Steve

I am mainly curious to see if anyone still has players on their team from season 1.  I would think this would be more common for GHL teams since it is tough to promote through the leagues and keep the same players.  If so, post them here.
 
I do have 1 player on my SHL team that has been with my team (well, my "franchise") since season 1 in LIHL.  Lucas Hirt.  It looks like he was originally on the Protons roster, then moved to Deferiet (formerly the Red River Red Empire).  I renamed the franchise to the Leopards when I took over late in season 9.
 
Hirt was my 2nd line center in BHL and now centers my 4th line in SHL.  Fortunately for him I don't anticipate promotion to GHL this season so his job is safe for another few seasons at least.
 
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=4244
 

Have you tried your top line as Two Way?  If they aren't scoring and are giving up goals, I'd assume it can't hurt.  Maybe break up Chov and Ryz and put one on your 2nd line (Scoring). 
 
Also you mentioned you changed OFF tactics this season so your team probably isn't that familiar yet.  I'm sure that can't help offensive production at the moment.

Yeah it's pretty surprising to me too...have you tried playing Chovanec and Ryzhanov on different lines or shuffling the lines a bit? Personally I found that some players just seem to click for some unknown reason, and some just don't play well together. One thing that stands out for me when I look at your team is that all of the defensemen have poor puckhandling, so maybe they have trouble carrying the puck out of the zone despite their strong passing abilities?

I truly don't understand how the team manages to perform so poorly. The only trick I haven't tried is sacrificing the assistant to the hockey gods, but sadly that option isn't in the game yet.

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

I don't change tactics too often so I'm not completely sure, but I think the amount of time to go from zero in a tactic to perfect takes a little more than half a season. Although,I find that even if the tactic is red and if it fits your team better than your perfect tactic that doesn't fit your team, then you won't have a period where your team gets noticeably worse.

Quick update, I'm currently on an 8 game winning streak since I made the adjustments. Thank you for all your help!

A good start to a season remains unchecked on the bucket list. After winning the first three games, the team is now 5-1-0-10. The first line that was doing solid work last season has managed to gather a minus-12 rating in 16 games.

I seem to be either losing big or winning big this season, could be quite the roller coaster!
 
I saw your loss today Paul... he beat me pretty handily the game before that with stats being what I felt was in my favour.  Either we just got rotten luck or he has a "opponent keeper is going to be crap" button

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

Just noticed that those of us that have been in since the beginning and/or have a lot of playoff games are surpassing 1,000 games played! Hard to believe but shows the staying power of this game since each match is no more than once a day!?!? What have I been doing with my life?!?! Haha.

Pretty sure it is Points > Goal Diff > Goals.  I don't think Wins factors in.

Point number one has been addressed. However it will take time to see the results of the solution take effect. Patience here would be appreciated.
 
Point two was something debated over when "minor leagues" were created. It was decided not to go that route for 2 main reasons. First it removed any real management role from lower league teams as they would just be given the extra players from leagues above and actual signing and maintaining their own players was more or less absent with this idea. Second calling the players up would suddenly mean that the lower league team is losing a player on their team just out of the blue with nothing the manager can do. Not an ideal thing to be dealing with when running a team to say the least. Also there are other problems with your given idea. Chiefly the complications behind it. For example why should a team that sent a player down to develop have to then match an offer to keep the player just because the lower league team that got them when they were sent down then promoted? The player is already under contract to that team and should remain so until they are either traded or the contract ends. That of course does not include the waiver system that is being worked on to be included but that still doesn't come into play.
 
The third idea has a major issue. Every league has their cap and contract system set at a certain percentage of the league above. This allows the simplest transition of player salaries from one league to the next should a team either promote or a player be traded. The third idea, and since it is an extension of the second even the second idea, just wouldn't work in the current system from how I understand it. Something would need a major rework.
 
The IHL and IIHL idea would just create a mess out of a currently rather streamlined system currently in place. In terms of new players joining there are two solutions. First would be the creation of a new game world and second would be a more strict enforcement of the fact that managers should only have 1 profile to create more room for new players without creating new game worlds. Let me go back to and explain the first part. The way that the leagues are currently set up is the foundation of everything in the game world. The draft, the way contracts work, everything. Breaking it up in the way you suggested means that most everything would have to be reworked from the ground up. The current system works as intended. It may not be the perfect system in your mind but changing these game worlds now in that manner just isn't likely going to happen. If Anders decides to try to create one massive game world for each speed type with a massive ladder tree then your idea would most definitely come to the forefront. However until that happens how things are now will likely remain how things will continue to be. It is a different solution to the same problem with no absolute right or wrong answer to it.
 
Finally I suggested getting rid of center and forward for just forward way back in beta. Anders wanted to keep some sort of distinction between a center and a winger though and thus kept it which is fine for the game.

1. Wildwood Thunder Cats (Torbjörn Johansson)
OFF: 78.4 DEF: 80.5 SG: 78 OVR: 79.3
 
2. Pittsboro Plastic Attack (Makate Naekfor)
OFF: 78.8 DEF 77.7 SG: 79 OVR 78.3
 
3. Tullahoma Tomcats (Wendel Clark)
OFF: 78.5 DEF 77.7 SG: 80 OVR 78.2
 
4. New Richmond Patriots (T81 S18)
OFF: 76.8 DEF 78.2 SG: 80 OVR 77.7
 
5. Michigan Center Fury (Clayton Garnier)
OFF: 77.0 DEF 75.7 SG: 80 OVR 76.6
 
6. Quail Ridge Crusaders (David Schneider)
OFF 74.8 DEF: 76.5 SG: 84 OVR 76.3
 
7 (tied). South Dayton Owls (Jay Daley)
OFF 76.6 DEF 75.2 SG: 81 OVR: 76.3
 
7 (tied). Buena Park Skyhawks (John Lyons)
7FF: 76.9 DEF 74.7 SG 82 OVR: 76.3
 
9. Stony Brook Swords (Bill "bdrake79" Drake)
OFF 75.7 DEF 76.5 SG: 78 OVR 76.2
 
10. Goldville Groove (Mark "Mark Z" Ziegler)
OFF: 76.3 DEF: 74.8 SG: 75 OVR: 75.5
 
11. Silesia Templars (Derek Mayne)
OFF: 73.8 DEF: 76.2 SG: 78 OVR: 75.2
 
12. Valley Center Bears (Charles Brucia)
OFF: 75.5 DEF: 74.5 SG: 76 OVR: 75.1
 
13. New Haven Woodpeckers (Jon "wingedbeaver" Carignan)
OFF: 74.7 DEF: 74.2 SG: 79 OVR: 74.8
 
14. San Rafael Storm (Bob John)
OFF: 73.7 DEF: 74.8 SG: 74 OVR: 74.2
 
15. Medicine Hat Winterhawks (Nate Bickel)
OFF: 72.2 DEF 72.5 SG: 75 OVR: 72.5
 
16. North Las Vegas Pilots (Eric T)
*OFF: - *DEF: - SG: 81 *OVR: -
* Roster building in progress, has 10 C/F and 4 D at this moment.
 
I'm just expanding Erzac's tradition to BHL here following these guidelines:
 
Calculated on day 7 of S14, using:
 
Team OVR = (OFF + (DEF x 2) + (SG x 2))/26
 
where
OFF = Combined overall of 12 best centers/forwards
DEF = Combined overall of 6 best defenders
SG = Overall of starting goalie (best overall goalie in team)

I currently have 30 + 4 prospects.  I don't think prospects should count against your roster limit since they are unsigned.  It'd also encourage those prospects that are turning 21 to either be dealt or released to proper leagues instead of signing and burying in the minors for less than a $200k per season.  
 
I'd be fine with a limit of 35 at GHL level.  I think most of us would, but this would also unfairly disadvantage newly promoted teams who might be carrying salaries from even two leagues below.  If they cut them, then that counts against their cap, only making it more difficult for them to compete.  Plus, it wipes out a lot of their insurance salaries if they get demoted in their 1st or 2nd season at the higher level.  Maybe promoted teams could be given a 1-season time frame to meet the new league's roster limit?

If you remove the extra players that I have signed (young IIHL/IHL/BHL quality players unsigned at a start of a season that show promise for growth that I signed a season or two ago so they had a chance to develop) my roster is at 37. Who I would get rid of to get to 35 wouldn't be a hard decision. After this season is over if I keep this roster as is the rest of the season and stay in the GHL I will be letting go of 8 players. 35 is definitely manageable for a GHL team. A bit tight but definitely manageable.

Don't think that I am saying that there shouldn't be a roster limit. When the suggestion first came up a long time ago I said somewhere in the ballpark of 40 is where I think we should be. Too low of a roster limit and proper team building becomes nearly impossible as does sustaining your team from efforts within. Too high a limit and it might as well not be there. With around 40 you can have 5 depth players give or take a few and 10-12 prospects with some extra room left over for multiplayer trades.
 
Edit: Also turning and burning picks means that someone somewhere is selling out their picks/prospects for a short term risk while the team benefiting is maintaining their position atop the league they are in with valuable future assets. So long as the team benefiting works the deals to maintain status que they aren't ever going to move and it will remain status quo. If you guys don't think human managers are that gullible look at the team that won the GHL in Biscuit the prior two seasons. They got human managers to give them way more value than the players they were trading away were worth and now that team is a gold mine of young players.

Oh sh..., now there are 9 teams above 90 OVR... I remember S12 (not so long ago, right?), when I was the only one. This is going so fast we will soon have a full 90+ roster (I need just 4 F and 1 C to achieve that and surprisingly after long time I have no problems with cap space anymore, so it is doable - not that I want or will do that, but possible).

1. West Chicago Protons (Richard "bouncer" Feynman)
OFF: 90 DEF: 94 SG: 97 OVR: 92,0
Age: 30,5
 
2. Deadwood Vandals (Kim "koekefix" Vandaele)
OFF: 90 DEF: 92 SG: 96 OVR: 91,4
Age: 29,2
 
3. Portland Marauders (Xavier "xZhou" Zhou)
OFF: 90 DEF: 92 SG: 93 OVR: 91,1
Age: 25,9
 
4. Richford Rebels (Jusu "Jusu5" Manager)
OFF: 89 DEF: 92 SG: 95 OVR: 90,9
Age: 28,7
 
5. Canmore Grizzlies (Matt "themattinthehat" Muffett)
OFF: 90 DEF: 91 SG: 92 OVR 90,6
Age: 28,5
 
6. Harrisonville Sabercats (Hurja "HurjaHerra" Herra)
OFF: 90 DEF: 90 SG: 95 OVR: 90,5
Age: 29,4
 
7. St. Thomas Stray Cats (Erzac "Erzac" Ray)
OFF: 89 DEF: 91 SG: 93 OVR: 90,2
Age: 27,5
 
8. Eldred Elite (Steven "Steve" Bennett)
OFF: 89 DEF: 91 SG: 93 OVR: 90,1
Age: 29,6
 
9. Cedar Rapids Minutemen (Richard "rainsilent" Armour)
OFF: 88 DEF: 92 SG: 94 OVR: 90,0
Age: 27,5
 
10. Thetford Mines Pegasus (Anthony "Pingu" Grauwels)
OFF: 90 DEF: 89 SG: 95 OVR: 89,8
Age: 28,4
 
11. York Wolf Pack (Jiri "jiihee" Heikkala)
OFF: 89 DEF: 90 SG: 93 OVR: 89,7
Age: 29,9
 
12. Buckingham Breakouts (Jussi "jusatin" Ahonen)
OFF: 88 DEF: 90 SG: 95 OVR: 89,2
Age: 27,2
 
13. Violet Volcano (Soupy Salez)
OFF: 88 DEF: 89 SG: 96 OVR: 89,1
Age: 28,9
 
14. Cuba City Tomahawks (BEN \)
OFF: 87 DEF: 90 SG: 91 OVR: 88,6
Age: 30,3
 
15. Hawkeye Indians (Wills Sk)
OFF: 87 DEF: 90 SG: 91 OVR: 88,6
Age: 27,1
 
16. Pinehurst Miners (Phoenix "phoenixtf" TF)
OFF: 87 DEF: 89 SG: 95 OVR: 88,5
Age: 28,3
 
League AVG team OVR: 90,0
League AVG team age: 28,6
 
 
Calculated on day 3 of S14, using:
 
Team OVR = (OFF + (DEF x 2) + (SG x 2))/26
 
where
OFF = Combined overall of 12 best centers/forwards
DEF = Combined overall of 6 best defenders
SG = Overall of starting goalie (best overall goalie in team)

The roster limit has to apply to all players for simplicity sake. You can't have 18-20 players not counting. Edit: ok you can but again simpler is better usually. If GHL teams have only 10 extra players they would theoretically be continuously trading prospects for picks, drafting those players and then trading them again just to stay under the roster limit. It creates a ridiculous situation.
 
Also if it is more difficult to hoard players in the lower leagues than what is the point of the higher roster limit? I ask this in complete, genuine honesty.
 
Finally creating a roster limit doesn't directly address the real issue with player hoarding. The fact that teams can sign players of any age and skill level and then stash them away in their affiliate system. With the roster limit it would theoretically be possible to still stash away 10 real quality players and still hoard them. What I suggested to Anders in the original hoarding thread is a much better solution because it is direct. Any player above a certain age and overall (I think 23-25 and older at say 83 overall for GHL teams is about right) that get sent to the affiliate immediately goes on waivers for x time. Only after that time is up and no team claims them will they then go to the affiliates and stay on said team. Every new season the players that are at or above the age limit go to the main roster and have to be sent to the affiliate at the start of the season to have the process repeat again unless the manager decides to keep them on the main roster to again prevent from player hoarding.
 
Edit: Paul T it doesn't matter how much you care or not. It is important to talk about it and any other issues in the game openly. The more friendly dialogue that happens over an issue the more possible solutions that can be found. The more possible solutions that get discussed the more likely it is that a really good solution gets found. Good solution idea or not talking about issues with the game in an open and friendly manner only will go to help make the game better as issues are getting discussed which will lead to suggested fixes which will lead to improving the game.
 
As for low player salaries yes it is a real issue but what isn't helping is the inflated overalls. I think once player overalls come back down again we can see what the salary demands are doing and go from there. That said players weren't asking enough then either so bumping up player salary demands at least a little wouldn't be a bad thing in my mind at all. After all the ideal situation is that the best teams have to deal with cap crunches and difficult decisions in who to keep and who to give away or get rid when their team is good because of quality depth.

@rainsilent - I didn't see that as an extreme.  I see 10 extra players as being enough - but you do make a good point about the draft picks.  I suppose in a perfect world, the roster limit would not apply to players aged 18-20 (since this issue is really around free agency), but I also get your point about simplicity so asking for that may be too much to code.
 
As for the staggered limits... I dunno.  As someone who has played Biscuit BHL & SHL - and IHL/LIHL in another world for a while - I can say that is considerably easier to stash players in the affiliate the higher the league.  It's not so easy to do this in lower leagues and stay competitive.  But I'm all for simplicity.
 
To be honest, the whole thing doesn't even bother me that much.  I just like having clear rules for everyone to follow... and right now there seems to be too many rules that are merely insinuated.  And as you can see, everyone has a different opinion on everything.  Roster limits would help solve this one.  But until then, the players who are doing this are not breaking the rules and every lower league team is at the same disadvantage.  At the same time, I can see where it is annoying for other players and could push people away from the game.
 
Thanks for the update... I'm interested to see what type of fix Anders has planned.

Biggest thing is wages on these star players need to go way up.... bigger wages solves the problem naturally.
 
90+ players should be the rarity which I understand it isn't but make it too expensive to have more than 2 or 3 and soon the problem will weed itself out.