Steve

Per Reggie's comments, I think one solution to this would be to have a league that is designed differently, ie not and up and down, but more an NHL static level with equal leagues/divisions.  Some prefer that, some this.  If you want to jump in and be competitive in a season or two, then that style of league makes it possible, but not the current promotion/demotion style.  Each have their pros and cons.  
 
Like Erzac said, moving from SHL to GHL really requires most of us to spend 3 or more seasons before we have a realistic chance at the Finals.  My biggest challenge is not screwing up my plan and being impatient in the interim, haha.  
 
But more importantly, not doing these types of trades is also part of the sportsmanship of the league.  Anyone from GHL could easily pick off the top 2-3 players in each computer SHL team for a 3rd round pick and/or a bench warmer.  But we don't to not screw the real SHL players and we recognize the game is more fun this way, for us all.  We're all competitive, but we don't want to ruin the integrity of the game just to win a handful more of games each season.  

There are some more improvements on the way regarding computer team trading AI. This will include computer teams less likely to agree on trades with unrealistic number of players involved. Computer teams will be less likely to get involved in too many trades each season. They will value incoming trade picks less but will still demand great value for their own. I'm also thinking of introducing a lock down period for free agents before being able to trade them. This is not decided but maybe would prevent quite a lot of abuse.
 
Can't say when this will be ready since I'm in the middle of another update at the moment. But I will really try to speed things up or perhaps pause the other update and squeeze this one in before.
 
Thanks for all your comments and commitment of making this game better!

*Begin wall of text*
 
-- I started with one of those awful teams that as been managed by the computer for a while.  By the way, I don't think a new manager will ever get a competitive team right away because it either has been managed by the computer (so not competitive) -- I made a lot of trades with computer and signed some free agents.  I wasn't always fair with the way I used free agents to make trades.  My apoligies if I ruined anyone experience --
 
Part of the reason why computer teams are not competitive off the bat might just be that they're robbed of their picks, and/or young talent. A big problem is the ability to trade freshly signed free agents for "free" assets, especially picks. Maybe one doesn't ruin anyone's experience right away, but making such trades just condemn new players into pilfered teams that will take ages to build up. You might just have started with such a team.
 
 
-- everyone has the exact same opportunity to trade with computer teams.--
 
Technically, yes, but every (computer) team has a limited number of assets. Once they're gone, they're gone. Also, just being able to do something doesn't quite equal that it should be done. It can't be a race of "who is the fastest to sign FA's and turn them into computer picks".
 
 
-- What's keeping new players from joining this game is the huge edge teams from GHL have on any other teams in this world because they get the best prospects (first two rounds so best 30 prospects every season) and the best free agents seasons after seasons --
--Right now, my best player is 86 overall, and a 85 goalie, I have a few 81-83 and mostly 80 overall players.  If I'm lucky, I might sign 1 or 2 players over 85 overall, a few 83-85 as free agents.  How will I compete with the top 4 GHL teams--
 
Comparing lower league teams to GHL teams is not a really good practice. Yes, they sign the best FA's. Yes, they get the best prospects. And so will you, if you make it to GHL and stay there. It's now my 3rd season in GHL, and I'm tied for 6th in the standings. The first two seasons I finished 12th. I never expected to compete for the first couple of seasons in GHL, my only goal was to not relegate and gradually build up the team. Maybe I'll even make the playoffs this season. I might even have a shot at the cup in a season or two. Even right now I probably couldn't win a playoff series against a top-4 team. But at some point I will. And the whole process has been, and continues to be, exciting.
 
Point being, I don't think you're expected to stand up to the best GHL as you come out of SHL. Hell, when I got to the GHL I barely knew a player's overall might be displayed in green (I think I had one, 81). It takes time, and it should, to become competitive when you move up a league level. For me, that's what a sports management game is all about - seeing your long term decisions, trades, signings combine into a hopefully winning package over time.
 
 
 
I might've ventured a bit off topic - computer trading in itself is not a problem. Computer trading, when used to accomplish trades that wouldn't be feasible between human managers, is a problem. That, and the FA flipping for computer picks.
 
*End wall of text*

Here an answer from one of those two SHL top teams that Steve refered to.  I manage Collegeville Rhinos.
 
I started to play in this world a 1 season and half ago in BHL.  I started with one of those awful teams that as been managed by the computer for a while.  By the way, I don't think a new manager will ever get a competitive team right away because it either has been managed by the computer (so not competitive) or by a manager that left the team (so not competitive).  But this is another issue. 
 
So I started with a crappy team.  I made a lot of trades with computer and signed some free agents.  I wasn't always fair with the way I used free agents to make trades.  My apoligies if I ruined anyone experience.  But, computer team trading is a whole different thing.  Computer trade isn't cheating and everyone has the exact same opportunity to trade with computer teams.  This system isn't perfect but it's the same system for everyone.  But, again, this is another issue.
 
My point is that what's really keeping new players from joining this game isn't computer trading.  What's keeping new players from joining this game is the huge edge teams from GHL have on any other teams in this world because they get the best prospects (first two rounds so best 30 prospects every season) and the best free agents seasons after seasons.  And this edge gets bigger and bigger.  They get the best propects, keep the best players in their teams and sign the best free agents.  How will I ever compete with a team like, for an example, the Deadwood Vandals, that have been playing in GHL for 7 seasons? 
 
Steve is right: what is the real worth of a 1st pick in SHL.  72-74 overall rating with average traits if you are lucky.  And I don't even botter about lower leagues drafts.
 
Let's have a look to those chances.  If (this is a big IF) I finish first in SHL this season,  I will have one of the top 4 prospects in the next draft.  For an example, a 80 overall goalie with good traits.  Right now, my best player is 86 overall, and a 85 goalie, I have a few 81-83 and mostly 80 overall players.  If I'm lucky, I might sign 1 or 2 players over 85 overall, a few 83-85 as free agents.  How will I compete with the top 4 GHL teams?  And that is with a lot of computer trading.
 
So my point is if a new manager doesn't make computer trades, he will never compete with the top teams in this world.  And time won't help because the edge just gets bigger and bigger.  
 
So is computer trading is a problem or the answer to a bigger problem?   

I just reviewed the transactions in SHL where 8 of the 16 teams are CPU, so understandably, trading is going to be hard to do without trading with these teams.  
 
TWO of the top four teams in SHL have a total of 14 trades with CPU teams this season.  Of those, I'd say roughly half are tilted in the players' teams favor.  
 
I think part of the problem is that the CPU AI over values the draft picks.  One could say this is true in real life too, some GMs wanting youth and picks over a current roster, but when you look at the trend over a large sample of trades, the CPU (which I assume is more or less the same for each team) values the picks over current players.  
 
Even if players (in every level) exploit this apparent weakness to stack their team (but sadly leave a team almost wrecked for any new player joining, which I feel is worse), once they move up a level, they are going to have to start all over again and assuming the next level up has more player managers, probably unlikely to be replicated, especially at the GHL level in Biscuit.  
 
So even though this is somewhat self policing, I think tweaking the AI in the CPU teams to make it damn near impossible to trade with them without giving up a lot is possibly the quickest or most long term solution.  

I just reviewed the transactions in SHL where 8 of the 16 teams are CPU, so understandably, trading is going to be hard to do without trading with these teams.  
 
TWO of the top four teams in SHL have a total of 14 trades with CPU teams this season.  Of those, I'd say roughly half are tilted in the players' teams favor.  
 
I think part of the problem is that the CPU AI over values the draft picks.  One could say this is true in real life too, some GMs wanting youth and picks over a current roster, but when you look at the trend over a large sample of trades, the CPU (which I assume is more or less the same for each team) values the picks over current players.  
 
Even if players (in every level) exploit this apparent weakness to stack their team (but sadly leave a team almost wrecked for any new player joining, which I feel is worse), once they move up a level, they are going to have to start all over again and assuming the next level up has more player managers, probably unlikely to be replicated, especially at the GHL level in Biscuit.  
 
So even though this is somewhat self policing, I think tweaking the AI in the CPU teams to make it damn near impossible to trade with them without giving up a lot is possibly the quickest or most long term solution.  

New game yesterday and another injury to one of my defenders. It was his first game back from an injury and again he got injured. Never happened to my team.

I had that happen also - the day after I posted this I had my Top line center go down and got my top line defender back but lost him again in the same day due to a concussion. Weird. We're all healed up now and crossing our fingers for promotion!

Between 3 game days, the Injury Bug took out 4 of my Forwards (my leading Goal Scorer included). I actually had to use one of my Centres to be a Fourth Line Forward. I actually wouldn't mind knowing if my Opponent played Dirty.

In my experience in few worlds, it's a lot better to have the guys play in higher leagues, if they can get good +/- and green ratings, they can develop a lot. My 1st overall pick developed by 2 ovr (78->80) and in the same time my prospects who were playing in the computer leagues only developed by 1 or 2 ovr, while being much lower than the guy who played on my team. Also they often ask for crazy little money for 8 or so years, so it's not a bad idea to just sign them for sitting purposes and maybe have them as a backup players in case of emergencies.

I think it would be cool if we could have our prospects play in preseason games without signing them to contracts. It would be a good way to evaluate how well a prospect fits into your lineup in order to see if they are ready for your team and, even if they aren't, it would still be neat to see them play.

I think it would be a fun idea to have a standings graph of teams on the league page. I've always found it neat to look at teams where they rank relative to each other after each game. Here is an example of what I mean:

Unfortunately there is only one true way to eliminate this sort of behavior from the game and that is to simply not allow trading with computers. Will it be harder? Yes, but isn't that the point? To make the game realistic? If these kind of trades aren't realistic in the real world, why should they be on GPH? The idea is to grow the game and have all of the teams be owned by humans. New GMs aren't going to stick around if they aquire a team that has been picked clean and filled with ridiculous contracts that were handed out by other GMs. Who would want to stay and play a game with poeple who would do that? I understand that this comment will receive some heat, but let's be honest... If you really want computer trading to be left in the game, we all know the real reason why.

You can try, but often these players will ONLY be happy if they move to a higher league team.  If you are about to be promoted, wait it out.  If not, good candidate for trading up a league.  

Hi all,
 
I'd like to suggest a player sorting option in the "roster" of the teampage.
 
I personally like having my players sorted in different manners for different actions.
I think it'd be handy if players automatically / by default are sorted on "overall Q".
When looking for whose the best shooter or defenceman it can be nice to be able to sort on specific skills too.
 
The same holds up for contracts. It'd be nice if I can sort them by "Number of years left on contract", so that in an instance I can see who's contract about to expire in what season. 
 
I'd be alright if this can be done per position, but wouldn't mind an overall team option for that too.
 
 
Also I'd like to add that sorting on performance in the player stats doesn't work correctly.
 
V

In "Other Games" (Eastside Hockey Manager, the closest to this IMHO), I believe you can view ten games back, with a 'five game split' summary on the team summary page (which would be a nice feature, underneath 'current season stats' on the player pop-up summary having 76-80-80-82-61 for example).
 
And while it's true players don't USUALLY go on cold streaks that long IRL... I definitely have had them go on cold streaks for that long in game and have seen it happen if a team is at the bottom of the league and lined up against several top guys in a row. 
 
Personally, I'd rather see a separate section for pre-season ratings, too, so I have a better idea of how each player is doing but those stats don't show up unless you go into the individual games.
 
It'd be nice to also archive games from the past season or be able to view them. I know there's a lot of database strain issues, but I still stand by saying that if we eliminated most of the players over 40 or nix retired stats for guys who haven't played in several seasons we wouldn't be any worse for wear. Eastside Hockey Manager does this, with stats only being maintained for players who remain in the database as coaches.

I understand it that the rights are till season 8 (it is said at the players page) - meaning you have to sign them before the last day od season 8 or they will become FA the first day of season 9.
It make sense since the 21st birthday is between season 8 and 9. But be aware - you can sign players in non-playable leagues only during pre-season, including your prospects. That means the player under some contract from non-playable league is available to you only during pre-seson of season 8 and you have to sign him then or you will lose the rights after the season ends. If there is an exception, I don't know, probably good to ask managers form faster worlds, where they already passed the 3 season after first draft.

Is there a reason we can't see the game history for each player for more than 5 games?  I often find myself wanting to to see 10 or 20 games back to see streaks my players have been on so I can adjust my roster, tactics, etc based on what seems to have worked in the past.  I know I can go into each individual game but usually I am only looking on that info for one or two players.  Five also is a very small sample size, especially if it a player that is in and out of the lineup.  

In my league I have two prospects on my shortlist that I want to trade for.
 
It would be cool if in the action tab you could compare two or more players, specifically their traits, ratings, stats, and development chart.
 
That way I would be able to choose easily between the two said players and make a good trade.
 
I assume a comparison screen would work in other situations such as comparing players on your team to see which ones you should trade.
 
Let me know if this is in the game already because I think this would be very helpful.

Is there a reason we can't see the game history for each player for more than 5 games?  I often find myself wanting to to see 10 or 20 games back to see streaks my players have been on so I can adjust my roster, tactics, etc based on what seems to have worked in the past.  I know I can go into each individual game but usually I am only looking on that info for one or two players.  Five also is a very small sample size, especially if it a player that is in and out of the lineup.  

Hello everyone,
Due to the probability that I will not get promoted next year coupled with salary cap considerations for next year, I am looking to trade one of Brett Thomson (http://gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=3718) or Rauno Kimmo (http://gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=32705). They are both playmaking centers and are in 1st and 5th in scoring with an 88 and 81 overall rating (respectively) in the SHL this year. I am looking for draft picks, prospects, young and talented players, and/or some help in net. I might also trade Tomi Junttila (http://gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=3688), who is third in goal scoring in the league, for the right price.

Yea, it happens...there are hidden factors in the game that dictate a players potential. Hey may grow at an alarming rate but there's always that chance that a player's ceiling could be quite low and it sounds like he may be one of those players. I do find it odd that young players don't just stay level in skill but rather decrease in skill. Maybe there is a hidden "life challenge" aspect to the game where your young player has suddenly got himself hooked on an illicit drug or just likes spending all of his time in the red light district and contracted a lovely infection of some sort thus making him susceptible to skill loss???

I realize this is an older topic, but I think I have an easy work around while being able to continue the current system.
 
Instead of having the wording saying "signed to 1 year contract", just change to specific season.  If it is halfway through season 5, then when you offer a contract it should say "sign for season 5" or "sign for seasons 5-6". This way you know he is under contract for the remainder of season 5 and the entirety of season 6. 
 
This way will make it more clear about what you are getting, without having to re-haul the whole system. Personally I wouldnt be a fan if I got notices every 3-4 days telling me that i have a contract expiring; I like the fact they all end when the season ends, as it is more realistic.  NHL teams can sign free agents in January, but they dont expire the following January, they expire at the end of the season. 

Hoping to build a line like NES Ice Hockey; two skinny guys, one fatty, and a medium!  

Ha - I suppose the height makes sense! I never knew they gained weight - that's awesome!