MattBerserkers

I wouldn't mind this. I do recall that affiliate will actually use the same tactics as your main squad, but the lineups thing could definitely be helpful. I've noticed that most of my assigned players end up tired or even exhausted just because the AI plays the better players for far too many minutes and doesn't ever rest them.

Wait, so the player traits can shift now or is regression based on player traits?

Yeah, the finance screen isn't working 100% on the trade screen as it currently treats it as though all salary movement is being done with everybody on the main team. Although, I am pretty sure that it is fixed with the next update.

I'm not 100% getting your numbers and I don't have a biscuit world to check, so I'll just make some up that I think match your situation. Say you have a guy making 20k/year with 2 years left on his 2-way contract and your remaining cap space is 50k this year and 60k next year. If you assign him, you will be paying 2k/year and your cap space will be increased to 68k this year and 78k next year. If you cut him, you will be paying 10k/year and your cap space will be increased to 60k this year and 70k next year. If you assign him and then cut him, you will be paying 10k/year and your cap space will be increased to 68k and then reduced to 60k this year and 78k to 70k next year. Essentially, it's cheaper to keep 2-way guys you don't want to leave them in the minors then it is to release them. 1-way guys, however, are different as they can't be assigned and therefore if you need to get rid of them, you have to cut them.

If I set a guy that badly needs training in to say physical to be a powerforward, will that increase his training speed for his physicality trait? Or would it remain constant as though he were left as a sniper?

It's working properly today.

Was he assigned before you cut him?

Whenever I am shortlisting a player in Lumber, I am getting the bug page and message. However, when I go to check my shortlisted, the players are still properly there. edit: Nevermind, they aren't listed there when I checked again.

So if I sign a bunch of older 80 overall guys to my team to up the average, would that normalize an 80 overall prospect's development? Or would I need the entire league to do something like that?

I'm curious, at what point will player development slow down while guys are assigned?

I know, I'm just saying that the buyout option is pretty much useless now for 2-way guys.

Should the buyout cap penalty be adjusted? Right now it's pretty pointless as it is a lot cheaper just to hide players in your minors for 10% of their salary versus the 50% cost it would take to buy them out for an equal number of years. I do think it should stay a little more expensive as some teams might be forced to buy out guys to give younger players some ice time, maybe 15%-25% would be a better range. This change should only affect 2-way guys as 1-way guys can't be hidden in the minors for a cheaper cost.

This season is pretty close in the GHL. Most teams are a game away from jumping or falling a few spots. And a small streak of bad luck could put any of the bottom 9 teams into relegation spot and there are still a number of teams that have a realistic chance for the #1 spot. I can't wait to see how it plays out.

I just looked at your team and he can't go down because he is on a one-way contract.

You'll need to mention your team name and world so that Anders can find and fix the trade glitch.

But that is exactly the situation that I don't really want. As I said earlier, skills/stats are well documented and every team should easily be able to quickly find a player that fits their skill requirements. But personality traits are different; you don't know what a guy is like until you meet him, and the current method of having to click on players to see their traits is a decent alternative to interviewing a guy as I doubt most people would like to actually converse with every player to find out what they are like. Another argument is the fact that everybody would try and pick up role-model-type players. Sure some "blue traits" would be searched for to keep a team balanced, but that still ignores a bunch of players. You mentioned earlier in another comment that there would be a bunch of good players excluded simple due to having a bad trait, but does that really matter? Older leagues have a glut of players and I am sure that everybody is able to find that perfect player to add to their team. The current method forces managers to click each player and manually look for the traits they want. But because I don't see most managers sifting through more than 30 players trying to find the perfect guys, unperfect players are often given a chance to sign and play on a team. Also, what would be the point of even having traits in this game if every manager just signed perfect players? Mentalities would just become a moot feature of this game.

I don't like the idea of searching for personality traits. I look at it like this, I'm searching for players based upon their skill/stats I have no idea what their personality is going to be like. The stats are given data that's collected, personality traits, not so much. When I then click on a player to view his traits, it's like I am giving him a small interview to find out what his personality is like and then can decide if he fits in my teams culture. I enjoy games where everything is not just searchable and people have to do a little work, I think personality is something that doesn't belong in that searchable category. Height and weight are just numbers, I wouldn't mind those being searchable.

This post should really be in suggestions. Anyways... I like the idea. A similar thing that I thought of when I abandoned the Cherhill Chieftens in Lumber to experiment in the LIHL would be is if the AI could players that I listed as untradeable and keep them there. Managers that make players untouchable usually have a good reason for doing so and it doesn't make much sense that the AI is then willing to trade the stud a few days later. To be direct, I am saying that the computer shouldn't unlist any players from the untradable block until their contract expires or is extended. At best, AI keeps the players that human managers wouldn't consider moving and at worst, everybody is locked up and it's impossible for the AI to make any trades. But if I think a little, I can recall that there were many managers asking for that in the past and so I see that problem as a non-issue.

I think it's the same thing happening in that previous merged thread. Today I did notice a long pause between two games being simulated; there wasn't really a pause between other game simulations that I noticed. The pause I noticed was between the kings game and the tigers game in LIHL.

I'm prepared to swap backups if you really want to tank and save 1mil. I guarantee that he'll lose half the games he plays while keeping your starter tired do to having to play most of a game anyway. I do like that all those top goaltending prospects fell from the top ranks of the draft rankings, and I don't have any young, promising centers. This will be a good draft if I lose my losing streak and not get relegated.

Copying Paul T in biscuit, I thought it would be cool to see where everybody's teams are located! I only did the GHL, but I might do the SHL in the future. I definitely won't be doing the other leagues as they get changed quite a bit.

Lol, you've been so close so many times! Although I doubt you will get the 16th place LIHL team. The manager designed the team to get 0 points probably to raise a team from "nothing". The Uniontown Wolves (15th place) is currently available. Good luck with your new endeavor!

I think that I'm going to copy this for Fishbowl!

Wow! I haven't ever noticed that Frankenstein-Shrek logo!

Honestly, there are mixed feelings in the community about these sorts of trades and there are some past threads with a lot of arguing. Some managers think that it's completely fair because the game accepts the trade. In my opinion, that's a bad argument as the needed perfect coding is really difficult to do and isn't quite there yet. Although Anders has made it more difficult to abuse. Others say it's cheating or unfair as people are often trading quantity for quality and stripping teams that make it really difficult for new managers to get a competitive team when they first join. How I try to evaluate trades (with the AI) is: 1) AI has top pick or prospect, leave it. 2) Are you trading final year guys for a guy that will be a core player for many years to come? That's blatant robbery, don't do it. 3) I've noticed that typically with trading with AI, it's a quantity for quality type deal, that's not necessarily bad, but how fair is it? A bunch of dud prospects for a star? That's typically a major loss for the AI. A 78 Defenseman and a 79 forward for an 80 forward, that's probably a fair trade with AI, but double check their contracts. 4) If I was AI, would I accept? If I have 5 good centers and 1 good defenseman and someones offering me a really good center for that single defenseman, I wouldn't accept it. Keeping the defenseman is more important than another center, even if he is better. These aren't rules, just guidelines that I am trying to follow. Ultimately, just ask yourself if the trade is fair. If you're feeling unsure, just leave it, there's a ton of other good players available that you can chase after instead.