rainsilent

Members
  • Content Count

    591
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    91

Everything posted by rainsilent

  1. Lazy, CPU team and not training hard caused it. That said I've noticed a few things in regards to this. Lower overall players it seems to be less of a thing but a notable one none the less from what I have tracked. There seems to be a massive burst of player growth up to about 19-20 and then the player just hits a proverbial brick wall most of the time. I've seen a few instances that break this rule thus far in both of the worlds I am in however it isn't exactly common. The thing I am curious about is if this is a thing for the current iteration of players or if it will be persistent through time with all players? If it is just a problem with the current players only then the issue might be a hard to find bug. If it is with all players then it is a clear issue with development. That said I also wonder if the problem is found will players jump to where they should have been if it is a development bug or will things just be fixed from that point on?
  2. So you are taking what the game is saying and taking it further than what it is meaning. Also, less puck skills don't equate to less passing and shooting per what it says in dump and chase. Also yes faster and more physical players have a natural advantage. Same goes for taller players. However, if everything were about speed, physicality and height alone the NHL would be another NBA like league with everyone as tall and fast as possible. Also the Leafs and Lightning wouldn't have made the playoffs because they significantly lack in at least one of those 3 areas. Ultimately if you don't have the appropriate skills to go along with the skating, physicality or height then those skills themselves don't matter either. For dump and chase you want to focus on speed, physicality and spirit more than puck skills however passing and shooting skills are still relevant. Hence why, between the two players in the prior example, player 2 is still better than player 1 higher up in the lineup. While player 1 has the speed and physicality their actual skills of passing and scoring are so low that they aren't actually then good enough to really generate or take advantage of scoring chances. In regards to the spread tactic, it is asking the players to be very aggressive in their positioning and attack the puck carrier. Thus speed to catch the puck carrier and physicality to potentially force them off of the puck are important. That doesn't, however, necessarily mean that more speed and physicality is better defensively. Since this is along that tangent I am going to mention physicality on the PK. It is only important if the opposing team uses the spread PP tactic since that tactic is about using physicality to get to rebounds. Beyond that, the only two relevant skills to look at for the PK is def and then spirit. Edit: I should have said this when I was originally replying. The only thing that the in game description of tactics is telling you is what skills you want to look for and get in your players that will make that tactic work best. Edit 2: And on that in regards to the player examples player 2 would still likely struggle in your system that emphasizes speed and physicality even with him being the more skilled player. The player that you really want to be looking for in comparison to those two looks something like this. 85, 85, 75, 85, 75, 85, 75, 75, 85 Notice how this player is different from the other two. It is these small differences that you need to pay attention to as they make a world of difference in terms of results.
  3. In my guide or in the game? Either way, don't take more emphasis on physical skills or speed in tactics to mean that it suddenly trumps skill in importance in where to put players in your lineup. At the end of the day, the actual skills (pass, puck, shot and def for skaters) of the players will eventually trump everything but a better combination of skill and tactics. It makes absolutely no sense to play a physical specimen of a player on the top line over a slower and less physical but more offensively skilled guy. For example, think Martin St. Louis vs Colton Gillies. Ok, that is a more extreme example I grant but hopefully, you get my point. Maybe a more reasonable example would be Ray Whitney vs Chuck Kobasew. This is the most common mistake I see in lineups. Managers not putting better offensively skilled players higher up in their lineup because they are either lower overall or don't fit their desired tactics. If the player doesn't fit your tactics trade them for someone who does with similar skill rather than subbing them in a skilled role with someone that has less skill. Again it makes no sense to do that. Side note about Ray Whitney that made me laugh. I was watching a game with him and the color analyst said that when most players get older they slow down and that causes them to be less effective. However, Ray Whitney was able to remain effective as he got older because that never was an issue. As the color analyst said, "You can not lose the speed you never had."
  4. Updated with my IHL offensive lines as an example. Please don't mind that I had to borrow the computer as shown by the tabs.
  5. Yes. Player 1 will never be the better performing player outside of a depth role even in that case. He can't provide the same offense and he doesn't provide a defensive advantage either.
  6. If I can get around to it today I will post my lineup as an example as the final player I was waiting on finally accepted the contract offer. If not today it will be edited in by the end of the week. Beyond that is adding defensive tactics and likely special teams as well. After that, I don't know as I don't know what any of you would like to know so please post with questions and or ideas on what you would like to see added.
  7. Oh hey, look! I updated section 4 with a little tidbit after years of neglect. Specifically about lineup creation.
  8. Well, the Senators were a harder playing team after they traded away a number of players at the deadline. They weren't good but they played hard.
  9. rainsilent

    Training

    Also with the new development system in the new version each player skill has its own skill cap and growth rate.
  10. C Oli Langham is on the block. 32yo playmaking center. Good 2nd/3rd line center. Looking for either someone that I can send down to minor team or on as short a contract as possible in return.
  11. Look into how and why your team lost. Were the games close? Was the opposing team better than yours at something? Tactics? Did your goalie or team just have a bad game?
  12. Whichever one allows you to offer a contract? I've not actually seen that but I've not looked at players on CPU teams outside of the offseason in a while.
  13. I have yet to even look up at the GHL in this world. That said the team I have is surprising me in its results.
  14. 8 games in and my team is 6-0-0-2. That said I deliberately wanted this team to be a bit more offensively focused than my normal team. Goals per game 12th 4,1 Goals against 1st 2,3 Powerplay 15th 18,8% Penalty kill 11th 84,2% I think I may not understand the concept of more offensive.
  15. I remember some saying that the East looked stacked. From this perspective the West looks worse. Edit: Oh and brilliant job Erzac. I'm not sure what me ranking 6th in the East means. In the prior run I was really good at getting my team to finish higher in the rankings relative to the team skill. We shall see how I do. Best to all this season.
  16. Trash talk... You mean like this?
  17. Starting at the bottom for me in this world.
  18. C Daven Marc-Aurele (29), F Zachariah Rancourt (26) and D Cedric Obeng (24) are on the block for me. Looking for a 2nd/3rd line TWF type. Will combine 2 of the 3 for a 1st/2nd line TWF type of older age (30+), skill and higher trade value. Edit: Rancourt is currently a 2nd/3rd line playmaker and Obeng is a 2nd pair D man. Marc-Aurele is a 3rd/4th line playmaker.
  19. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  20. Yes and no. There are a lot of factors at play however most I will skip because I don't think your too interested and they aren't in play here. A typical contract is a contract where the team and player agree to a certain amount of money paid over a certain time with the amount agreed upon spread out evenly over the duration of the contract. For example 20 million over 5 years which means 4 million per year. Thus in terms of once a contract is signed a player will not be getting more money.
  21. One of two things is going on. They are either acquiring the player with that contract or they signed them to a very long contract at a cheap price and the player continued to grow.
  22. It does. I thought that it did show it though. I could be wrong.
  23. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  24. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password