.png.89070b1700d17dc29d5856f05a15adea.png)
MattBerserkers
-
Content Count
488 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Posts posted by MattBerserkers
-
-
In brief, it just means looking for patterns in the game whether it's good or bad. Anders can analyze what players are doing and make game development decisions based on that. For example (don't quote me on this, I have no idea if it's true), he might've seen that almost all managers were keeping their players on hard training. He probably considered that a problem as it meant there weren't high enough consequences that forces managers to go easier on their players. He's gonna try and remedy that by increasing player fatigue while on hard training and decrease the performance of an exhausted player. Managers will analyze the game to figure out what works and what doesn't. For example, what stats give a player better performance in your lineup and tactics. You've probably done a little bit of analyzing yourself.
-
Just made an early pre release of the upcoming v1.3.1. You won't see any big changes right now, but please report back any oddities you may find (it's quite untested).
New features
- New hidden trait: Current ability (not yet complete). This new trait allows players to go into longer slumps or into longer streaks. These slumps or streaks will not be visible in player ratings, only in stats and in game performance (analysis). What may cause or break a slump depends on player’s individual profile. Some examples: transactions (trade, free agent signings, releases), injuries, general happiness concerns, game performance.
Improvements and bug fixes
- Endurance update.
- Increase penalty for exhausted players.
- Increase endurance penalty for hard training
That's a cool new feature. Hopefully I can get some hot streaks in the playoffs
Also, +1 to the endurance update, there are almost no players that I need to take off of hard training. The increased penalty is also good, I hope it stops more goalies from playing 60 games a season and still being a top goalie in the league.
-
Gameworld: Lumber
player: http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=34021
teams: http://www.gameplanhockey.com/all-teams?gpid=723and http://www.gameplanhockey.com/team?gpid=80
The player, Almlof, was on my team last season and I assigned him to an affiliate. Now that the season has switched over, he's been released from my club but still appears on my affiliate team. He's also now been signed by a BHL team and now appears to be playable by both teams. I'm not yet sure if he can actually be playing games for both teams yet, but it's looking possible. I also don't know if the player would disappear from my affiliate should the other team chose to assign the player to their own affiliate.
-
Just wait until day 1 and it'll fix itself. There is a period in between being promoted and the game still thinking that you are to yet to be promoted. In lower leagues, you get extra salary space that you can use (btw, knowingly using and abusing this is cheating), but in the GHL it behaves weirdly. I forget what salary the game thinks you should have, but obviously, it's not enough.
I've seen this bug reported before, but I don't think Anders has found a way to fix it. Good luck in the GHL!
-
I suggested the same thing a long time ago. +1 that it should be a thing.
-
If the reason is to prevent people from hoarding players on their farm teams, then perhaps the minor league contract should just simply count for more than the 10% it currently does to the primary team. Hoarding isn't "free", it still costs 10%. However, if it were 25% (pick any number higher than 20%), then I think it would be hard for a manager to hoard. (3-4 farm players equal 1 primary contract). That's not exactly hoarding. Plus, I like the idea of having fluid and experimental lineups. If I have to worry every time I send down a 24+ old player about waivers, then it defeats the purpose of having the farm team for anything other than prospects who already play in appropriate level leagues.
I'm not 100% against waivers, I just haven't yet been convinced how it would be more fun than hassle in our leagues.
The reason I like the idea was because it would allow for the same experimentality that you like, but not let the top teams get too far ahead by hiding top players others might covet. That's also part of what was going through my head when I suggested that waivers should be clauses. Making a player unclaimable would give managers a safety in their mind that they can play a guy more games but would obviously come at a higher cost.
Now that I think about it, the cost wouldn't be that much if you plan on demoting the player. Maybe the percent of salary that counts towards cap could be increased with a players age. Ex: 18-22 year olds in minors take 10% of cap, 23-27 year olds take 20% of cap, etc. Maybe after it could also go back down after a certain age. Another option could be to include the percent of cash that a player will earn should he be sent down to the minors. But that might start to clutter contract screen and I do like the games simple design. I'm just spit-balling ideas here.
-
I've only ever done the most basic of coding, but I don't see why it would break anything else or be difficult. Wouldn't it literally be something like
function waiver_eligibility
if age >= 24 or games_played > 60
player is waiver eligible
else
player is not eligible
To me, adding conditions would be pretty simple, especially compared to everything else which I have no idea how to even approach. But as I said earlier, I think it's fine anyway as long as I can easily check how far away a player would be from waivers.
-
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.
Adding conditions shouldn't be hard to code. My reasoning earlier was so that managers wouldn't have to spend time figuring out how many GHL, SHL, etc. a player has played/been on the roster for. But now that I think about it, a player could be given a counter somewhere on his page that lets managers know how many games a player has played.
I'm fine either way.
-
RFAs
in Suggestions
Unless I am missing something, isn't the current system exactly like that except better for a team? The "RFA" period is currently the same as the playoffs and is technically better as you can offer players of all ages a contract. Other teams are also unable to make any contract offers to your players.
-
The problem I see with this is that you can just "replace" players you don't want in your team if they get injured and then don't have to pay their salary for the rest of the season. Preparing for injuries should be a normal precaution when building your team, so having 1-2 extra players per spot signed to step in if needed. The same way it's done in NHL currently.
Good point, but remember that things like Robidas Island, Chicago getting the extra space in playoffs a few years ago and Chicago again getting to get off paying consequences for Hossa retiring early, so they have the same problems with the injury reserve.
A solution could be to force players to pull the players who are healed and been healed while on IR the longest first. There's enough injuries that eventually a manager will go "shit, I really need that guy" and find a way to get to him or else suffer the consequences.
-
How are you finding the new season of GoT so far?
-
I guess I'll get my post here as well...
-
I don't really agree with this. What happens when the player gets back from injury if you have signed a new player during that time and you would be over the cap?
I say that that the player on IR should be forced to stay on IR until there is free space. Although all players should come off of IR at the end of a season to prevent managers from using it as a way around older, declining players on a multi-year deal.
-
Honestly, I'd prefer that this game not 100% copy everything the NHL does. It's fun to have a unique system, but if we are comparing everything to the NHL, I'll play along.
Yes, like NHLers...When they got a 1way clause they are sure to not play in AHL... as long they not put on waivers....
If it's like the NHL, then a 1-way contract after waivers would mean that the player is still getting paid the same as though they were in the NHL. But yes, they can go on waivers.
Where the system need to change...it is in contract negotiation. Whatever the overall, all player need to ask more for sign one way contract... Like, as soon a player reach 24 years old he asking for one way. Two way contract need to be set ALWAYS as 3years or less.
Why should it be age dependent? Older fringe players don't deserve one-ways. In the NHL, you wouldn't give John Scott a one-way contract, when he is signed, he gets a two-way contract because he would barely play on any roster. I do like the idea about two-ways being 3 years or less. It would prevent stupidly good manager-friendly contracts that let teams have a main team and an affiliate full of 85 overall and better players, not that it's a problem yet.
So only young player (under 24) or old player (over 34) would be willing to sign a two way. And it up to you to sign a 24 yo player 1way with a "lowest" overal in your team for any purpose. So this way, mostly you will let them sign in lower league if not be sure to can play them or at least keep in your roster (roster need to be limited too, between 22 to 25 players... depend the level of league.. 25 in low and Iron league, 23 BHL,SHL, and only 22 in GHL)
Honestly, roster limits only hurt computer teams. The majority of managers who have played a few seasons already limit their teams to less than 22. The affiliates will probably get the remaining manager teams to a small number. I'm neutral on this.
And i repeat, have to put in waivers a player that you have sign as two way it would be sooooo ridiculous...
Why would it be ridiculous? Two-way contracts in the NHL are all waiver eligible. As Bremitt mentioned earlier, their waiver system is based on age and number of games that players were on a roster. It's part of why I was suggesting different levels of waiver eligibility through clauses as an alternate system.
edit: For whatever reason, I feel like I'm being an ass in this post -- don't take it like that, I'm just trying to bring arguments to help develop better ideas.
-
Nope, that's not how it works right now. You play 3 games no matter what, and whoever wins at least 2 moves on. I agree that if you win the majority of the games, your round should end then and there for injury reasons. Although playoffs are getting revamped soon, so that may change.
-
If they have no interest, they have no interest. If they have any interest, keep trying. I find some players won't want to sign one hour, but will the next and then won't the next if you don't offer anything. Once you time the offer correctly, usually you will be able to successfully sign the player, the other odd times he will end up declining the contract after a few days and you will be back to stage 1. There's not a way to know when a time frame might open up, it's just about being on the right screen at the right time. It's just part of the pains of having a team full of guys slightly too good for your league.
-
Waivers could be neat. I think that they should definitely just be based on age just to keep things simple. I also have mixed feelings about lower leagues being able to claim the waivers as backup players might have a hard time staying where they signed which would get somewhat annoying. Maybe players could get a new clause in their contract that enables/disables waivers. And maybe for two leagues as in a same league waiver eligibility and a lower league waiver eligibility.
Another option would be to have two different ages for the different waiver claims. Say at 23 years old a player becomes waiver eligible in the same league and at 25 the player becomes waiver eligible in the league below. Although I still think players should get a clause that states whether they are waiver eligible or not. I'd really hate for any older backups to be constantly taken by teams in the league below me.
Also, no players should be able to be claimed by a someone in a higher league. I don't foresee any managers putting really good players on to waivers and so higher league teams claiming lower league team's players would mostly just be for trolling.
I don't like your idea about forfeiting games. If injured players are to become exempt from the cap, they should be forced to say on the injured reserve until the manager clears enough cap to allow the injured player back into the club.
-
RFAs
in Suggestions
Honestly, it sucks losing young players, but I don't think RFA's should be a thing in this game. It's already easy for good teams to build a big pool of prospects and the new affiliate teams will help in developing these prospects into really good players. Adding RFA's into the mix would let the big teams hoard the best players at supposedly cheaper prices (where else can they go as an RFA?) and make it nearly impossible for newcomers to a higher division. It's already a small problem for the oldest worlds. No RFA's make it so that teams are forced to let go of some talent for salary reasons which allows for talent to be spread out and overall give everybody a chance at becoming a good team faster.
It's a good idea, but I just don't think it would work very well in the both the top and bottom tiers.
As for your second post, I think it's interesting. I think the way the system currently works is that players are more willing to sign with a team with more reputation. I don't think a managers reputation really matters. Maybe a team getting a new manager could change that team's reputation to be something like "Fresh management" and give the reputation equal status to "Legendary" in a league. Then it would expire after a couple in-game days. I doubt it would give any major advantage that encourages cheating, but it would give that new manager that player that is slightly better and might be able to change a teams fortune.
-
Here's a similar thing in Fishbowl. I just noticed a different team in the SHL but it's page is glitching and the pop down menu says it's controlled by the computer.
-
Can we get a send message button in the action bar of a teams page. I find it a little bit annoying to have to go to a teams page to check a managers name and then to go to my own page to send a new message as soon as I can find that managers name in a big list of a million managers.
I imagine that this would take minimal time to install, so can we please get it? Pretty please!
Mattti0 and IneffableLeafs reacted to this -
In my experience when a tactic is failing, you should change it to something more suitable as soon as you decide it's just not working. A more suitable tactic can be a huge boost to performance if it becomes more suitable to your players. From what you listed, I'd swap your pp tactic because it's not working. Your pk is average, so swapping that may or may not workout.
-
Please keep away from offending other people in the thread.
I'm not trying to offend anyone with this post, but I understand that I'm probably walking on thin ice.
It's a public reference because you made it a public statement, so there is a need. Stop taking offense to things and enjoy this - jeez!
I don't think he's meaning to take offense. He mentioned that he was living in czech, so I don't think his english is his first language and is probably still learning it.
@EXXEO
I haven't called anyone lier. Liar is somebody who willingly and continuously tells untruth. I don't believe he was. But he said lies.
No need to point out my tone ffs..
I think you are misusing the word "lie". He hasn't said anything that he knew was untrue nor has he said anything false so he is not a liar. If you just disagree with him and are arguing your opinion, it's not the right situation to call ineffable's points lies as it can be somewhat insulting. If your listing arguments, it's better to use small phrases such as "first of all / my first point / my first argument/ etc." It just comes off as less rude and prevents everyone from feeling offended.
IneffableLeafs reacted to this -
http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/4122-manager-absence/
From your last login, 48 in-game days until you are fired from the team.
-
Once I'm sure that I am safe from relegation (probably around day 62), most of my 1 year deal players will be available for trade. The only exception is Engstrom.
Notable GHL players include:
Eser Heinze - center - 90 ovr - 1 year remaining - 5.5 mil - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=23236
Vit Kreiger - left defenseman - 90 ovr - 1 year remaining - 3.9 mil - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16336
Derik Fridley - goalie - 89 ovr - 2 years remaining - 6.3mil - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/goalie?gpid=2193
For any SHL managers looking for that extra umph, here's a list for you guys: (note: i'm posting SHL salaries)
Gavin Hasse - right forward - 86 ovr - 1 year remaining - 500k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=17211
Shawn Roosevelt - right forward - 83 ovr - 1 year remaining - 2.5mil - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=17825
Vlademar Ruzicka - left forward - 83 ovr - 2 years remaining - 500k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=17856
Youssef Hunter - left forward - 83 ovr - 1 year remaining - 337k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16480
Ignac Slozil - right defenseman - 82 ovr - 2 years remaining - 585k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16119
Mattis Hodell - left defenseman - 81 ovr - 1 year remaining - 880k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=22994
Milos Kudor - right defenseman - 83 ovr - 1 year remaining - 617k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=16947
Loik Gilpin - goalie - 82 ovr - 4 years remaining - 225k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/goalie?gpid=5217
*For a higher price Alexander Eristov can be available - right defenseman - 2 years remaining - 11k - http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=32263
As I am a new to the GHL and looking to build up my team, picks are preferred and prospects are a close second. I can take on some salary, but that will be limited. Message me in-game or send a trade offer if you are at all interested. Good luck to all of you!
.png)
S11
in Biscuit
Posted
wait until post-free agency and you can underpay
. Downside is that the best of the best players are already taken, so I doubt it would work in the GHL. I just earned a promotion from BHL doing that (Parkville Guardians).