rainsilent

It wouldn't be ridiculous considering that the number of young players 24 and under capable of contributing as at least the equivalent in this game are rather plentiful. However for coding purposes (keeping things simple and easy to code) the NHL waiver eligibility system can't be used. Something simpler needs to be used like a specific age. You don't want it too high or higher league teams will horde all of the younger players that could be playing in lower leagues that potentially could grow into good players in the high league. Too low and teams can't develop borderline players because they don't have the chance to. Why do I not agree when you think I was saying the same earlier? Because you are saying something very different than I am that makes your idea fundamentally completely different than what I was suggesting above. You view 1 way contracts in this game the same (fundamentally at least) as 1 way contracts in the NHL. I don't because I realize and understand that they are drastically different and serve 2 very different purposes. It looks like you think 1 way contracts should be able to go to lower tiers. This completely defeats the purpose of a 1 way contract in this game. Again you are talking about 1 way contracts here like they are NHL equivalent as you are completely missing the point of the 1 way contract in this game. The point of a 1 way contract in this game is that you cannot send the player down to a lower league at all. That includes farm teams. Again this isn't how 1 way contracts work in this game. The point of a 1 way contract in this game is that your exampled 24yo 82 overall player with said 1 way contract can't play in the SHL due to the contractual clause of the aforementioned 1 way contract no matter if they can, much less if they deserve to play in the SHL. I didn't find it confusing or hard to understand at all. In fact excluding the one way contracts part we fundamentally agree on what should be going on. The only problem with your vision as you put it is the one way contracts. Your completely making them void of their purpose in this game. 1 way contracts in this game are intended to prevent players too good to play in a lower league from playing in a lower league. A la a 90+ overall player playing in anything other than the GHL.

The reason you think that is probably because you think it never happens for prospects 24 and under to go through waivers. That is because NHL teams usually go out of their way protect young players (25 and under) that have 2 way contracts and are waiver eligible. They still do happen though. 2 recent examples. Greg McKegg, 24 at the time, and Seth Griffith, 23, were claimed via waivers just last season. It happens a lot more often than you think. It also makes no sense to force 1 way contracts by a certain age. 1 way contracts should only be determined by player skill and demand of wanting it not by age.

NHL does not have 1 way contracts with the same intent as with this game. The NHL 1 way contracts are completely different in intent and purpose. The NHL one way contract is not to prevent player demotion to a lower league. That is because there is no lower league for a NHL team to be demoted to. It is to determine the value of the contract in terms of cap hit and player pay no matter the league they play in. For example lets look at Jordan Eberle and his 6 million contract. Say the Islanders sent him down to the AHL for whatever reason. The Islanders would still have the cap hit of his 6 million and they would still have to pay him 6 million. In the NHL a two way contract simply determines the pay the player gets depending upon which league they play. For example a 800,000 two way NHL contract the player gets paid the full 800,000 in the NHL however if they play in the AHL they only get paid a total of around 150,000 and they do not get counted against the NHL teams salary cap. In this game a one way contract is strictly so a player does not go with a team should they demote. They don't want to play in a lower league than what they are in. Thus they can not and will not go to a lower league. This is a rather common contract clause available in leagues where teams can be demoted. A two way contract in such leagues allows the player to be sent to or go with the team to a lower league. NHL 1 way contracts and 1 way contracts in this game are completely different from each other in every sense. Also as said above a lot of 2 way contracts in the NHL are waiver eligible. In fact most waiver claims last year were players with two way contracts. Thus you saying that two way players being available to waivers being ridiculous is a very ridiculous statement to make since they are the most common waiver claims in the NHL.

The point of one way contracts currently is that the player can't go to a league lower than your own. It is an anti demotion clause. Sending a player down to a farm team is a "demotion." Besides there is absolutely no justified logical reason to send a player that wants a one way clause to your farm team. They are going to be the best players on your team.

So basically have 3 contracts from a waiver point of view. Non eligible, same league only waivers and open waivers.

Players on one way contracts can't be sent down to the farm team. There are two reasons I can think of to not use the NHL system for waivers though. First complications to coding. Keeping it simple really would make it easier. Second the NHL doesn't have promotion or relegation. How does that make a difference? The better teams could hoard quality growing players until they are 26 without worrying about losing them to waivers in the NHL system. To me that is too generous when there is promotion and relegation in play. Finally the only reason I said 4 in game days is because of the faster leagues that can play 4 games in one real life day. You have to give consideration to time relevance in every league. The NHL 2/3 day system would be a very short time frame in the fastest leagues. At the same time giving them 2 real life days would be 8 days for slower leagues. If it could be coded in real life days rather than in game days a 2 or 3 real life day system would be good. Edit: Please note that I am not countering or rebuking your ideas. I am just pointing out why I suggested what I did.

Now that there are "minor league" teams that we can send players down to I think it is a good time to start figuring out a waiver system to prevent teams from hoarding players by making players waiver eligible. This is one possible way for such a system to work. For players to be eligible to be claimed they have to be a certain age. Say 24. When they become eligible is completely open for discussion however I do think the minimum age considered should be 23. If they signed at 21 they have only been on that team for 2 full seasons. Any less I think would be at least a bit unfair to the team. Also they have to be sent to the farm team during the regular season. Anyone sent down before the regular season starts is not waiver eligible when they get sent down before the regular season but they are eligible for waivers if they get called up at any point. As for who can claim them well at least the same league teams. I would also throw in lower league teams as well if the player would have interest in playing for said team at the lower level. As for the order of who would get waiver claims same league should start off going in reverse standing order, meaning worst team in same league gets first dibs on any waiver claims, until you reach the playoff line and then lower league teams get dibs (going form worst to best again) finishing with teams in playoff position from the original teams league. Now that who is eligible and who can claim had been presented how would it work? Well when a waiver eligible player gets sent down a notification pops up in the league news section on the league home page. "x gets put on waivers." could be what it says. Also they would appear in a new tab in the transactions section called waivers. The player would be there for a number of days. For example sake lets say 4 in game days. During these 4 days any team interested puts in a waiver claim. After the required days pass the team that put in a claim with the highest position in the waiver claim system order gets the player. Thoughts?

It really depends. Your players may the problem, the way your setting them up may be the problem or it may just be the tactics as you suspect. If you go to a better tactic from a bad one it actually is possible to see immediate improvements but that is rare. Typically initially there will be a drop off but, so long as you chose the right tactic, you will inevitably see improvement eventually. In regards to PP and PK tactics if you want a good PP and PK you need to know the ideology behind what is going on or you will be finding success via blind luck and it likely won't be consistent. First PK since there are currently only 3 tactics in game. I am going to go in order from safest in real life (and thus most common in the NHL) to aggressive. The Box: This tactic tries to prevent the opposing teams power play from being able to get a shot from the most dangerous part of the ice. The middle. The negative is that due to emphasis on keeping the middle of the ice unavailable the outside is open for use making it weak against power plays that try to create scoring chances via one timers. So why is this the safest? Because the middle of the ice is by far more dangerous than an outside shot save rare great shooters like Ovechkin. Diamond: This tactic is basically the box set on one end to counter the outside shooter situation however it opens up a lot of opportunity for seam passes to and through the most dangerous part of the ice. This is the other popular PK in the NHL however it has two major weaknesses compared to the boxes one. 1. The middle of the ice is much more vulnerable due to it being more open. 2. A distinct lack of defensive coverage low in the zone. Wedge: This one you pretty much don't see in the NHL. Well you do and you don't but I will explain later. This tactic has one player aggressively challenging the opposing player with the puck trying to force them into a mistake. In game wise it works as an aggressive cross between the first two. However in working as a cross it pretty much carries the weaknesses of both of the others at the same time while having its own as well. This is basically an all or nothing PK tactic and if you want to even consider using it you need to have players with high speed, defense and spirit. If you are a GHL team all 3 of those attributes pretty much needs to be in the 90s for this PK to be effective. In terms of seeing this in reality it is all about how aggressive the PK is rather than this being its own PK tactic. A very aggressive box or diamond is going to have one player constantly pressuring the puck carrier on a PK whereas a more passive PK will stay more confined. As for PP in game there are 4 options here. Umbrella: This is the first outside shooter PP set. 3 shooters with 2 guys in front for screens, deflections and rebounds. While this set up is great for creating scoring chances this one also is weak in that it has limited options for moving the puck making it weak against aggressive PKs. 1-3-1: Most common PP in the NHL by far because it can easily blend into a down low set up or up high set up or even into different PP sets with relative ease. Great for highly skilled players but you need highly skilled players for it to work. Overload: The down low PP tactic with a focus on quick player and puck movement. While the two above struggle in game (the 1-3-1 in reality doesn't care as it is reliant on player skill alone but if it were that way in game it would be the only used PP due to having no weakness outside of the lack of your own players flaws) with more pressure this one is the in game counter to a high pressure PK. Spread: This one doesn't even exist in reality. At least anymore. Maybe it existed in the 80s to early 90s when a team had a lack of skilled forwards. It also has a silly name to go with it in game. This should be called crash the net (since nobody is spread anywhere on the ice) since all 3 forwards go to the front of the net and the 2 point players just throw shots at the net looking for deflections and rebounds with a few lucky shots hopefully finding their way through everything into the net. Technically this is the worst PK listed due to it having no out from an aggressive PK and it would be incredible luck to get a shot through to net in a passive one even though it doesn't work that way in game. If you want to use it have high strength ratings in all 3 forwards and high shot ratings on your point guys. I really think this one exists solely so the wedge can be properly considered good against a PP. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the PP/PK system go to something like this: 3 PP systems and 2 PK systems. The PPs being overload, 1-3-1 and umbrella and the 2 PKs being box and diamond. Umbrella is strong against the box but weak against the diamond (say +10% and -10% respectively. Overload being the opposite and 1-3-1 being neutral. Say all things being equal a 1-3-1 will score 18% of the time on the PP. With the umbrella the rate would be 28% against the box but only 8% against the diamond and vice versa with the overload. I am not trying to say that my idea is better than what we have in game currently. I am actually not sold myself that it is better but this idea is an entirely different conversation.

The gap in Biscuit isn't as big as you state but it still is very noticeable. The reason why I asked if just adjusting the talent gap would be enough is because it logically doesn't make sense to have the other promotion/relegation playoffs be one way and have the GHL/SHL one different. Especially if the talent gap largely goes away. Also as you say the talent gap is the reason for you posting then if it is fixed your reasoning for the playoff change (besides just wanting something different) goes away too does it not? Finally I am indifferent to your idea as, even though I see the good and bad, I just don't see it as an improvement. Chiefly because it just makes things unnecessarily more complicated to have 2 different promotion/relegation systems at play at the same time. I do think that at least 2 teams should promote automatically with the current system. I played a game where only one team promoted each year (with no fight for a 2nd spot) which made it very frustrating just to finish second repeatedly. However I would think it better that 2 more teams have the chance to demote rather than a chance and another forced demotion. Once a GHL league gets filled with human players and there are no outstanding teams benefiting from a history of AI trade abuse the margin of error becomes rather small to the point where an injury plagued season can see a regular strong playoff team finish in the bottom 5. That said I do not think that we currently have the best possible system in place in terms of making promotion/relegation fun and fair all around. I do believe that we have the best in terms of simplicity which from Anders perspective coding wise is much more important. Personally I think that once Anders gets rid of the skill gap between the SHL and GHL you will find the system to be perfectly fine.

To the OP: So your only problem is the GHL/SHL playoffs am I right? The rest are currently ok? And your reason for the issue with the GHL/SHL playoffs is the talent gap between the GHL and SHL right? So wouldn't the fix to the problem be close the skill gap between the SHL and GHL? The skill gap difference is something Anders is currently working on fixing if I am not mistaken. Also Scorvat what would you want to see changed?

Not a bug but goalies were overperforming. Anders did recently adjust things to bring goalies down.

Also, as late as I am to this, there is something that needs to be clarified. A giveaway is a player giving the puck away without pressure. That could be something as basic as a misfired pass or unfortunate bounce that causes a player to lose control of the puck or it could be as egregious as trying to force an ill advised pass or not trying to take a pass and letting it go by because you might get hit if you take it. A takeaway is possession lost because the opposing team took it away through pressure in some way. Also skilled players are more likely to have more giveaways. They are on the ice more often and they are trying to score. That involves trying things that sometimes just don't work. The offensive strategy you use as well as the opponents defensive strategy will also play into giveaways.

I don't recall specific games but it takes about half a season to 2/3rds of one.

I need to very much get back to my version of #2. I will likely do what I know of player profiles this weekend due to this reminder. #3 should be doable. If I remember correctly, for a manager not new to the team they have to wait until the offseason to do this, under the action button when in the team menu you can edit everything with the team under the edit franchise button which is the last option. #4 would be great as almost every day in the offseason I get about 50 messages a day regarding players I am following getting contract offers.

Ok that is not that helpful because S15 is missing in the picture you provided. I then assume that he started as a 78 in junior, grew to an 82 when he was drafted and has digressed one overall in 2 years. Is that right? Edit: One way or another I wouldn't have drafted him based upon what I am seeing of him as he looks like a rather mundane draft pick with a low skill rating, which of course is hidden, which means that he will degrade sooner anyways. What I suspect is going on with many of these players losing ratings, without seeing anything beyond what you have shown Exxeo, is that the lower skill rating players are now dropping in ratings rather than slowly growing because they don't have the massive growth boost that every player had in the past.

Was season 17 his first season?

As Matt said though I am not in any way "abusing" you, insulting you or however you want to put it. I think it is good that you (or anybody) started this topic. All I did was tell you what Anders did based upon what he told us and give you advice on how to deal with the adjustments good and bad. Until he fixes the bad (or other in game issues) we are more or less stuck with dealing with the bad and I don't doubt that he will adjust or fix bad things with the game as soon as he can. Be patient and more importantly be realistic. Anders is working on this game alone as a hobby. It takes him time to code adjustments to the game. Thus telling him to fix something or else you will leave is more along the lines of throwing a fit than reporting game issues with a level head. Exxeo what is the 19 year old players ambition rating? Also by the looks of it no matter his ambition rating he looks to have the lowest player skill rating. That of course is hidden now and we cannot see it. Of that rating when we could see it I got to see an 18 year old with that rating (before it was hidden) go down in skill despite being ambitious in ambition rating. That reason is why I stay away from players that don't grow much as all like the plague.

http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/7586-v121/ http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/7328-v120/ Not sure how your not aware of this at this point... Also if a straightforward and helpful attitude is not productive than what is?

First we can't actually see your team unless we are in the same game world thus linking it like that is a waste of time. If you want us to see your team screenshot it and post the screenshot. Second I don't see the same issues that you are talking about in the game world I am in thus it makes me think one of two things. 1. Bizarre isolated incident. 2. Your over exaggerating the situation and/or not being forthcoming about horrific team management that you can't get yourself out of a la old players that you are stuck with. If you are in the fastest league(s) there are somethings you need to realize. 1. There was a massive over build up of players 90+ overall leaving the world over saturated with extremely high overall players. Anders had to counter this immediately thus he made it very hard for players to keep "topped up" skills topped up. He also had to counter the excessive over growth of younger players that was creating an over saturation of extremely high overall players thus he slowed down the development pace of players. If one or both of these factors of player development needs to be adjusted in the future they most definitely will when they need to. 2. The fastest leagues were breaking the sim engine and while not near as big of an issue now they still give the sim engine a good working over. Also Anders is adding more sim detail into the sim engine. Both of these combined are going to cause the sim to go slower. Finally it is hardly a wasted season if it is less than 20 games in. Learn some patience. Every team is going to go through tough stretches. Yes injuries can cause teams to miss the playoffs. The Tampa Bay Lightning is the most recent shining example of such. If you don't like that too bad. Sorry to be brutal about it but it is something we all have to deal with in due time. The better managers do a better job dealing with injuries via making sure that they have good players in reserve before they actually need such players. That doesn't mean that they are immune to injuries. It just lessens the impact that injuries have. Finally in terms of trading with the CPU be reasonable with your offers and I don't doubt that they will actually go through.

Anders is working on a NHL style game world. As for "unfair" promotion position it is going to just be a natural issue jumping from the SHL to the GHL regardless of any trade abuse. So few 80+ overall players are interested in playing in the SHL and those that are willing are exceptionally expensive so SHL teams cant afford many of them. On the other hand 80+ overall players are going to be exclusively bottom of the lineup type of players for GHL teams. That means that there ends up being a notable skill gap between SHL teams and GHL teams that any promoting SHL team has to find a way to overcome. A massive majority of SHL teams try to carry over a large number of players and that just isn't a viable tactic if you actually want to stay in the GHL, especially when the margin for error for a GHL team in terms of making the playoffs or being at risk for demotion has become so small. By the way I was wanting to do my own version of these before this season started but alas I just couldn't find the time before the first game.

It does but it is significantly more difficult than in the past apparently.

The first difference is the player you got in return can't win draws whereas Pearl was one of the best. That difference alone can actually be a big deal. Second Pearl was never going to put up much more in points from where you had him in the lineup and how you were utilizing him. That isn't your fault rather it is a trend I see in this game. The Vandals are using him in the exact same way you were by the way hence the lack of points with the Vandals too. And to be frank Pearl should never have been there to put up a lot of points. He just isn't that kind of offensive player. Think of Pearl as someone similar to Anisimov or Bonino. Solid, reliable two way players that can chip in offensively time to time. Finally I thought Pearl was actually playing well for you. Not great granted but I thought that he was still playing well for you. That said the player you got in return is more of an offensive player that can't win draws.

Steve I think what is going on with your team is the fallout of your trade involving Pearl. The play of your team really fell off after you traded him away. That may not have been the cause completely but it seems like after that trade the bottom just fell out of your team. As for the other person I would have to see more than what those pictures show to provide any help.

I also didn't reply to him again for the same reason. He is on a witch hunt without any logic or justification behind it. He isn't concerned about if a trade may or may not be balanced much less whom it favors. If he sees any sort of trade that he doesn't like for whatever reason he is reporting it. The worse thing is his exceptionally toxic attitude. I fully get not liking people who are continuously exploiting the game because I don't like them either but... Also if your going to use the report function to report a suspicious trade at least use it properly as intended and report lopsided human to AI trades only. If you see a suspicious human to human trade report it to Anders or a forum mod and let it be investigated from there. That doesn't strictly go to him by the way as it goes to everyone. That said he did bring up one point I should make public regarding the trade. Specifically why I gave so much. In my opinion fair value for the goalie was at most the Dman and the 3 forwards. The goalie I gave was in the trade because the SHL manager wanted a goalie back for his goalie and the only goalie I could send was the goalie I did send back. Me and the SHL manager made a gentleman's agreement. If the SHL team did not promote to the GHL before the contract of the goalie I gave expires I would get the goalie back. To compensate for that I would give him what we both agreed was full trade value for his goalie, the defenseman and the 3 forwards, to go with my goalie so that way should he not promote and ends up giving the goalie back through honoring the agreement he still ended up getting full compensation anyways up front. If he makes the GHL before the contract expires he gets to keep the goalie as well as the other players in the trade.

It wasn't with an AI team einstein which is what the report function is for first and foremost. The manager of the SHL team proposed the trade to me too. I tried to talk them out of the trade in terms of them not getting immediate trade value in return despite them winning the trade long term. They still felt confidant enough to want the trade. In terms of the trade and what went both ways I got what will never be more than a very good backup or ok starter goalie in return for what should be an equivalent goalie now if the game hadn't screwed me in development but will be a quality GHL starter down the road in Klavins (he should be developing at 5+ overall a season if he plays for at least 3 more seasons fyi making him nearly 90 overall,) what will be a good GHL defenseman in a few seasons in Steegman, what will be a good GHL goalscorer in Enrik Castles in about the same time and 2 forwards that, if they develop, will be quality 3rd or 4th line forwards for a GHL team. Since they went to a SHL team the players they got are what will be by the end of this season an elite SHL goalie that can be carried into the GHL as a quality starter, a cornerstone SHL defenseman to build around that will also be carried into the GHL, a cornerstone goalscorer to build around that can be carried into the GHL and 2 forwards that can make a real impact at the SHL level that may be able to be carried into the GHL. In return I got a goalie that they couldn't resign and I could use in emergency if I end up not finding someone to replace Loveday in 2 or so years. That said Bockastael will never be a high quality starting GHL goalie like Klavins will in at least 3 or 4 seasons. So yeah I sure hosed a SHL team with that trade. Good catch there. Seriously dude not all 5 for 1 trades are lopsided in favor of the GHL team. Heck that should never have been a 5 for 1 trade as I gave way more than I should have for what I got in return. So please don't be stupid and crass like this. It isn't needed. However if you can explain how trading a definite starting GHL goalie in about 3 seasons time, a quality GHL defenseman in about the same time (Steegman should be gaining 4-5 overall for the next 4 or so seasons,) a quality GHL goalscorer again in about the same time (Castles should develop at about the same pace as Steegman) and 2 potential depth forwards for what amounts to what will be nothing more than a decent starter at best with another human manager is cheating the AI in a trade (never mind ripping off a SHL team) I will concede the point and reverse the trade or even do more.