. Many of the long time D2/D3 coaches who had been at their schools for years and years simply stayed where they were and refused to move. So not only did the "forced migration" to D1 fail miserably, but there were a lot of teams dropped in protest as well. People figured that if you cut the incentive awards by 50%, then they'd just cut 50% of their teams in order to compensate monetarily (as a crude example).

After this last major exodus (3.0), the game is damn near on life support as it is. Can it afford another big drop in coaches and stay viable? Probably not.

Posted by l80r20 on 12/2/2017 1:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Could they not open more worlds if needed? I think they could.

Of course they could. It would be a great way to empty out the existing worlds even further.

Why?

Read the thread, spud. Context means a lot.

Posted by emy1013 on 12/2/2017 7:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

Apparently most of the people posting in this thread weren't here when WiS "did" cut the incentive awards back at D2/D3. It went over about as well as you'd expect. Lots of coaches got angry and dropped teams (because as Mike has so succinctly put it, "People hate it when you take away their ****"). The intended effect was to basically force coaches to move to D1. That didn't work either. Many of the long time D2/D3 coaches who had been at their schools for years and years simply stayed where they were and refused to move. So not only did the "forced migration" to D1 fail miserably, but there were a lot of teams dropped in protest as well. People figured that if you cut the incentive awards by 50%, then they'd just cut 50% of their teams in order to compensate monetarily (as a crude example).

After this last major exodus (3.0), the game is damn near on life support as it is. Can it afford another big drop in coaches and stay viable? Probably not.

I agree with you but what about cutting back the cost and the credits for DII and DIII as Benis' model does.

Posted by cubcub113 on 12/2/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 12/2/2017 7:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

Apparently most of the people posting in this thread weren't here when WiS "did" cut the incentive awards back at D2/D3. It went over about as well as you'd expect. Lots of coaches got angry and dropped teams (because as Mike has so succinctly put it, "People hate it when you take away their ****"). The intended effect was to basically force coaches to move to D1. That didn't work either. Many of the long time D2/D3 coaches who had been at their schools for years and years simply stayed where they were and refused to move. So not only did the "forced migration" to D1 fail miserably, but there were a lot of teams dropped in protest as well. People figured that if you cut the incentive awards by 50%, then they'd just cut 50% of their teams in order to compensate monetarily (as a crude example).

After this last major exodus (3.0), the game is damn near on life support as it is. Can it afford another big drop in coaches and stay viable? Probably not.

I agree with you but what about cutting back the cost and the credits for DII and DIII as Benis' model does.

Emy- do you remember the details about what they tried to do?

I agree, cutting credits without doing anything else is not going to make people happy that's why I suggested cutting cost too. But even then it still wouldn't be sufficient so you'd have to do something along with it - improve jobs for example.

Posted by Benis on 12/2/2017 11:53:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 12/2/2017 11:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 12/2/2017 7:16:00 AM (view original):

Posted by grimacedance on 12/1/2017 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Yep. The owners of the site decided that HD was stagnant and made a change. Some long-time users didn't like it. Life moves on. None of us have the financial data so we don't know if that played a part in the decision to make a change. But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years.

Businesses are in business to make money.

"But, from what I've gathered in this forum, some long-time users haven't paid a dime in years. "

The more I think about this, the more stunned I am. In what world do you create a business model where your most loyal dedicated customers pay nothing to use it? All of the new users who try it for a few seasons and then drop out are subsidizing the users who use the game (and the accompanying bandwidth) the most.

But WIS is going to be scared to cut the credits you receive for success, fearing a mass exodus.

Apparently most of the people posting in this thread weren't here when WiS "did" cut the incentive awards back at D2/D3. It went over about as well as you'd expect. Lots of coaches got angry and dropped teams (because as Mike has so succinctly put it, "People hate it when you take away their ****"). The intended effect was to basically force coaches to move to D1. That didn't work either. Many of the long time D2/D3 coaches who had been at their schools for years and years simply stayed where they were and refused to move. So not only did the "forced migration" to D1 fail miserably, but there were a lot of teams dropped in protest as well. People figured that if you cut the incentive awards by 50%, then they'd just cut 50% of their teams in order to compensate monetarily (as a crude example).

After this last major exodus (3.0), the game is damn near on life support as it is. Can it afford another big drop in coaches and stay viable? Probably not.

I agree with you but what about cutting back the cost and the credits for DII and DIII as Benis' model does.

Emy- do you remember the details about what they tried to do?

I agree, cutting credits without doing anything else is not going to make people happy that's why I suggested cutting cost too. But even then it still wouldn't be sufficient so you'd have to do something along with it - improve jobs for example.

I've seen Mully respond in here, maybe he can help remember a few things as well. What I "seem" to remember is that the credits were cut back after potential was implemented. Now, if you think 3.0 had a bad reaction, you should have seen the crowd when potential was introduced. The fact that the game already HAD potential built in was apparently too much for some folks to understand without the neat little colors etc. (What I mean is, when a player had an attribute rated at about 20 or lower/88ish or higher, any practice time devoted to that attribute produced VERY slow growth. Low potential. Between 21-35/70/88ish, practice time led to fairly normal growth. In the middle of the range, practice time led to QUICK improvements. Obviously that would correlate to high potential. But most people were too dense to make that connection and had to have the game color-coded and spoon fed to them. But I digress).

If memory serves, HUGE exodus with the implementation of potential (that is fact) and the credit cuts came soon after, probably to attempt to offset some of the loss of that revenue. As I said earlier, it still didn't work. Coaches who had been at their programs for many years simply stayed at those programs but dropped other teams to make up for the difference in credits. WiS eventually relented (obviously) when they saw that the plan to essentially "force" coaches up to D1 didn't do anything but **** off their most loyal customers.

Cub, no there was no price difference to account for credit difference. Teams were still the same price which is why many coaches said they dropped some of their teams. Would Benis' idea work? Hard to say without trying it. But I personally have ALWAYS enjoyed D2 more than D1 or D3 and I doubt that I'd move up in many worlds. The game is advertised as a Dynasty game, not a D1 Dynasty game. I don't CARE what the name on my team header says. If I close my eyes, it looks like it spells Duke to me. Hell, they could change the names of all the teams to inanimate objects and I wouldn't give a ****. Does it REALLY matter? And if it does, if it matters SO MUCH what the name of the team is that someone coaches, they may have deeper seated issues, ya think?

I really hate to sound like the grumpy old man, but the game really has suffered greatly since the "good old days". My best example would be when Tark was initially due to open. Tark was a different kind of animal for two reasons: (1) it was the first "new" world opened in some time, and (2) it was the first 2/day world. Here's how popular that world was. The world was due to open for D3 sign-ups at 12 noon. I had to be at work, but knew I could jump on very shortly after and thought I'd just grab whatever team was open (as theoretically, everyone was starting on equal footing). When I logged on at 12:15, ALL 384 D3 teams were taken. Every single one in less than 15 minutes. Now? Now you can wait damn near two and a half days and still pick up an A- prestige team at your own leisure.

Truth is, when Fox bought Tarek out (or he sold out, depending on your opinion. Although with what he was "supposedly" offered, it would have been hard NOT to sell), the game went straight down the toilet. Tarek might have been a bit defensive about some things, as this "was" his baby, but he also handled things quickly and, as far as I could tell, fairly. Fox bought it and threw it in the dustbin. Hopefully the new ownership will eventually give this game the time and necessary attention it deserves because it really is quite a unique game. It's just a damn shame to see how many Sim teams make the NT every year. There's NO reason why this game shouldn't stay filled, if only there was proper advertising.

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I've been advocating for years now that what WiS really needs to do is contract some of the worlds. Problem is, how do you do that without ******* of coaches in the contracted worlds? To me, the optimal numbers would be about 4 1/day worlds and 2 2/day worlds. Run the 2/days exactly opposite of each other so those coaches (like me) who are constantly wanting to do something will at least have a team to fiddle with. But there are simply too many worlds and not enough coaches (for the current populations). Without a HUGE influx of new coaches, how long do you think it'll be before coaches simply get bored with playing 22 Sim teams each season? I would assume that most of us play here for the competition, no? For those who haven't yet had the experience of playing in a full (I mean 11 or 12, not 6 or 7) conference of human coaches. who trash talk, build up a little camaraderie, and have to actually plan for their next game, you just don't know what you're missing. It's still HD but it's a whole different version of HD than hanging out in empty conferences beating the crap out of bad Sim teams every night. It's actually, you know, challenging and more importantly, FUN.

Whatever, back under my rock for the next year or so. Forums have become quite toxic anyway due to the presence of a few specific users. C' est la vie, vaya con (deity of your choice), and all that good stuff. Take care.

From what I remember it was something like this
D1 : no change
D2/D3 : Once you made the NT for four season your rewards would decrease such as ;
5th appearance : 90% of current rewards
6th appearance : 80% " "
7th appearance : 70% " "
8th+ appearance : 50% " "

The numbers aren't accurate but that was the jist.

Posted by mullycj on 12/2/2017 3:30:00 PM (view original):
From what I remember it was something like this
D1 : no change
D2/D3 : Once you made the NT for four season your rewards would decrease such as ;
5th appearance : 90% of current rewards
6th appearance : 80% " "
7th appearance : 70% " "
8th+ appearance : 50% " "

The numbers aren't accurate but that was the jist.

Oh... hmm, I'm not necessarily a fan of the decreasing rewards strategy.

Thanks for posting mully.

Emy -

Thanks for the post. I agree with most of what you've said (with the exception of contracting the worlds).

"There's NO reason why this game shouldn't stay filled"

This is dead on. We're talking about a couple thousand people here. The target market segment for a game like this is in the millions.

It really isn't.

People who like sports.
People who like games.
People who like sim games.
People who like sports sim games.
People who don't mind games being played on someone else's schedule.
People who don't want monetary rewards for their time.
People who don't mind spending years playing the above game.

FWIW, users could fill conferences. But that's not the way to win games/collect credits/be successful. I play in a full conference. I believe Benis plays in one as well. To the best of my knowledge, those are the only full conferences. It's not because there are only 11 users per level. It's because users chose easier paths to success.

Please. Despite what your mother told you when you were a little boy, you're not that special or unique.