IneffableLeafs

If my goalies can't start playing goalie, I'm probably going to fall. We're on pace for an absurd 230 goals, but our defense ranks 10th or lower I think, all thanks to stellar goal tending. My last game was a 6-4 win, and the other team had 12 shots. My goalie finished with a solid .667 save percentage. My goalies sit at .863 and .886 save percentages. Not to mention I'm sitting in an all too familiar 3rd place , and all of my defenders have a performance rating of 75 or higher. Having 8 point-per-game players is also helping my cause. If I don't get promotion this season though, I'm going to have to rebuild my core, which wants bucket loads of money. Lumberjacks, your team is going to finish in a good position regardless thanks to the superb negotiating skills to bring Tal Lowe in for $37,000 , and the maxed out winner instinct and teamwork.

This could happen: https://gfycat.com/DefiniteVigilantIcelandicsheepdog I don't know if that would be considered checking though.

The underestimation aspect confuses me as well. I recently played two preseason games, and one was a win, another was a loss. In the win: "The team totally underestimated the opponent" In the loss: "Your team showed no signs of underestimating the opponent." The underestimation feedback seems to vary about 50/50 for all my games, so I don't really know. My one question would have to be; why do the backup goalies get all positive feedback?

Yes

I think that players 35+ should honestly regress more. I'm looking in free agency now and see 8 players all 91+ overall that are aged 35 or over. I'm looking at all players in Game World Lumber and I see about 95% of 90+ rated players being over the age of 30. Since Fishbowl is only 7 seasons in there are much less 90 rated players, but still a significant amount. In NHL 17, the first roster featured forty six (46) 90 rated players and this game seems like it has hundreds. These players eat away at a team's salary and I agree that either the salary cap should be lowered or players should not have such high potential ceilings.

Welcome to fishbowl Walter! Hope you enjoy your stay.

Draft picks will become more useful!!! Everyone's on an even playing field!!! I definitely support this, it would for sure be enjoyable. I think I may have suggested this myself before or supported it. Either way, it has been talked about by Anders and it would be great to see it implemented. But I don't think divisions should be shuffled every season. Divisions would probably be based on the city you choose. Ex. If you choose Mississauga as your city you'll likely be in the Eastern Conference. Divisions however could be slightly shuffled every few seasons, and everytime a new manager comes in and changes the city it could shift the conferences and divisions around.

The reason your seeing people trade so much is because what they do is sign garbage players for their league level and get picks so they have tons of prospects (trade value) then when the time is right, they deal all of them away for quality players on computer teams, essentially abusing the current trading system. These are cheaters. If I'm understanding you right, you want cap penalties for cheating players like I'm describing above. I see a few possible effects in this idea: 1. This will reduce trading drastically. 2. This will cause the cheaters to stop playing. 3. People will become extremely cautious when making trades. You can look at this from a positive or negative perspective, Pros: Trading will be reduced to a realistic level, this will eliminate cheaters, people will think their trades through and fairly, trades with computer teams will reduce due to the strict trade system. Cons: Barely any trades will be made whatsoever, almost everyone cheats once in a while and no one likes cap penalties, people will be too cautious to make trades, with the current trading system, trades will likely only be made with other human teams. I see what you're saying bhandsome08, but this could better be solved with a limit on contracts. For example, managers will be limited to 24 players in their main roster, and 30 in total (6 prospects and 24 players, 4 propsects and 23 players with 3 empty roster spots, etc.) My 2 cents

Can anyone elaborate on what this concern means? Does not feel appreciated by the club I want to trade for a player, but his happiness says that, so I'm not sure. I know unhappy players are notorious for playing like garbage in this game. Any knowledge would be a big help, thanks.

@Wingedbeaver Your absolutely right. This forum is for suggestions and your suggestion definitely would improve convenience. I only said to use a pencil and paper as a temporary fix, because new features come out rarely. @canucks The word doc would probably be smarter than pencil and paper.

I think the smaller a player is, the more likely he is to be injured. I had a 5'4" tall player (163cm) get injured for 20 days. Their fitness also factors in. If they are overplayed and get a lot of ice time, they are also more likely to be injured.

I'm suggesting the ability to retain salaries on players that are being traded. Example: Toronto Maple Leafs trades: Nathan Horton (5 million salary) with 2.5 million salary retained Calgary Flames trades: 2019 6th round pick Because Calgary was under the cap floor and needed a contract to stay above. Thoughts?

I somewhat agree, Game world fishbowl's season 6 draft (previous season) featured 7 goalies in the top 16. 3 in the top 5. The same world's midterm rankings feature 8 defenders in the top 16. I'd imagine that forwards would be more readily available as well. However, in fishbowl from what I've seen doesn't have an absurd amount of a specific position dominating the prospect rankings. For example, in season 5, the top 7 picks in the draft were all centers and forwards. When the game generates players I imagine the positioning is random, so maybe that's why we see so many of one position being drafted, or maybe everyone wants a goalie. The game might have just made 50 good goalie prospects in one season, I don't know. Although I agree that forwards and centers are generally the ones drafted higher up (goalies usually never go in the first round, especially in recent NHL drafts); the randomness makes the draft a little more interesting. Further, the players with the top picks being promoted from the SHL I would assume want goalies so that in 5 seasons they have a monster goalie. If there's one position that can completely destroy your chances of winning, it's goalie imo. I personally wouldn't worry about it too much.

@CrimsonLumberjacks The reward is supposed to be what gets players into the competition if you know what I mean. You can think of it with this analogy: Somebody gives you a lottery ticket for free with a chance at 1 million, would you take it? The idea is some sort of reward is at the end for the team that manages to beat 3 tough teams in a row. The reward does not necessarily have to be a player, it could be something else, but I'm not sure exactly what. I also forgot to explain in my previous post that empty group slots for human teams that are not taken up are: 1st filled with computer teams in the GHL-LIHL, 2nd, if there are any slots left, they are filled with any remaining European teams.

About 10 days ago I started up a new team in clapper, and I timed it so I got the computer team relegated from the SHL. The team had 5 players (not including prospects). I basically had to sign a new team, and for some reason in the BHL I had $800,000 retained salary cap penalties. I had to go on a budget for this team, and I ended up signing about 15 players "the last minute before the game" because people refused to sign with me, even for the money that they demanded. After losing my season opener, I had a full squad ready for the second game, though not as good as I expected. So my simple suggestion is: increase the length of the preseason. Then I figured, some people wouldn't like a longer preseason, and then I thought preseason tournaments would be fantastic. No seeding, I thought of a format like this: BHL Team v FIHL Team BHL Team v SEHL Team BHL Team v SHHL Team BHL Team v CZHL Team How it would work: Note: Preseason would increase by 3 days for the tournaments, making preseason and silly season add up to 9 days. 1) The game would randomly generate groups of 4 foreign league teams for every single league level (GHL-LIHL), which would make for 20 groups. 2) Human controlled teams will be offered during silly season to participate in a preseason tournament. 3) Once the user accepts, they are placed into a random group of both foreign and same league level teams (i.e. BHL team plays against other BHL level teams and random FIHL-CZHL squads). 4) Spanning 3 days, teams will compete to win the preseason tournament, with the focus on improving players, much like in normal preseason games. (I'm not sure if playoff games better develop players, but these games could, due to the games being in single knockout tournament form) 5) If the winning team is from the GHL-LIHL, they receive some sort of incentive. The incentive could be a few things, but what I had in mind is the team is being able to select a player from a losing foreign team. A Brief Synopsis Players are invited to participate in annual preseason tournaments. Four GHL-LIHL teams will match up against four foreign teams in a single knockout, no seed tournament (no round robin). Should a human manager win, they will be rewarded an incentive for their efforts and "European exposure". As in, Swiss hockey team rewards BHL team with a player because they grew the game in Switzerland. What this would do for GPHM 1. Help player confidence and team evaluation: With a possible 6 preseason games that could be played, player confidence and ability will be given an excellent chance to improve, as well as give the manager more time to figure out what lineup to ice come season opener. 2. Increase competition: With the stakes high right at the season to win a player (or another incentive), teams will be itching to get their player development, team spirit, team knowledge, and lineup right, even before a meaningful game is played. 3. Increase player enjoyment: The game is good, but lacks a realism of having the foreign teams serve any purpose. People would like to play the game more because of a cool new, original feature that everyone is sure to like for the reasons stated above. Thoughts? IneffableLeafs

Hey guys, I'm just looking for some advice. Long story short, my team is pretty much in a lock for a position between 3-6 (currently 3rd). I'm 9 points behind 2nd, and 12 points out of 7th. I've locked up some good players (80-83) rated (in SHL) for the next season. Key info: all of them will have a 1 way contract by the end of the season. In roughly 4 seasons of experience, I've never been in the playoffs (GHL, relegation, or promotion). I've either sat mid table of clinched auto promotion. I have two questions: 1) For anyone with playoff experience, what can you expect when your facing someone a division higher than you in the playoffs? Facing players in the same division? 2) Would it just be wiser for me to tank in the playoffs so my team will be more established next season, rather than risk losing all of my 80+ rated players to relegation next season in the GHL? Any help/advice would be appreciated, Ineffableleafs

4 games per day, 4 votes. I think I might join lumber after this season in clapper, it looks like people enjoy 4 games per day. I haven't tried it though, because my concern is that if silly season and preseason fall on a weekday, I'm going to lose 3 days automatically due to school.

The idea is ok, but I can't see this working due to the amount of inactive manager's. Lets say IHL wants to decrease trade lock to 10 days. The league needs 9 votes (one more than half of the players) to approve this. 6 players are inactive, lets say. (And this is only assuming there are no computer teams) That leaves 10 players to vote, and because people's opinions differ, getting a rule change would be next to impossible. This may only work in the GHL where there are plenty of established manager's, But either way, I can see more abuse coming with an addition like this. An alternative would be to create a new game world to see how this feature would work.

If the inbox is under construction than I think this could work, but not in its current system, because if you 'bookmark' more than 10 messages it'll become annoying to go through the pages. +1

I can't recall the speeds off the top of my head, but I'm interested to know people's opinions. Clapper Fishbowl Biscuit Howitzer Lumber, or Mitts (UAT) I'm personally gonna saw Fishbowl, because it is the first game world I've played in, and it appears to be the least buggy, especially compared to the faster world's. However, I think Fishbowl has the least amount of forum users. However, I do like the normal speed of 2 games per day in Clapper, and the fact that there seem to be many more 90 rated players there than in Fishbowl. I have played in Biscuit and Mitts before, but I don't like lightning speed, and Biscuit is pretty much the same as Fishbowl. Feel free to add:

Since everyone in clapper is talking about player progression, I'm going to suggest a minor upgrade to the emails you receive when a player improves/declines. A current example (my team's latest player to improve): ASSISTANT IMPRESSED BY REMY MERCURIO Your assistant is happy to let you know that your defender Remy Mercurio has really improved lately. This message left me happy, yet unsatisfied. This email is missing a crucial convenient touch: which attributes improved? So I went and checked. Defense went up from 79 to 80. Not only that, but about 20 days before, other stats also improved, but I had no indication of this because my assistant did not give me an email. PuckHandling went up from 68 to 69, and Physical went up from 72 to 73. So what I'm proposing is: Tell us right in the email what improved/declined. Here's an example using the same player on my team, with it being day 31 on the season: ASSISTANT IMPRESSED BY REMY MERCURIOYour assistant is happy to let you know that your defender Remy Mercurio has really improved lately. The following attributes have shown growth: Defense: Improved from 79 to 80 on Day 31 PuckHandling: Improved from 68 to 69 on Day 16 Physical: Improved from 72 to 73 on Day 16 Let me know what you guys think! - Peter T.

The pencil and paper works wonders here

I know that the youth draft is a relatively new feature, but the players in the drafts have been so weak. In game world Fishbowl, drafts started in season 4. I haven't done much in depth research, but here are some shocking facts. It is season 7 in Game World Fishbowl. The 1st overall pick from the season 4 draft is currently an 84 overall. The 1st overall pick from the season 5 draft is currently an 83 overall.The 1st overall pick from the season 6 draft is currently an 82 overall.See a trend there? Those players remain the highest rated of their draft class and none have really made an impact in the world yet, all putting up modest numbers playing little to no minutes. I'm arguing that there should be franchise players in the draft that can come in to a GHL team and be a key cog in the team, as in high 80s to low 90s in rating. The draft already has the growth part right; the first overall selections are growing slowly, but they are not rated high enough. At least within 3 seasons a 1st overall pick should be 86-90 in rating, or at least be an impact player. Since the 2013 NHL entry draft, there have been many players to come in and have an immediate impact, or at least an impact in 3 years. From 2013: Nathan MacKinnon, Aleksander Barkov, Sean Monahan, Bo Horvat, Seth Jones, Rasmus Ristolainen, Elias Lindholm From 2014: Aaron Ekblad, Sam Reinhart, Leon Draisaitl, William Nylander, Dylan Larkin, Robby Fabbri, Nikolaj Ehlers, David Pastrnak From 2015: Connor McDavid, Jack Eichel, Mitchell Marner, Zach Werenski, Noah Hanifin, Ivan Provorov From 2016: Auston Matthews, Patrik Laine, Jesse Puljujarvi, Matthew Tkachuk However, that being said; I have a team in Game World Clapper and the propsects in those drafts have been much, much better than the propsects in Fishbowl in terms of overall rating, growth, and impact.

I find this quite odd, especially because my team is in the SHL currently and has decently skilled players. It seems that so many players have their heights under 5 foot 8 (172 cm), and weigh nothing close to 200 pounds / 90 kg. I assume that all players rated 81 or above (green players) are world class. This is how they are recognized in the FIFA video game series. World class hockey players, whether they are in the NHL or KHL, are 90% of the time 5'10"-5'11" tall or more., from what I know. I've seen countless examples of 81 of higher rated players that are 5 foot 5, and it just baffles me. These players will never put up good numbers regardless of their ratings because of their height. They will literally be crushed by tall players. Yes I know, there sometimes are small players that are good (Martin St. Louis, Johnny Gaudreau), but very few are generally good. Here are a few examples of world class players in GHL Fishbowl that would not play in the NHL just because of their height and weight: http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16404 Rating: 88 Height: 5'5" Weight: 137lbs Position: F http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16230 Rating: 87 Height: 5'5" Weight: 146lbs Position: D http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=32174 Rating: 85 Height: 5'6" Weight: 148lbs Position: F Players like this very rarely occur in hockey, but at a huge level in GPHM. Another seemingly useless bit of information is the 'dirty' trait in goalies. It really makes no sense to add that to a goalie, and I see no difference between a respectful goalie, tough goalie, agitator goalie, etc.

Winner instinct is a bit confusing for me as well. I have only 3 players that I consider starters that are anxious or nervous in big games, 5 if you count the backup goalie and an extra forward. I assumed that the 'big games' trait would determine my team's winner instinct, but it appears it isn't so simple. My team's winner instinct is 'ok', even though the majority of my players are heroic, determined, and stable. After scouting through other teams and looking at their starting player's personality traits; the winner instinct statistic appears to be more or less random. Some teams may have many players that are anxious but they still manage to have a strong winner instinct. While others have many of their players being heroic, but their winner instinct is not strong-heroic. Based on this, making an educated guess; I would say that having too many heroic or determined players doesn't lower your team's winner instinct. After I built my team for the SHL (this season), only 3 players I have that start more or less every game were on my BHL team the season prior. Further, my team had a strong winner instinct until I traded away my captain. He was influential, growing and captaining my team in our IHL and BHL title wins. His notable traits were arrogant, nervous, and commander. I traded him away for salary reasons, and the team's winner instinct dropped because of one player. Therefore, I think a team with all new faces needs to 'grow' a winner's instinct. By this I mean the players need to play a while with each other before a winning culture is established.