Recruiting Position Targets

[brooks_piggott]

What I'm thinking is tying the position maxes to different coach styles for your head coach. So just for transparency I'm going to open it up for discussion here. I'm going to leave K/P at 3/3 for all formations.

Keep in mind this is just CPU Teams or Auto Recruit enabled teams. In 4.0.3 the human teams can already exceed these maxes.

So for defense what changes to position maxes would you make for each defense variant:

D34,
D43,
D335,
D34Hybrid,
D43Hybrid,
D335Hybrid,
D52,
D52Hybrid

Current defaults are 34 players:
CB: 6
LB: 8
DT: 6
DE: 6
FS: 4
SS: 4

Which changes for Offense Variants:

WestCoast,
Power,
Spread,
ProStyle,
Vertical,
WestCoastHybrid,
PowerHybrid,
SpreadHybrid,
ProStyleHybrid,
VerticalHybrid,
SmashMouthHybrid

Current Offense Defaults (45 players):
QB: 4
RB: 6
FB: 4
G: 5
T: 5
C: 5
TE: 6
WR: 10

Let me know in the comments below what the desired changes are and see if we can come to a consensus.

[XxVols98xX]

I'll post my opinion tomorrow along with a video to explain it. Too much to just type out. Do y'all have a Discord channel for a DDS community?

[brooks_piggott]

I pretty much just hang out on the forums and slack.

For the above I'm just looking for modifiers.... for example, if your head coach is a spread offense that means you target +1 QB, + 1 RB, -2 FB or something like that.

It could be the base is fine for defense and most of offense... and just a few schemes need tweaking so not everyone is recruiting the exact same mix of players.

And again, this only affects cpu teams or teams on auto recruit... if you're doing it manually you can target whoever you want.

[XxVols98xX]

What I'm thinking is tying the position maxes to different coach styles for your head coach. So just for transparency I'm going to open it up for discussion here. I'm going to leave K/P at 3/3 for all formations.

Keep in mind this is just CPU Teams or Auto Recruit enabled teams. In 4.0.3 the human teams can already exceed these maxes.

So for defense what changes to position maxes would you make for each defense variant:

D34,
D43,
D335,
D34Hybrid,
D43Hybrid,
D335Hybrid,
D52,
D52Hybrid

Current defaults are 34 players:
CB: 6
LB: 8
DT: 6
DE: 6
FS: 4
SS: 4

Which changes for Offense Variants:

WestCoast,
Power,
Spread,
ProStyle,
Vertical,
WestCoastHybrid,
PowerHybrid,
SpreadHybrid,
ProStyleHybrid,
VerticalHybrid,
SmashMouthHybrid

Current Offense Defaults (45 players):
QB: 4
RB: 6
FB: 4
G: 5
T: 5
C: 5
TE: 6
WR: 10

Let me know in the comments below what the desired changes are and see if we can come to a consensus.

This here would satisfy any Off/Def, wouldn't even need to have multiple breakdowns as any system will have enough players to match anything they do year in and year out. I don't mind the player cap either as it keeps folks from exploiting and signing 5 QB's in a class and cutting 3-4 of them. Not really a fan of the cutting option as I believe you can't even do that in real life. From my understanding a player gets a 4 year scholarship thus cutting him is not an option. QB's and RB's I think you nailed it. FB's and TE's are overvalued in this game especially in today's college football world. The AI sucks at using their FB's and TE's and even when I try my best FB's barely get anything unless I move them to RB on the depth chart and TE's just flat out suck even if I make an Off geared around them. Saying that I think carrying 10 players between the least utilized positions on Off is a waste as those scholarships can be used at much higher valued positions. Only issue with the Oline is having the same number of C's as G's and T's whilst only 1 plays. Take 2 from the C and give 1 each to the G and T spot. With this breakdown you'll have the option to run any system and the AI will avoid over recruiting positions that have no impact and player can't exploit by over signing and cutting. I have no idea why you're stuck on 3 kickers and 3 punters when the top programs aren't ever signing 4 combined in each recruiting cycle. 2/2 for each is enough no need to have 4 guys who never see the field once in 3-4 years waste valuable scholarships. The front 7 is what wins football games which is why I added 2 for each position. I don't know if it's just me, compared to other users, or what but my Dline and LB's usually have less sacks than my S's and that's just odd. It even happens with the AI teams so I know it's not just me in my dynasty. Would love to see the Dline be valued to what they are in real life as we all know the games are won and lost in the trenches. Skill position guys on Off and Def are a dime a dozen while yes they can make huge impacts but the front 7 should have way more value which is why I think more spots are needed. The DB's look fine as most are interchangeable. Anyway just my opinion but I think this roster breakdown would really help make the game better and even the playing field for the AI as we humans tend to exploit recruiting as is.

QB - 4
RB - 6
FB - 2
TE - 4
WR - 10
G - 6
T - 6
C - 3
P - 2
K - 2
DT - 8
DE - 8
LB - 10
CB - 6
SS - 4
FS - 4

[brooks_piggott]

Ok, I was under the impression you wanted it tied to different coaching styles so all teams wouldn't be cookie cutter. I can make these changes but would still prefer adjustments based on coaching style. Will keep this open waiting for more feedback.

[XxVols98xX]

Ok, I was under the impression you wanted it tied to different coaching styles so all teams wouldn't be cookie cutter. I can make these changes but would still prefer adjustments based on coaching style. Will keep this open waiting for more feedback.

At first yes, but if the base breakdown is built with sufficient numbers at each position a one size fits all works well. Keeps the AI from over recruiting positions with little on field value and also, if you keep the human max, keeps us from just hoarding all the talent and later cutting them. I know some folks strat is recruit 6 QB's and cut 4-5 of them and retrying the next cycle. Which for me is an exploit and just takes away from the fun and challenge. After playing now 11 full seasons with the position max I find that the true issue is not the AI recruiting but the way they actually utilize their recruits. Still think they build a poor depth chart and of course never adjusting with the ebb and flows of classes and their own roster talent.

[dhouston1]

Here are my thoughts and strategy that I will be utilizing based on the information provided regarding position max:

My teams run the following:
Offense - Spread
Defense - 4-3

QB 4
RB 6
FB 1
TE 2
WR 12
G 6
T 6
C 2
P 2
K 2
DT 8
DE 8
LB 10
CB 8
SS 4
FS 4
85

Just my thoughts if you are looking to implement such a feature.

[MattP598]

I'm not sure human controlled teams aren't locked in on a certain amount in 4.0.3. In our online league I had a QB that I had put 150 points in and he was at 0 interest. I have 2 coming back next year and 3 committed.

IMO it should be

QB- 5
RB - 6
FB - 2
TE- 5
T- 7
G- 7
C- 4
WR- 10

46 - Offense

DT- 6
DE - 6
LB - 9
CB - 6
SS - 4
FS - 4

35 - Defense

K-2
P-2

4- ST

It seems like QB's and OL are the ones that get hurt most in this game. Maybe it's all random but I seem to lose at least a couple of OL every season. On defense players can be used in different positions with more success, for instance SS at LB, FS at CB, LB at DE, DE at DT and DT at DE so you have more flexibility. On offense you can move your OL around but usually that's about it. Occasionally a WR to TE or vice versa or a WR to RB.

[ksbass]

Just a few observations:

In relation to style specific limits, I really like the idea. So I will offer up my suggestions for changes:

Spread Offense
RB:5
FB:2
TE:4
WR:12
G:6
T:6
C:4

3-4 Def

DT:4
DE:5
LB:10
CB:6
SS:4
FS:3

However, I think the problem most people appear to be running across has nothing to do with the limits of any kind, whether we want to think so or not. It has to do with the recruit generation algorithm. It produces far too many QBs and FSs, I say this, as after many seasons, it seems like almost every recruit left behind at 4 stars or better is a QB or FS. Meanwhile, it is often the biggest challenge in the game to land sufficient LBs, TEs, or DTs to even meet the limits.

My humble suggestion is to look at the recruits generated before moving to the style delineated limits, even though I really like that idea.

And I, for one, don't mind the limits applying to all teams, even mine.