MattBerserkers

Lol, spoke a bit too soon about my own luck. I just over-payed big-time in a trade for a player and now he's 32 days injured out for the season. Plus I wasn't gonna resign him, I'm a little bit peeved that I only got 2 games out of him for what I payed, but whatever.

You're just having an unlucky season. In the past 32 days this Fishbowl season, I've only had a single injury to my main squad team and it was a 1-day injury. Past seasons I've lost pretty much my entire defence plus a few forwards and centers with varying lengths of injury time in a span of 10ish days. Injuries are all about luck, but you can mitigate that by looking at a player's recent history. Injury prone players tend to have multiple injuries listed.

Wow, I wonder why I got so many penalties, this is definitely an outlier. But yeah, they were all powerplay goals.

Either the minuses aren't registering against my team or my team doesn't hop onto the ice until my backup is put in net. Considering my starting goalie performance drop, I'm kind of hoping for the latter Moved to Q&A since it's not a bug. -jusatin

Are you also playing the Pinewood Lumberjacks? I'm starting to wonder if GoalieMakesEasySave.exe is working for my team.

My guess is that its because the GHL has only just recently filled up in the past few seasons. It's not that difficult to earn promotion if your only facing AI's and therefore most people that got promoted into the SHL would then get promoted again into the GHL the next year. Now that the GHL is pretty much full, there are now human managers both being promoted into and demoted into the SHL which means that the number of people entering the SHL is finally bigger than the number of people exiting the SHL. And then there's also the occasional people that quit, but that happens in every league and I think the past season or two have all had an AI team get promoted into the SHL. When I first started in the LIHL, the GHL was roughly as full as the SHL is now, so it's not that bad. Also the reason the LIHL/IHL/BHL leagues are always nearly full is because anybody can join those leagues. Compare that to the SHL and GHL where managers either have a lot of experience which lets them just join a team or else have earned promotion which will take many months to do in Fishbowl depending on which league that you started in.

Yeah, I don't know why he is performing so bad. Maybe try to go after the Reapers goalie Giertl who is performing pretty decently despite being on a bad team. My opinion is that Bardou + a pick should be a fair trade considering both of their performances so far in a similar amount of games but behind entirely different teams. Another option would be to try switching your defensive tactics up. You've got fringe GHLers on your team and those players might be good enough that they are able to hide the fact that your defensive tactic is currently getting beat.

I think world class also requires a minimum number of games played. In fishbowl, I went in successive seasons starting in the LIHL all the way to the GHL and don't yet have world class status, however in Lumber, my account had done the same thing, except got stuck in silver for a few seasons and earned a world class reputation before making it to the GHL

Ugh, my backup prospect goalie, Chevrier, can't make a save for his life. But I need to play him because I want him to develop and I have a feeling that getting the occasional GHL game is better development than an affiliate at his current talent level. Maybe my goalie rotation should look like 2 games Konchesky, 1 game Chevrier and 1 game Stafford. Or else send Chevrier down, but bring him back up whenever I noticed that I am playing a team with bad scoring ability. What do you guys think?

Lol why can't I get your team right. But I see why, most teams had a bunch of assigned players and few goalies while you have 2 assigned players and a number of goalies, so I mistakenly grabbed your best affilîate rather than goalie. I'll fix that later today.

Fixed it, I guess I just forgot to write it down. I'm surprised about 3 things; 1. How far Urbancrest fell 5 places in the rankings and they are actually better now than last season. 2. How high Wynward ranks after having just been in the SHL for a season. 3. The fact that my team ranks a bit better than last year even though I just let 2 of my best players fall into free agency (they were old) and didn't grab any equal replacements in free agency. I thought that I would start off a bit worse but than progress fast with my young core.

Here, I had some free time so I decided to once again do the Fishbowl Power Rankings for this new season.The formula is the same for total overall average as past season (offensive players + 2 * defensive players + best goaltender)/25. Rather than just chose the top players from each team, I selected players in order as your regular lineup or a swap of players if there is a stronger injured player and then filled any remaining holes with the top scratched/affiliated players. I've also done an average for height (in cm as it's easier) excluding goalies as I was curious. 1. Larson Knights - Kelvin. off: 89.58 def: 92.17 goal: 93 ovr: 90.96 Average height: off: 187.58 def:186.83 avg: 187.93 Previous position: 4th, Golden Cup 2. Horn Lake Hooligans - Mike Grubb off:88.75 def: 90.83 goal: 98 ovr: 90.12 Average height: off: 187.25 def:187.12 avg: 187.22 Previous Position: 3rd 3. Hawkeyes Revolution - MProust off: 88.67 def: 90.83 goal: 91 ovr: 89.8 Average height: off: 187.5 def: 183.5 avg: 186.17 Previous position: 1st 4. Cuba City Eagles - Mare Maro off: 88.42 def: 89.33 goal: 89 ovr: 88.88 Average height: off: 185.17 def: 185.83 avg: 185.39 Previous position: 6th 5. Montmorency Vortex - ineffableleafs off: 87.33 def: 89.17 goal: 94 ovr: 88.48 Average Height: off: 185.67 def: 181.5 avg: 184.28 Previous position: 8th 6.Wynward Wildfire - Matthew Bernsten off: 87.58 def: 89 goal: 88 ovr: 88.28 Average height: off: 185.5 def: 192 avg: 187.67 Previous position: SHL 1st 7. Pinewood Lumberjacks - MattLumberjacks off: 87.67 def: 88.5 goal: 90 ovr: 88.16 Average height: off: 189.58 def: 186.17 avg: 188.44 Previous position: 12th 8. Wolfe Wolves - Marcel Cloutier off: 87.33 def: 88.67 goal: 91 ovr: 88.12 Average height: off: 182.42 def: 184.83 avg: 183.22 Previous position: 12th 9. Wildwood Violent Rush - Keskustankeisari off: 86.92 def: 89 goal: 91 ovr: 88.08 Average height: off: 190.42 def: 180.33 avg: 187.06 Previous position: 5th 10. Urbancrest Comets - Noah High off: 87.58 def: 87.33 goal: 96 ovr: 87.8 Average height: off: 186.58 def: 187 avg: 186.72 Previous position: 2nd 11/12. Cedar Rapid Panthers - Mauri Nieminen off: 88.92 def: 85.17 goal: 90 ovr: 87.16 Average height: off: 187.75 def: 187.83 avg: 187.78 Previous position: 12th 11/12. Sellwood Spirit - Misco Grossi off: 87.58 def: 87.33 goal: 89 ovr: 87.16 Average height: off: 191.75 def: 192.17 avg: 191.89 Previous position: 10th 13. Molson Monkeys - Nathan Macdonald off: 86.17 def: 87.83 goal: 90 ovr: 87.12 Average height: off: 181.17 def: 180 avg: 180.78 Previous position: SHL 2nd 14. Portland Cyclones - Zach Furness off: 85.83 def: 87 goal: 91 ovr: 86.6 Average height: off: 179.67 def: 175.67 avg: 178.33 Previous position: 14th 15. Bleinheim Pirates - Martin J. off: 85.92 def: 85.67 goal: 92 ovr: 86.04 Average height: off: 188.92 def: 179.17 avg: 185.67 Previous position: 7th 16. Jolly Rattlers - computer off: 85.83 def: 85.67 goal: 88 ovr: 85.54 Average height: off: 186.83 def: 192.17 avg: 188.61 Previous position: 13th League average team overall: 88.025 Leave average team height: 186.03

Imo, I don't think that would work as well. If we consider just lowering the cap, that wouldn't have affected the situation Senet got into in Dangles. He had over 50 guys, but kept adding more as there was always somebody that could be sent down and last I checked, while he had over 50 guys, he had over 7m in free space remaining. A different % would make a better than reducing the salary cap difference, but then at a number like 50% I see teams being forced between having some decent backups and a small prospect pool or else a decent prospect pool and some weak, injuries take me out of the competition, backups. I think managers should be able to have a chance to acquire a decent prospect pool and some viable backup players. A lower % than 50% would definitely work, but it'd take some trial and error to get perfect. With a roster limit, we can just check for teams that strike a good balance between the regular roster players, prospects and backup players but don't have an enormous number of players and then decide what the cutoff should be. Looking around at teams, I'm agreeing that a limit of 40-45 guys would be good. I don't think it would at all limit promoted teams from sticking in the new league. If they gave away 1-ways and promotion clauses like candy and are forced to hit the roster limit and still not have a viable team in their new league, then that was bad management in the previous year and they should suffer the consequences of too many bad contracts. If they just barely sign enough viable players, then they'd be in a similar situation to a team that might have a preference of many strong backup players rather than lots of prospects which would be a competitive team. If they didn't give anybody promotion clauses or 1-ways, then they'd basically be rewarded by being able to do what they want in the first season.

I've got a couple alternative suggestions involving no computer trading if the community supports it: The first option would be to just block computer in SHL and GHL. I remember when I was new and initially completely against blocking computer trades, it was because there weren't many active human managers so the majority of my potential trading partners was the AI. But once you hit the SHL, most human managers are active and therefore it's easier to find a human trading partner. I think this is a potential option would prevent any managers being cut off from participating in any trades. My other option would be that the game keeps track of the number of active human managers in each league. If say 1/3 (maybe a larger percentage would be better?) of the managers are active, computer trading would be disabled in that league. Vacationing managers should count towards the non-active managers. Whenever the system automatically switches between abling/disabling computer trading it would notify all league managers through messages just to keep everyone updated on rules. This option would also eliminate the chance that disabled computer trades block any manager from participating in a major part of the game. The messages might break a bit more realism, but in my opinon it's an acceptable trade-off to keep everything fair.

Team? And does the game currently consider you to be on holiday? I have a feeling that you've got the same bug happening as Patches and a few other Howitzer teams.

It doesn't make much sense to lower it only for gold. It should be kept consistent especially because what would happen if a promoted silver team brought 46+ contracts to the GHL?

I think people have mentioned this idea slightly in other threads, but would it possible to get some sort of roster limit? My idea would be 50 players to match the NHL. The main reason for it is that it would reduce the amount of player hoarding that a team could by hiding salary on affiliates to an amount of players that would contain regular roster players, a backup player or two for each position and some prospects.

Honestly, I find computer trading to be pretty good now. But because there aren't really many players yet and because the ones that do exist seem undervalued, I wouldn't be against disabling computer trading to try it out as long as it can come back in a few seasons.

I've traded with a lower league many times and I accept that I will probably 'lose' the trade. But I don't know if you can technically lose the trade if the guy you are giving away no longer has a chance to make your team. I've also noticed that when teams are trading down and 'losing', they are typically receiving an asset back that has a high potential, but a low chance of hitting it. I agree that the affiliates have made it harder to stick in a new league, but I'm not sure waivers are the answer. Anyone a GHL team would want to send down, an SHL team would want to pick him up. And anyone an SHL team would want to send down, a BHL team would want to pick him up, etc. It would make affiliates useless. One suggestion I previously brought up to add multiple waiver clauses to contracts that could let sent down players be claimed by teams in the same league and another one to that would let lower tier teams claim the player. An alternate suggestion to waivers that I think could also work is player loans, but that also has some potential to be abused by higher tier teams without some rules against them.

So to start, I've typed out something similar before in similar suggestion threads but can't seem to find any of them, so I'll just say it again. Also, I've played in the LIHL/IHL many times and have earned promotion many times, so I can kind of understand where you are coming from. The problem with completely reversing the order is that the draft would become 100% useless for the SHL and GHL (BHL would stay at the same spot). The 1st round of the LIHL currently picks players around 60ish overall, if that were to become the GHL 1st round pick, nobody would make the league. No players are really given a chance in the league of "experienced" worlds until they are at least ~82 overall. And none of them will have a fast growth either that might be able to push them to the GHL by 21 -- they all would've been picked before the 1st round of the GHL teams. It's also a potential problem for the LIHL. They'd be getting the best players, but who cares. The league would devolve into a lottery for whoever was luckiest and got the best draft picks. Free agents wouldn't matter because drafted guys would all be at a level far above all of them that they could play the majority of the game and still have their team do well. It is also something the player would not want. If signed, the best players are now making 12k? versus the 500k they would have been making in the GHL. Also, since the competition worse, their own progress will slow down as well, no player would want that. The bad players (now GHL prospects) also wouldn't enjoy at as while they might've got plenty of ice time in the LIHL, they aren't going to even touch a contract in the GHL. I haven't seen your 1st round thing suggested before, but I think it suffers the same problems. LIHL would get a chance at players that would be league-breaking whilst the higher leagues only get one useful pick. The current method is pretty good as it allows all teams to draft a player that can compete in their current league yet allows each team to draft a player that had tons of potential that could be in the next league. Anyways, I disagree with the goal of your post -- that teams should be able to lots to offer to higher league teams. If they had guys the league above might want, the teams in the higher league should've signed them first during the off-season. If not, there wouldn't be any difference between the leagues, they'd all have similar talent +/- 1 overall. And if you want to add picks to just trade them to higher leagues, I also think that wouldn't work out. Ignoring that the picks would probably kept for the insanely strong players for a league in the draft, lower tier teams would get a fortune for their high picks that I could see morphing the league winner into whoever got motherload of a return for their pick.

Boom, that part about later draft picks usually not being able to make the NHL was actually my final point that slipped my mind! You brought it up, so I won't bother editing my post.

I disagree. I've successfully built a few lumber LIHL teams using the unwanted 3rd rounders of higher divisions, so I'll try to explain. a) The average isn't that good of a tool in the lower leagues and with the recent update, should give the highest picks a bit more variation. I arbitrarily just looked at the Fishbowl 1st round IHL expected picks. The highest rated was 65 overall and the lowest was 49 overall. Sure the average is 60, but anyone who does their due diligence can grab a guy that makes the team within a couple seasons. The development is often a lot faster on your own team if players are given a chance. I managed to sign a 64ish overall player in the LIHL on my last lumber team who was originally a 3rd round SHL pick. 2 seasons later, he was 79 overall and should have been an SHLer but had to stick with me for a couple more seasons. What I'm saying is that players don't need to be league ready a couple seasons after they are drafted. It doesn't usually work like that in the NHL and shouldn't work like that here. c) This is a bit of a continuation from the last point, but I've found guys have a potential relevant to where they are drafted. That 49 overall guy I mentioned earlier will likely end up in the IHL or even BHL if given a chance. But if those players were not LIHL picks like you want, they'd quickly outgrow the league and you'd have a bigger issue of players leaving as soon as their entry level expires. (I'll add that some people already find it an issue that their own drafted stars already often want to leave for greener pastures.) Sure this could be mitigated by proportionally reducing the number of draftees, but then we'd be in your same problem of having what looks like useless picks. d) I had one more point but have forgotten it, I'll edit this post if it comes back.

While exploring the new world, I've noticed every affiliate team ordered like logo/nickname then team location.

I should add, I've never found anything negative coming from too many arrogant players -- until this season when I ignored the trait completely. It wasn't visible anywhere, I had great team chemistry, winner's instinct, and confidence even though I was winning an average of 3/10 games. I tried everything and eventually decided to get rid of a few of my arrogant players. My luck turned around and a number of games I was winning doubled.

Too many nervous players will destroy your team's winner's instinct and hurt confidence. I'm not exactly sure what lazy actually does, but I've been using lazy players as backup/scratched players and they don't get as upset.