Request for extremely low prestige teams

[Vegas Vic]

Brooks, would it be possible to prohibit teams below a certain prestige level from signing 3* players? I'm trying to get some separation between the lower level FBS teams and FCS teams in my custom league trials; however the FCS teams are out- recruiting some of the FBS teams no matter how low I set the prestige. If it would be possible to have a cut-off point for prestige (5, 10, 15, 20, whatever) that would keep these teams from signing 3* players, I think it would accomplish having some separation between these teams.

[brooks_piggott]

No, we have it that way so we get some movement upwards of low prestige teams and to keep it open to chance if they're recruiting higher star players close to home, etc.

[Vegas Vic]

So if I'm understanding correctly, the game is designed to promote parity in recruiting over realistic outcomes. I'm not bashing the game, I just don't want to waste any more of my time trying to get some semblance of realistic outcomes from a custom setup. I've tried locking in the prestige at "5" on teams I've added, and over time they out recruit and beat many teams with locked in prestige levels 30 or 40 points higher. After a few seasons, they also play a lot of nail biting close games with teams that have locked in prestige levels in the 60's ,70's and 80's.

[brooks_piggott]

My guess is that FCS teams in certain states will still be able to recruit 3* players that are geographically close... so ohio, georgia, florida, texas, california where most of the recruits come from will always have shots at falling into low prestige teams just due to sheer volume of players. You can try moving the FCS teams to places where there is no recruiting pipeline which should hurt their chances of landing higher rated recruits. You're basically building a scenario that hasn't been coded for, so you'll have to get creative with how you handle it. Going in every year and turning prestige down for some schools that get raises is probably necessary. You can also go into your FCS schools and force them to drop any players that get too high on OVR just to further nerf them and keep them from being competitive. And even if they sign a bunch of 1 and 2 star players they're going to get better via training camps and such, so any "gems" of players probably need to be removed as well.

In the end I can't commit that it won't be a waste of time... I can toss out ideas on how to try and get this to work, but it's going to be a lot of trial and error and may require me updating significant amounts of code in a future version to get it closer to your liking.

And no, the game doesn't prioritize parity over realism... to us it's more realistic for teams to move up and down over the years so that you see both dynasties and rebuilding years come and go. So the better the teams get the harder it is to go up further and the easier it is for them to lose prestige. Prestige is driven a lot by expectations... so if you're a 30 prestige the game doesn't really expect you to win many games, so if you do then you get good prestige bumps, whereas a 95 prestige team is expected to compete for championships and if they don't they tend to fall back to the pack.

[Vegas Vic]

Brooks, thanks for that response. You've given me a couple of ideas I didn't consider.

For my next testing, I'm going to use these ten FCS teams: Northern Arizona, Maine, Idaho State, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana State, Northern Colorado, Weber State (Utah), Eastern Washington, and Northern Iowa. These are ones that appear to be in sparsely populated areas, not close to recruiting hot beds.

If I see them getting too good over time, I'll take additional steps like cutting high rated players after national signing day, but it might not be required.

Once again, thanks for taking the time to respond.

[Vegas Vic]

OK Brooks, I think you were right on the money with your recommendations.

I've found that the key is to go in and release the higher rated players after training camp. I know to some folks that might sound like a cheesy way of doing things, but for my purposes these ten FCS teams are only meant to fill out schedules and provide a realistic level of competition against the FBS schools. Think of them as kind of like the Washington Generals are to the Harlem Globetrotters. Interestingly, the location of the FCS schools doesn't seem to be as important as cutting the good players after training camp. These remote schools still pick up their share of players from California and Texas.

I'm seeing win rates of slightly above 90% for the FBS schools in these games, and most of the losses are by the lower level Group of Five teams. Occasionally a Power Five team will lose (usually a team like Vanderbilt or Kansas), which is also realistic. The prestige levels also remain fairly stable and don't require any intervention, at least not so far.

[JDB]

My guess is that FCS teams in certain states will still be able to recruit 3* players that are geographically close... so ohio, georgia, florida, texas, california where most of the recruits come from will always have shots at falling into low prestige teams just due to sheer volume of players. You can try moving the FCS teams to places where there is no recruiting pipeline which should hurt their chances of landing higher rated recruits. You're basically building a scenario that hasn't been coded for, so you'll have to get creative with how you handle it. Going in every year and turning prestige down for some schools that get raises is probably necessary. You can also go into your FCS schools and force them to drop any players that get too high on OVR just to further nerf them and keep them from being competitive. And even if they sign a bunch of 1 and 2 star players they're going to get better via training camps and such, so any "gems" of players probably need to be removed as well.

In the end I can't commit that it won't be a waste of time... I can toss out ideas on how to try and get this to work, but it's going to be a lot of trial and error and may require me updating significant amounts of code in a future version to get it closer to your liking.

And no, the game doesn't prioritize parity over realism... to us it's more realistic for teams to move up and down over the years so that you see both dynasties and rebuilding years come and go. So the better the teams get the harder it is to go up further and the easier it is for them to lose prestige. Prestige is driven a lot by expectations... so if you're a 30 prestige the game doesn't really expect you to win many games, so if you do then you get good prestige bumps, whereas a 95 prestige team is expected to compete for championships and if they don't they tend to fall back to the pack.

I'm curious about one thing here. Does this mean that the game is designed to generate stronger recruits from these football "hot spots" such as Florida, Georgia, and Ohio?

[brooks_piggott]

Not stronger, just more. You'll get more strong players there, but only because you get more average and more weak players too.