MattBerserkers

Just to confirm, we have now made a change so new free agents will only be generated during pre season. And as was already the case, only if there’s a very low number of available free agents.
 
The reason for generating new free agents in the first place was to let the system calibrate itself and generate new players as long as there was need for them. But I realize this caused more trouble than good.
 
Thanks for all the feedback!

There should be NO Free Agents after the initial list generation at the beginning of the season UNLESS a player gets cut!  Having these random players show up is ONLY going to reward players that have hours a day to follow the FA list, which is unfair to the majority of players.  I'm not faulting the manager that picked up the latest one, but the SYSTEM!  This is almost as bad as pay-for-play style systems.  The point of GPHM is that we all compete as managers evenly on that skill level, not on how much time we can devote to the game (stats analysis not included).  

This. Any sort of FA spawning should be kept to minimum, and timed at one certain point (start) of a season.
 
The most frustrating thing is when you acquire a player in a trade, and then see a better one magically appear in FA a day later.

I've got 2 suggestions that I hope can be added into that 20 day trade lock rule.
 
1) Entry level players do not have the restriction. They were allowed to be traded as prospects before having signed any deal, it just makes sense to me that they don't have the restriction handed to them as soon as they finally sign a deal.
 
2) This one only applies to mid-season free agent signings. The restriction would essentially be that any free agent signing (preferably entry level contracts excluded) after day 6 would be unable to be assigned to the minors for 20 days. If we go back to the start of Dangles, its big problem was that 1 team was essentially able to sign nearly every free agent with a snowball effect at less than most managers were offering. This was possible for 2 reasons; reputation and the minors. Coming back to when the new updated worlds were released, everybody was given an equal reputation to prevent an unfair advantage to the older managers as well as the managers that played fast worlds over slow worlds. And that worked all fine and dandy as it was mostly best offer gets the player with a little bit of random luck.
 
However, the snowball effect is still possible. Now that the seasons have all begun, the team reputations are shifting up and down to reflect how well teams are doing. The reputation thing itself isn't a bad idea; my issue starts with the fact that I've noticed good free agents popping up and then are snagged by better teams with better offers than some worse off teams made. To me, this is still acceptable since a free agent probably wants to go a more successful team than a team looking towards relegation. Where I really develop a problem with the system is when these rare free agents appear and better teams snag them up and then immediately get assigned to the minors. If a team plays him, fine, I have no issue, but if the player is immediately assigned its basically telling me a manager is being super greedy and signing players just so that other teams cannot sign new free agents and improve themselves. This is rather unfair for managers less fortunate at the start of the season. It also enables the snowball effect to continually exist as managers are able to assign players for a fraction of their cost and then once again make more offers for the limited number of free agents that appear mid season.
 
My reasoning for the 20 day mid-season free agent assignment restriction is that it prevents teams for going after every new free agent solely in an effort to prevent other teams from getting them and essentially abusing the minor system. If a team actually wants to play the player, then the restriction wouldn't really affect the manager as he/she can still do so. I suggest that this happens for only mid-season signings since there is a lot of free agent movement during the preseason and sometimes managers get 2 out of  2 free agents they aimed for while only expecting to possibly get 1. It also makes sense from a players perspective. If a strong free agent can expect to be paid millions, why would he go with a team that's going to immediately assign him to the minors and then only make a few hundred thousand. Yes 1-way/2-way deal exist, but I don't think good players sign 2-way deals expecting to be immediately sent down.

I've got 2 suggestions that I hope can be added into that 20 day trade lock rule.
 
1) Entry level players do not have the restriction. They were allowed to be traded as prospects before having signed any deal, it just makes sense to me that they don't have the restriction handed to them as soon as they finally sign a deal.
 
2) This one only applies to mid-season free agent signings. The restriction would essentially be that any free agent signing (preferably entry level contracts excluded) after day 6 would be unable to be assigned to the minors for 20 days. If we go back to the start of Dangles, its big problem was that 1 team was essentially able to sign nearly every free agent with a snowball effect at less than most managers were offering. This was possible for 2 reasons; reputation and the minors. Coming back to when the new updated worlds were released, everybody was given an equal reputation to prevent an unfair advantage to the older managers as well as the managers that played fast worlds over slow worlds. And that worked all fine and dandy as it was mostly best offer gets the player with a little bit of random luck.
 
However, the snowball effect is still possible. Now that the seasons have all begun, the team reputations are shifting up and down to reflect how well teams are doing. The reputation thing itself isn't a bad idea; my issue starts with the fact that I've noticed good free agents popping up and then are snagged by better teams with better offers than some worse off teams made. To me, this is still acceptable since a free agent probably wants to go a more successful team than a team looking towards relegation. Where I really develop a problem with the system is when these rare free agents appear and better teams snag them up and then immediately get assigned to the minors. If a team plays him, fine, I have no issue, but if the player is immediately assigned its basically telling me a manager is being super greedy and signing players just so that other teams cannot sign new free agents and improve themselves. This is rather unfair for managers less fortunate at the start of the season. It also enables the snowball effect to continually exist as managers are able to assign players for a fraction of their cost and then once again make more offers for the limited number of free agents that appear mid season.
 
My reasoning for the 20 day mid-season free agent assignment restriction is that it prevents teams for going after every new free agent solely in an effort to prevent other teams from getting them and essentially abusing the minor system. If a team actually wants to play the player, then the restriction wouldn't really affect the manager as he/she can still do so. I suggest that this happens for only mid-season signings since there is a lot of free agent movement during the preseason and sometimes managers get 2 out of  2 free agents they aimed for while only expecting to possibly get 1. It also makes sense from a players perspective. If a strong free agent can expect to be paid millions, why would he go with a team that's going to immediately assign him to the minors and then only make a few hundred thousand. Yes 1-way/2-way deal exist, but I don't think good players sign 2-way deals expecting to be immediately sent down.

I've got 2 suggestions that I hope can be added into that 20 day trade lock rule.
 
1) Entry level players do not have the restriction. They were allowed to be traded as prospects before having signed any deal, it just makes sense to me that they don't have the restriction handed to them as soon as they finally sign a deal.
 
2) This one only applies to mid-season free agent signings. The restriction would essentially be that any free agent signing (preferably entry level contracts excluded) after day 6 would be unable to be assigned to the minors for 20 days. If we go back to the start of Dangles, its big problem was that 1 team was essentially able to sign nearly every free agent with a snowball effect at less than most managers were offering. This was possible for 2 reasons; reputation and the minors. Coming back to when the new updated worlds were released, everybody was given an equal reputation to prevent an unfair advantage to the older managers as well as the managers that played fast worlds over slow worlds. And that worked all fine and dandy as it was mostly best offer gets the player with a little bit of random luck.
 
However, the snowball effect is still possible. Now that the seasons have all begun, the team reputations are shifting up and down to reflect how well teams are doing. The reputation thing itself isn't a bad idea; my issue starts with the fact that I've noticed good free agents popping up and then are snagged by better teams with better offers than some worse off teams made. To me, this is still acceptable since a free agent probably wants to go a more successful team than a team looking towards relegation. Where I really develop a problem with the system is when these rare free agents appear and better teams snag them up and then immediately get assigned to the minors. If a team plays him, fine, I have no issue, but if the player is immediately assigned its basically telling me a manager is being super greedy and signing players just so that other teams cannot sign new free agents and improve themselves. This is rather unfair for managers less fortunate at the start of the season. It also enables the snowball effect to continually exist as managers are able to assign players for a fraction of their cost and then once again make more offers for the limited number of free agents that appear mid season.
 
My reasoning for the 20 day mid-season free agent assignment restriction is that it prevents teams for going after every new free agent solely in an effort to prevent other teams from getting them and essentially abusing the minor system. If a team actually wants to play the player, then the restriction wouldn't really affect the manager as he/she can still do so. I suggest that this happens for only mid-season signings since there is a lot of free agent movement during the preseason and sometimes managers get 2 out of  2 free agents they aimed for while only expecting to possibly get 1. It also makes sense from a players perspective. If a strong free agent can expect to be paid millions, why would he go with a team that's going to immediately assign him to the minors and then only make a few hundred thousand. Yes 1-way/2-way deal exist, but I don't think good players sign 2-way deals expecting to be immediately sent down.

I've got 2 suggestions that I hope can be added into that 20 day trade lock rule.
 
1) Entry level players do not have the restriction. They were allowed to be traded as prospects before having signed any deal, it just makes sense to me that they don't have the restriction handed to them as soon as they finally sign a deal.
 
2) This one only applies to mid-season free agent signings. The restriction would essentially be that any free agent signing (preferably entry level contracts excluded) after day 6 would be unable to be assigned to the minors for 20 days. If we go back to the start of Dangles, its big problem was that 1 team was essentially able to sign nearly every free agent with a snowball effect at less than most managers were offering. This was possible for 2 reasons; reputation and the minors. Coming back to when the new updated worlds were released, everybody was given an equal reputation to prevent an unfair advantage to the older managers as well as the managers that played fast worlds over slow worlds. And that worked all fine and dandy as it was mostly best offer gets the player with a little bit of random luck.
 
However, the snowball effect is still possible. Now that the seasons have all begun, the team reputations are shifting up and down to reflect how well teams are doing. The reputation thing itself isn't a bad idea; my issue starts with the fact that I've noticed good free agents popping up and then are snagged by better teams with better offers than some worse off teams made. To me, this is still acceptable since a free agent probably wants to go a more successful team than a team looking towards relegation. Where I really develop a problem with the system is when these rare free agents appear and better teams snag them up and then immediately get assigned to the minors. If a team plays him, fine, I have no issue, but if the player is immediately assigned its basically telling me a manager is being super greedy and signing players just so that other teams cannot sign new free agents and improve themselves. This is rather unfair for managers less fortunate at the start of the season. It also enables the snowball effect to continually exist as managers are able to assign players for a fraction of their cost and then once again make more offers for the limited number of free agents that appear mid season.
 
My reasoning for the 20 day mid-season free agent assignment restriction is that it prevents teams for going after every new free agent solely in an effort to prevent other teams from getting them and essentially abusing the minor system. If a team actually wants to play the player, then the restriction wouldn't really affect the manager as he/she can still do so. I suggest that this happens for only mid-season signings since there is a lot of free agent movement during the preseason and sometimes managers get 2 out of  2 free agents they aimed for while only expecting to possibly get 1. It also makes sense from a players perspective. If a strong free agent can expect to be paid millions, why would he go with a team that's going to immediately assign him to the minors and then only make a few hundred thousand. Yes 1-way/2-way deal exist, but I don't think good players sign 2-way deals expecting to be immediately sent down.

I've got 2 suggestions that I hope can be added into that 20 day trade lock rule.
 
1) Entry level players do not have the restriction. They were allowed to be traded as prospects before having signed any deal, it just makes sense to me that they don't have the restriction handed to them as soon as they finally sign a deal.
 
2) This one only applies to mid-season free agent signings. The restriction would essentially be that any free agent signing (preferably entry level contracts excluded) after day 6 would be unable to be assigned to the minors for 20 days. If we go back to the start of Dangles, its big problem was that 1 team was essentially able to sign nearly every free agent with a snowball effect at less than most managers were offering. This was possible for 2 reasons; reputation and the minors. Coming back to when the new updated worlds were released, everybody was given an equal reputation to prevent an unfair advantage to the older managers as well as the managers that played fast worlds over slow worlds. And that worked all fine and dandy as it was mostly best offer gets the player with a little bit of random luck.
 
However, the snowball effect is still possible. Now that the seasons have all begun, the team reputations are shifting up and down to reflect how well teams are doing. The reputation thing itself isn't a bad idea; my issue starts with the fact that I've noticed good free agents popping up and then are snagged by better teams with better offers than some worse off teams made. To me, this is still acceptable since a free agent probably wants to go a more successful team than a team looking towards relegation. Where I really develop a problem with the system is when these rare free agents appear and better teams snag them up and then immediately get assigned to the minors. If a team plays him, fine, I have no issue, but if the player is immediately assigned its basically telling me a manager is being super greedy and signing players just so that other teams cannot sign new free agents and improve themselves. This is rather unfair for managers less fortunate at the start of the season. It also enables the snowball effect to continually exist as managers are able to assign players for a fraction of their cost and then once again make more offers for the limited number of free agents that appear mid season.
 
My reasoning for the 20 day mid-season free agent assignment restriction is that it prevents teams for going after every new free agent solely in an effort to prevent other teams from getting them and essentially abusing the minor system. If a team actually wants to play the player, then the restriction wouldn't really affect the manager as he/she can still do so. I suggest that this happens for only mid-season signings since there is a lot of free agent movement during the preseason and sometimes managers get 2 out of  2 free agents they aimed for while only expecting to possibly get 1. It also makes sense from a players perspective. If a strong free agent can expect to be paid millions, why would he go with a team that's going to immediately assign him to the minors and then only make a few hundred thousand. Yes 1-way/2-way deal exist, but I don't think good players sign 2-way deals expecting to be immediately sent down.

What is an even strength goal?!?  Will report back if my team finds out!

I need a goalie also - but it’s so darn expensive to sign a 63 OVR guy - sheesh! But for real, I’m paying one guy $5K a year to play...oh wait, I sent him to the Minors so he now makes $500 a year. I think he now flips burgers on the side to keep afloat. Good thing he lives with His Grandma...
 
Kinda strange jumping from the GHL to LIHL salaries....

I would vote to speed it up on the Cage, the playoffs that is.

My guys actually figured out there IS a net on the other side of the ice.

A nice addition to the search feature would be to hide players with a one-way contract on higher leagues. I find myself having to go thru every player's transfer tab to find out if I can claim him or trade for him. That's annoying. Another way to help with this would be to show the one-way option in the player preview pane.

The power rankings have arrived again!
 
Eastern Conference
 
1. Deferiet Leopards (Paul T)
OFF: 88 DEF: 87 SG: 89 OVR: 87,3
 
2. St. Thomas Stray Cats (Erzac Ray)
OFF: 85 DEF: 88 SG: 96 OVR: 87,3
 
3. Fairbanks Union (Eric T)
OFF 86 DEF: 88 SG: 92 OVR: 87,0
 
4. Horn Lake Hooligans (Mike Grubb)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 92 OVR: 86,8
 
5. Netherhill Nightmares (Tyrod Gibson)
OFF: 87 DEF: 86 SG: 90 OVR: 86,7
 
6. Cedar Rapids Minutemen (Richard Armour)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 85 OVR: 86,6
 
7. Sheshegwaning Dragons (Ives Pa)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 87 OVR: 86,5
 
8. Langenburg Bulldogs (Max Mol)
OFF: 86 DEF: 86 SG: 93 OVR: 86,3
 
9. Mango Duhawks (Dr. Jones)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 87 OVR: 86,3
 
10. Slaughterville Red Tide (Alexander Rasputin)
OFF: 85 DEF: 88 SG: 88 OVR: 86,3
 
11. Sault Ste Marie Battlin Bears (Joe Leconte)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 85 OVR: 86,2
 
12. Kingston Kamikaze (Antti Hänninen)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 83 OVR: 86,1
 
13. Wolf Trap Claws (Fango Wolf)
OFF: 86 DEF: 86 SG: 91 OVR: 85,9
 
14. Minnedosa Supersonics (J. J.)
OFF: 85 DEF: 86 SG: 86 OVR: 85,5
 
 
Western Conference
 
1. Kegashka Prairie Stars (Ferris Mason)
OFF: 86 DEF: 89 SG: 94 OVR: 87,7
 
2. Ithaca Ricochet (Marc S)
OFF: 85 DEF: 89 SG: 92 OVR: 87,3
 
3. West Chicago Hawks (Richard Feynman)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 94 OVR: 87,2
 
4. Montmorency Tomahawks (BEN \)
OFF: 86 DEF: 88 SG: 91 OVR: 87,1
 
5. Brass Castle Berzerkers (Matt H)
OFF: 86 DEF: 88 SG: 86 OVR: 87,0
 
6. Eastern Top Dogs (The Champ)
OFF: 86 DEF: 87 SG: 89 OVR: 86,9
 
7. Enigma Rage (Wendel Clark)
OFF: 85 DEF: 87 SG: 90 OVR: 86,5
 
8. Mississauga Stealheads (Torbjörn Johansson)
OFF: 86 DEF: 86 SG: 86 OVR: 86,3
 
9. Earlton Golden Grizzlies (Pavel Libich)
OFF: 85 DEF: 86 SG: 92 OVR: 86,0
 
10. Yonker Wolverines (Jiri Heikkala)
OFF: 86 DEF: 86 SG: 86 OVR: 86,0
 
11. Scandinavia Steelers (J Jono)
OFF: 85 DEF: 87 SG: 87 OVR: 85,8
 
12. Eldred Elite (Steven Bennett)
OFF: 85 DEF: 87 SG: 86 OVR: 85,7
 
13. Blenheim Pirates (Martin J)
OFF: 85 DEF: 85 SG: 87 OVR: 85,4
 
14. Wendell Ravens (Cynthia Dumont)
OFF: 85 DEF: 86 SG: 83 OVR: 84,9
 
 
Calculated on day 7 of S1, using:
 
Team OVR = (OFF + (DEF*2) + (SG*2))/26
 
where
OFF: ovr sum of best 12 centers/forwards
DEF: ovr sum of best 6 defenders
SG: ovr of starting goalie
 

Right now in the league menu, we can see the top 20 players in the league for different stats, but we cant search different player positions.. so for example, you can only see the top 3 defensemen on the main league menu. I would also extend the list to show top 50 from top 20 as the leagues have just about doubled in size. But this is more just stat fluff for us stat junkies so it is by no means a top of the list issue, just an idea. 

http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/10453-search-max-rating/ similar threadnposted a few days ago.

Trash talk... You mean like this?
 

I'm completely satisfied with the end result.
 
I also have to commend you for handling this rather professionally and  not turning this into a shouting match as has happened in the past.

Matt been looking forward to facing you because you have always been helpful to me in forums especially when I started in the game.  That said hurry up and move up from LIHL Attack.

That trade was outrageously bad on a few levels.  At first I thought the CPU trade logic went corrupt, then realized it was between two managers and one of the managers quit shortly after, so it's easy to see how some might think there was something shady going on.
 
That being said, all managers try to better their teams via trade.  Most trades can be considered lopsided depending upon your point of view - salary dumps, etc.  I'm not sure there are too many managers here who would have rejected that trade if proposed to them, so I understand that side of it.  I appreciate & accept the explanation and don't see any cheating here.  Ready to move on. 
 
I think reversing it was the right thing to do.  Also, as Alexander stated above, despite the drama it causes, managers pushing back against unfair trades can be a good thing because it protects the integrity of the game.  We're all competitive, that's why we are all here trying to win.  But the last thing I'd want to see happen is for managers to get frustrated and leave because of unfair trades.  That and whoever takes over that CPU team would be at a horrible disadvantage.  Personally, I think the ill will should be directed at the manager who offered the trade then quit.

To recap, a trade took place yesterday between my team (Red Tide) and Arcola Alligators that was perceived as unfair and was flagged by numerous managers, some enthusiastically accusing me of all kinds of cheating. I have been in discussions with Glawing for some time today as to how to best handle the situation - he has seen the messages between myself and the other manager involved, and will comment on this thread to confirm that no cheating took place. The trade will also be reversed.

Here is a recap of what happened:
 
1) I had drawn-out discussions with the Arcola manager with regard to his player Gibazov (91F), sending him numerous offers, including Bowen(89C) that eventually went to the team.
2) The latest offer from me was Bowen (89C), and my GHL 1st for Gibazov (91F)
3) The Arcola manager countered this offer with Gibazov + 2nd for Bowen, which I immediately accepted because while it is unfavourable to him, I am not responsible for his decisions - I am responsible for making my team better. The offer was bad, but not so bad as to suspect any kind of foul play or self-destruction.
4) Some time shortly after my acceptance of the offer, the manager of Arcola resigned, making the entire situation seem entirely more shady.
I proactively reached out to Glawing today to address the situation, providing my POV, and offering to reverse the trade. 

I appreciate the pushback of this community against cheating, which this would have been a blatant and easily noticeable example of, had it actually happened. That was awesome. 

What was not so awesome is some managers immediately jumping to arms and accusing me of shady dealings not only in this trade, but every other trade (you know who you are), and refusing to listen to my POV. Not fantastic for your health to have so much repressed anger, friends   .

I hope this clears it up. Glawing will comment below to confirm, and we can all move on with our season.

Alex

Hi all!
 
As Alex mention above we had a long discussion about this case and to begin with I would like to say there is NO CHEATING regarding this trade. I have seen messages as proof and after new release we got some new tools helping verify some things we couldn't before. Will not mention what of course.
 
This particular case happened because a player signed up made some strange trades and later resigned which is sad but will of course happen from time to time. We thought it was best to revert the trade because of this. So the trade is now being reverted.
 
With that said we appreciate people noticing these kind of things and report them! We need your help with this! So keep reporting! This time it turned out to be legit but next maybe not.
 
Keep enjoying the game!
 
//Glawing

What better way to start a new forum than by having a trash talking topic!
 
Chirp away boys and girls!
 
 
edit: I feel like I should add, please don't accuse any cheaters in here, I want this to remain semi-light hearted and not become a page to start arguments. If you feel the need to report something suspicious, send and email to [email protected] . Please and thank-you.

Currently when I am using advance search and setting all players, the new system displays only up to a maximum amount of players. I imagine its for server reasons, but unfortunately it causes role players and 4th liners to be hidden. My suggestion is just to add one more box to filter players above a certain overall.

Thought I'd post this thread since we everybody is probably looking for something.
 
GHL - Brass Castle Berzerkers
Have:
A few 84/85ish rated defenseman
Want:
A star goalie (I know, unlikely)
Similarly rated forwards