bremitt

I think picks should be treated like players...

What i mean by this is allow Picks to be put on the trade block or set them to Untouchable, and allow them to be listed as a Transfer need. When you are a rebuilding team, you want picks, a lot of picks, and it would be nice to tell everyone that you want picks, also, a rebuilding team doesn't really want to give up your picks, so being able to set them to Untouchable would be great, that way I'm not getting a bunch of annoying, bad offers for my picks when i want to keep them.

Also as a competitor, you might be willing to give up your picks to get that player that may push you over the edge to go from competitor to favourite, so it would be great to be able to put your picks on the trade block, let everyone know that your picks are available for the right return.

As far as i know, picks can't be Trade Blocked, Untouchabled or Transfer needed. It would really help in trying to communicate your intentions to other teams. If i am wrong, and this can be accomplished, please let me know...

Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant.

The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying.

Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.

Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant.

The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying.

Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.

Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant.

The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying.

Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.

Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant.

The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying.

Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.

Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant.

The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying.

Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.

I think you misunderstand me...

I'm not talking about "Anxious" in their "Big Game" rating, i mean when they are "anxious" in their confidence level. It changes (from my understanding) based on how often they are played and how well they are playing. This isn't about a confident player not handling pressure, it's about a player who has very low confidence, and yet his profile says that he is cocky. To me, a person who is cocky, is always confident.

now i understand the idea behind making players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" seem like a bad thing, and if you have a lot of these players, that would be a detriment to the dressing room chemistry, and this suggestion would sort of make having a lot of those players a positive, but here goes. 

Not sure if a suggestion is even the proper term, but more of an observation. My team is bad, and they have been doing bad, and I ran a lot of players through my team this season, so there are a lot of players that have been sat for long periods of time. I get that this hurts their confidence and I understand the reasoning behind this in the game. But I have players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" who are "anxious" or "uncomfortable", wouldn't these players always have high confidence? isn't that what being cocky or arrogant is? always thinking your hot stuff, which means they would have little issues in the confidence department.

Now, if you changed it so that "cocky" and "arrogant" players were always confident, or at least had a confidence floor of "good", this would mean that bringing in those types of players would be a positive because they would always play at a higher level than someone who is the same skill level but has "uncomfortable" or "anxious" confidence. So I can understand that it sort of defeats the purpose of having personality issues being bad for a team. But if you could find a balance between them always being confident but they hurt the team chemistry enough that it's not worth it, etc, it may work. Or you could leave it as is, and that would be fine. As stated, not really a suggestion, just a funny observation.

now i understand the idea behind making players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" seem like a bad thing, and if you have a lot of these players, that would be a detriment to the dressing room chemistry, and this suggestion would sort of make having a lot of those players a positive, but here goes. 

Not sure if a suggestion is even the proper term, but more of an observation. My team is bad, and they have been doing bad, and I ran a lot of players through my team this season, so there are a lot of players that have been sat for long periods of time. I get that this hurts their confidence and I understand the reasoning behind this in the game. But I have players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" who are "anxious" or "uncomfortable", wouldn't these players always have high confidence? isn't that what being cocky or arrogant is? always thinking your hot stuff, which means they would have little issues in the confidence department.

Now, if you changed it so that "cocky" and "arrogant" players were always confident, or at least had a confidence floor of "good", this would mean that bringing in those types of players would be a positive because they would always play at a higher level than someone who is the same skill level but has "uncomfortable" or "anxious" confidence. So I can understand that it sort of defeats the purpose of having personality issues being bad for a team. But if you could find a balance between them always being confident but they hurt the team chemistry enough that it's not worth it, etc, it may work. Or you could leave it as is, and that would be fine. As stated, not really a suggestion, just a funny observation.

already thought of something else (you guys are going to get sick of me fast).

With the draft prospects, rather than have the players ratings displayed on his page before his draft, maybe have a 5-10 range, like instead of player A having a 86 shooting rating , he could be 83-88 shooting, or even 80-90 shooting.This way, drafting isn't an exact science, you can create more scenarios where the 1st player picked isn't always going to be the best. Finding an algorithm to have full on busts or late round steals would be great too. The problem with that would be, A, i don't know how to make that happen in a fair manor, B, everyone who drafts a bust would get really pissed off and might rage quit...

also to do with draft prospects, I've only experienced one list of prospects, and maybe this is just an unusually good draft, but i think their ratings should be lowered. This draft has a 92 overall player, and many high 80's. If the idea is realism, there shouldn't be more than a handful of players that will make an impact in their draft year, with a lot of players (even high drafted players) needing to develop over a couple (or 3 or 4) seasons before they become regular pro players. Bringing along a highly rated prospect every once in a while would be great (a la Crosby, McDavid) but most years, i would think, for those top picks that DO make their team in their draft year, should be of a secondary scoring, or a sheltered role, etc.

I only recently discovered and started playing Game Plan Hockey Manager. I discovered the game probably around a week ago. I looked and so no teams were available, i cried a little, i got over it. I checked back a day or 2 later, and a team had opened up in a fast (6 hour) world. I quickly made a profile and took over this team, not sure of how often teams became available. This world proved too fast for me. I got my team, relocated, changed the team name and jersey, and then it was time to get to bed. I woke up and went to work, came home, to realize my team had already played 3 games in that span. One of my good players was hurt and only had 1 game to go before he was available again, unfortunately, when i was able to sit down and set up my lineup, i had played 3 more games and a good player was a healthy scratch for 2 of those.

This world proved to fast for me, and i had noticed that there was a team available in the slow (24 hour) world, so i resigned, waiting 2 hours, hoped it was still available, and eventually, got my new team. So far, i am enjoying what i have seen, i don't even think i have discovered all there is to discover yet, and still haven't really taken the time to get to know my NEW new team, but it is a weak team and most of the players are on the last year of their contract, so i'll have a lot of turnover after this season, which is now 1 game from being over.
 
I used to play Hockey-Dynasty, was a little late to that party, as i think i only got in about 3 seasons before it died. I still play Good Hockey, but that's a shallow hockey sim, and it's basically been dead for a while, it just hasn't realized it yet. I'm always looking for a good Hockey GM simulation, and i think I've stumbled onto a gem with Game Plan Hockey.

Now, with my life story out of the way, and maybe being so new doesn't give me a the requirements to make suggestions, but here's a few things i noticed that could enhance the game (unless they are in the game and i just haven't discovered them yet. Did i mention that I'm new?)

1. Roster Limits. With Affiliate teams coming in now (and that is absolutely fantastic) how about a roster limit? The NHL standard of 23 players (which usually results in 14 forwards, 7 D, and 2 Goalies) would be good, or it could be another number just to make the game a little unique. Injured players don't count, allowing you to pull up players to replace them until they recover. The team i inherited had 39 players on it, that is a tad ridiculous, I think anyways. As soon as the affiliate teams became available, i sent 13 players down.
 
2. Positions. I find the centre and forward thing a little odd, as a centre is a forward, and why not just have centres and wings? but that is minor, and not really the point of this suggestion. I did a little bit of reading in the Forums and heard people talking about off hand penalties, as well as out of position penalties (putting centres on wings, playing forwards at D, etc) I think it is good to have these kind of penalties, but not in such a black and white way. I would like to see the rosters broken up in to all the positions (C, RW, LW, RD, LD, G) but also, have the ability to change a players position as you see fit. The kicker (and where the out of position penalty comes in) have the positions much like "Roles". Have each player have 5 positional ratings (a goalie is a goalie and nobody else can be a goalie, that's just how it is), you can make a player any position of your choosing. Player A could play anywhere on the ice, forward of back. Some positions will come more naturally for him, some he may just be good at, some, he's OK, and some he's bad. I would suggest that you have to set his position before the game and then place him in that position for the game, if he is out of position, he would suffer a performance penalty much like if he was assigned a position he was bad at. This would help with the off handed penalty as well. There are advanced stats that suggest a right handed player is better on the right side and a left handed player is better on the left side, at least when it comes to defence, but there are exceptions to the rule (ovechkin). So, to create sense of realism in the game, have most of the players that are right handed be natural RW/RD and those that are left handed be natural LW/LD with the hand not mattering for centres. But with a percentage (5%, 10%?) of players being natural at both wings/Ds, or even being natural at their off handed position. Have a higher percentage being natural at their proper side, and being good at their off-side, that way, there's a penalty for putting a player on his off-side, but not a big one. This system would also help for create players that can play all around the lineup, while limit it so that not EVERY player is so versatile. I would also suggest that a very small percentage of players be good or natural at both a D position and a forward position, creating players like a Brent Burns or Dustin Byfuglien. Being able to switch players around creates better solutions, plus more in depth strategies, for the instance when an injury occurs, is it better to call up the next centre in line? or can you slide a wing over to the centre and pick someone else. 

a bit of a twist on the Positions suggestions, i know i said about having to pick assign a player a position before the game, but i just thought of this alternate. Don't assign players positions at all. When you are putting them in the lineup, put them anywhere you want (much like it is now) and the game engine would factor in his position skill for whatever you assign him to. This would allow for being able to put a player on an off wing on a power play or penalty kill with out an obvious penalty. If you assign player A as a RW, and he is right handed, but on the power play you want him on the LW so that he can be in better position to one time bombs all night (I'm not sure if the game engine actually takes this into account) then his powerplay performance would suffer due to his out of position penalty. But if player A is natural or good at the LW position, taking the "position assignment" out of the game, would allow him to play the left side of the PP without as much penalty. If it was implemented this way, still have his position skill count on special teams play, but if it was done with having to assign a position to a player before a game, then maybe have no out of position penalty for special teams play so that you can put wingers and D on their off hand side so that they can be set up for one timers, even going as far as allowing forwards to play D on the power play as some teams do this in real life.

3. Beginners guide. I have seen a lot of people talk about getting one of these set up, I'm not sure if it has been done yet or not, but my suggestion on the guide would be to not go too in depth. I think a guide that explains what everything means (for example, I would like to think myself someone that knows the game of hockey, but when i read on a players page where it said their spirit rating, i just wasn't sure what this referred to for a real world player), but some have even suggested the guide to explain how a beginner should set up their roster, what things to look at in a players ratings, what tactics to use, etc. I think that making sure everyone knows what each rating affects a players performance, and how each tactic will affect the style of how your player will play, but i think telling the GM how to go about setting these things, which tactic to use with what kind of player, that defeats the purpose of playing the game. These sort of things, I think, are best left to the GM to experiment, figure out what he likes best, what works best for his club and go from there.

I'm sorry for the long winded novel, when i try to explain a concept, i like to make sure there are no misunderstandings, and i appreciate those that are still with me at this point and didn't just close the page as soon as they saw that this post had a 9 billion word count. This is all i can think of right now for some suggestions (reasonable ones at least, there are ideas about waivers, and scouts that may just be too much of a pipe dream) and may add if something else strikes me at a later date. I look forward to hearing your critiques or praise (preferably praise) and any comments or counter-suggestions you may have.

agreed, when you go to "Team", "Roster", "Transfer", it would be nice to see the Salary of the "Assigned Players". It shouldn't be too hard for someone to quickly mentally translate their farm team salary into actual contract salary, but if it is needed, it could display their parent club salary. But it is a nice quick way to see who's contracts are up, etc.