MattBerserkers

This is a simple suggestion but can you add the transfer status to the prospects so we can put them on the block or make them untouchable?

There was a vote and the result was to keep things the same speed... but the vote didn't take into account game world speed.  I suggested we vote by world, assuming it would be beneficial for a slow world to speed things up, but if not, that's cool too.
 
Boston... hehe.  I never really got into the classic rock stuff.  I dig it from time to time, but Metal is more my speed (especially 80s Metal and Metalcore... and some of the melodic death stuff).

This was voted on a bit ago.  I had a recent post in the focus group that voting should take place per game world.  I can't really speak for fast or normal since I will be joining the slow world, but I'll give my two cents anyways.
 
Fast - No need to speed up the playoffs for obvious reasons.
 
Normal - I wouldn't want playoffs sped up here either.  A game every 12 hours is good.  A game every 6 hours and you are possibly sleeping through 2 games.
 
Slow - Yes, I 100% believe the world should be sped up during the playoffs for quite a few reasons.  If you are not involved in the playoffs, or even if you get eliminated quickly, you are waiting forever for any action.  If you are in the playoffs, I don't see why you wouldn't want quicker results.  A game every 12 hours seems reasonable.  I mean, even if you are a lazy A-Hole that sleeps 10+ hours a night, you still won't miss an opportunity to change things up between games, if needed.  I also have 3 kids and work 60 hours a week on average, so I'll never buy the "too busy" claim.  Keep it moving!

I tried my hand with paint to visually show what I mean, the two new status would be kept secret from everyone but the manager of the team in question in case he/she wants to keep the information private. When I drew the expiring, I thought it would show up at the end of the last season in the last year of the players contract.
 

I've found that it's gotten a million times harder to make a move within the last couple seasons. I think it is due to the anticipation of the upcoming release as people have no reason to move their players for future potential as you should be in win now mode. But I do agree that Fishbowl has less human interaction than other worlds and it is making me consider a switch to Biscuit when the update is released.

Hey everyone!
 
I am the new manager of the Fillmore Flame in the LIHL, taking over what was the East Barre Mavericks. This game seems like a lot of fun and cant wait to compete with you all!

Hey guys! Fillmore Flame LIHL (was once East Barre Mavericks - day 30ish) is looking into a rebuild since playoffs are looking out of sight heading into the 2nd half of the season and have been for sometime these past seasons. In general, we are looking for young talented players/prospects and preferably draft picks. We are also interested in any defensemen (OFF or TW preferred or nice shooting stat), and physical/spirit/defensive forwards; longer contracts preferred as players do not have much interest in resigning with us as of yet. Here are my list of players I am shopping, though everyone on my roster, including draft picks are assets I am willing to negotiate. My 1st round and UNT players are no-goes. Thanks Fishbowl, and good luck with the rest of the season!
 
Abbas Godsmark © 24yo, 65 overall, 5yrs/8000. Playmaker/Sniper
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=39412
 
Viktor Duris © 25yo, 66 overall, 1yr/13000. Playmaker/Two-way
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=36205
 
Abram Prasad © 26yo, 66 overall, 1yr/12000. Playmaker/Sniper
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=43906
 
Amit Nettles (LF) 27yo, 63 overall, 1yr/13000. Playmaker/Two-way
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=42673
 
Hugo Petljanska (LF) 26yo, 63 overall, 1yr/8000. Playmaker/Sniper
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=44897
 
Eliam Marineau (RF) 29yo, 65 overall, 1yr/10000. PwrForward/Two-way/Grinder/Enforcer
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/player?gpid=40674
 
Dany Reynolds (G) 26yo, 68 overall, 1yr/8000.
http://www.gameplanhockey.com/goalie?gpid=5294
 
Edit: Removed tradelocked players.

This would be what I would want to see at the end of the season

Personally I think there should be a generalized overall. Then we need scouts in the game and the more time they scout certain players the more info you get. On my phone so not going to go full detail.... but think that would be a hell of a lot of fun

There are actually a lot of people who put the time and aggravation into deep scouting.  I do think having a little bit of work is what makes you earn your keep a little, so am on the fence whether I am a fan of it or not.  Just like scouting in free agents, you have to go look at each player in detail and if you are willing to do the work you have an advantage.  
 
Saying this the I can see where your idea has merit, not sure which side of the fence I am on with it though is all.

It could be done like another management game I play. In this regard, only managers that subscribe to the Patreon might be able to manage, and all international games have zero impact on fitness and don't carry a risk of injury. Either that, or the off-season is expanded to allow for international games.

On another manager game I play adding custom logos is nice, but you get some very low quality uploads by some people that really takes away from the aesthetics of the game (consider a logo on a jersey with a white rectangular background on it).
 
I'm curious where the logos were licensed from. I saw some from this game on Shutterstock and if you buy a license to the images on Shutterstock they are yours to use for life (as confirmed by email by Shutterstock staff). It'd be a pricey alternative, but it'd be a one-time expense.

Yeah, if it's a free for all, people will definitely choose to upload questionable images. I'm sure someone will use a Nazi symbol or a Pepe frog for shock value.

You got a couple numbers off, so I'll just write it out.
 
 
EDIT: THE FORMAT OF GAME WORLDS HAVE BEEN CHANGED, AND WHILE THIS IS NO LONGER EXACTLY CORRECT, ITS STILL ROUGHLY RIGHT. CHANGES INCLUDE THAT THERE IS NOW A COPPER LEAGUE BETWEEN THE IHL AND BHL. LEAGUES HAVE ALSO BEEN DOUBLED IN SIZE CREATING AN EASTERN AND WESTERN CONFERENCE. THE TWO CONFERENCES WILL FACE EACH OTHER DURING REGULAR SEASON, HOWEVER WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE GHL, WILL PLAY PLAYOFF GAMES EXCLUSIVELY AGAINST THEIR OWN CONFERENCE.
 
PLAYOFF/RELEGATION CHANGES:
GHL: TOP 8 TEAMS IN EACH CONFERENCE COMPETE IN THE PLAYOFFS (16 TEAMS IN TOTAL) FOR THE GHL CUP
RELEGATION PLAYOFFS: TEAMS 10 AND 11 IN A CONFERENCE WILL FACE EACH OTHER IN A PLAYOFF SERIES, LOSER IS AUTOMATICALLY RELEGATED
PROMOTION PLAYOFFS: TEAMS 3 TO 5 IN A CONFERENCE WILL FACE EACH OTHER IN A COUPLE PLAYOFF SERIES, WINNER IS AUTOMATICALLY PROMOTED
 
The leagues in-game now also have a lot more detail and it should be more clear if you go to league page --> playoff tab.
 
 
GHL:
1st-8th play playoffs for Golden Cup
9th-12th watch the Golden Cup
13th & 14th are in relegation playoffs, they will match up against a team from SHL playoffs and winners will be in the GHL next season, losers in the SHL
15 & 16th are relegated to SHL
 
SHL:
1st & 2nd are automatically promoted
3rd - 6th play promotion playoffs
             -3rd vs 6th -> winner plays 14th SHL team (I think) for a chance at promotion
             -4th vs 5th -> winner plays 13th SHL team
             -it's possible that there can be 0 to 2 teams that earn promotion through the promotion playoffs (for a maximum of 4 teams                                                 -promoting and relegating)
7th-12th watch the Golden Cup
13th & 14th are in the relegation playoffs and each match up against a BHL team
15th and 16th are automatically relegated
 
BHL:
1st & 2nd are automatically promoted
3rd - 6th play promotion playoffs -> the 2 winners then have to play teams 13 and 14 from the SHL
7th - 12th watch the Golden Cup
13th & 14th play in the relegation playoffs and must match up against an IHL team
15th & 16th are automatically relegated
 
IHL:
1st & 2nd are automatically promoted
3rd-6th play promotion playoffs -> the 2 winners must match up against the BHL relegation playoff teams
7th-10th watch the Golden Cup
11th - 14th do relegation playoffs
           -this isn't a situation I've been in nor payed attention too, I'm not sure if there's a mini tournament among themselves and the 2                                           -losers have to play the LIHL playoff winners or if they all have to play LIHL winners. But you should kind of see the pattern of what                                   -is happening now.
15th & 16th are automatically relegated
 
LIHL:
1st & 2nd are automatically promoted
3rd-10th play in the promotion playoffs
          -I've been in this situation before, but it's been so long that I forget exactly how it plays out. It's either all 4 winners play the 4 IHL                                        -relegation playoff teams, or there is an extra round and the 2 winners play the 2 losers of an IHL relegation round
11th-16th watch the Golden Cup

It's just bad luck when you get a bunch of injuries like that. My worst luck was when I lost my 4 starting centers and half my d-men over a few day for multiple games and a couple have-season injuries.
 
What I find works to prevent injuries is to ensure my players are only playing when they are fully fit. For something more pro-active, I try is to build a team around non-injury-prone players. In my experience, when you check a players home page, look at his current headlines. Injury-prone players will generally have multiple injuries listed over multiple seasons. Though injury-prone studs can hide their past injuries by getting player of the week/stars of the game. I've read somewhere on this forum before that injury-likeliness (durability?) is a hidden stat in this game, but you can sort of guess what it would be just by seeing how often a player gets injured. (I think when this game was first being developed durability was actually a visible stat.) Unfortunately I don't think age has anything to do with injury rates as I've had a bunch of old veterans on my team the past few seasons and none of them have been injured. 
 
TL;DR: It's definitely not a bug.

It's just bad luck when you get a bunch of injuries like that. My worst luck was when I lost my 4 starting centers and half my d-men over a few day for multiple games and a couple have-season injuries.
 
What I find works to prevent injuries is to ensure my players are only playing when they are fully fit. For something more pro-active, I try is to build a team around non-injury-prone players. In my experience, when you check a players home page, look at his current headlines. Injury-prone players will generally have multiple injuries listed over multiple seasons. Though injury-prone studs can hide their past injuries by getting player of the week/stars of the game. I've read somewhere on this forum before that injury-likeliness (durability?) is a hidden stat in this game, but you can sort of guess what it would be just by seeing how often a player gets injured. (I think when this game was first being developed durability was actually a visible stat.) Unfortunately I don't think age has anything to do with injury rates as I've had a bunch of old veterans on my team the past few seasons and none of them have been injured. 
 
TL;DR: It's definitely not a bug.

For possible fall release... I think having a trade deadline earlier in the season would be beneficial for a few reasons.  I will use Days 55 as an example (which falls around Game 50). 
 
Also to go along with this suggestion, I would also recommend that those players who are "happy with their current contract", be open to re-negotiating or flat our refusing to re-sign around Day 45 (around Game 40).
 
1) First, I think it would add some excitement to the game mid-season, giving managers another milestone to look forward to.  Preparing for the draft is exciting.  Silly season/free agency is exciting.  The playoff race toward the end of season is exciting + actual playoffs.  Why not add something in the middle for managers to look forward to?
 
Around Day 45, players are either willing to re-sign with your team or refuse to re-sign.  You then have 10 days to get your trades in before Day 55.  Personally, I think it would be an exciting 10 days of managers trying to wheel and deal before the deadline hits.  Then all managers must live with their decisions for the remaining 10 regular season games and through the playoffs.
 
2) Second, it would require managers to be proactive and take calculated risks based on their expected finish.  It would eliminate teams from making those final day trades to stack their teams for relegation - and would also not allow managers to trade expiring contracts on the final day of the season, which caused an issue this past season.
 
3) Finally, this is how professional sports are run - and I know that as a fan, I get really excited around the trade deadline every year in anticipation of what trades will be made.
 
Thoughts??
 
 
 

Ah, finally! 

Hey. Just wanted to chime in and introduce myself as the new GM of the Duffield Desperadoes (formerly Oshawa Aztecs).
 
Once upon a time I was a veteran of original Eastside Hockey Manager and Front Office Football sims, and thought I'd get back into it with Game Plan. Hit me up with any reasonable trade requests.

Agreed, I just resigned my top defenseman for the third straight year to a one year contract for less money than the previous contract and he is probably his prime.
 
Also, my 93ovr goalie is willing to take a 50% cut to stay on my team after I benched him half way through the season for having his worst season out of five. His ovr hasn't changed and he is 37, but he is asking for less than my 27 year old AAHL starter.....
 
The cap is too damn high! Haha, but I do think lowering it would create a positive cascading effect where all these FULL lineups of 90+ovr teams would have to let players go, and more of the mid 80 players would need to be used at the GHL or made available for SHL.

Currently in the GHL, the playoff structure looks like:
 
Series A: Rank 1 vs Rank 8
Series B: Rank 2 vs Rank 7
Series C: Rank 3 vs Rank 6
Series D: Rank 4 vs Rank 5
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner B
Series F: Winner C vs Winner D
 
Final: Winner E vs Winner F
 
The current path ensures that there will never be the top 2 teams fighting it out in the finals. It also makes it so that the teams rank 4th and 5th have the highest chance at getting the easiest path to the cup. And since the 5th place team is also entered into a better playoff lottery compared to the top 4 teams, it makes it the ideal position from a purely playoffs and potential future success standpoint. My suggestion is to simply change the following series:
 
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner D
Series F: Winner C vs Winner B

Currently in the GHL, the playoff structure looks like:
 
Series A: Rank 1 vs Rank 8
Series B: Rank 2 vs Rank 7
Series C: Rank 3 vs Rank 6
Series D: Rank 4 vs Rank 5
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner B
Series F: Winner C vs Winner D
 
Final: Winner E vs Winner F
 
The current path ensures that there will never be the top 2 teams fighting it out in the finals. It also makes it so that the teams rank 4th and 5th have the highest chance at getting the easiest path to the cup. And since the 5th place team is also entered into a better playoff lottery compared to the top 4 teams, it makes it the ideal position from a purely playoffs and potential future success standpoint. My suggestion is to simply change the following series:
 
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner D
Series F: Winner C vs Winner B

Not a bad idea but imo it would be nice to have a second round also determined by standings, like the highest placed team faces the lowest placed team. That way, if 1st, 5th, 6th and 7th win, 1st will take on 7th and 5th will take 6th. I think it would be more representative of the work done in the season to be among the top 4 teams.

Currently in the GHL, the playoff structure looks like:
 
Series A: Rank 1 vs Rank 8
Series B: Rank 2 vs Rank 7
Series C: Rank 3 vs Rank 6
Series D: Rank 4 vs Rank 5
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner B
Series F: Winner C vs Winner D
 
Final: Winner E vs Winner F
 
The current path ensures that there will never be the top 2 teams fighting it out in the finals. It also makes it so that the teams rank 4th and 5th have the highest chance at getting the easiest path to the cup. And since the 5th place team is also entered into a better playoff lottery compared to the top 4 teams, it makes it the ideal position from a purely playoffs and potential future success standpoint. My suggestion is to simply change the following series:
 
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner D
Series F: Winner C vs Winner B

Currently in the GHL, the playoff structure looks like:
 
Series A: Rank 1 vs Rank 8
Series B: Rank 2 vs Rank 7
Series C: Rank 3 vs Rank 6
Series D: Rank 4 vs Rank 5
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner B
Series F: Winner C vs Winner D
 
Final: Winner E vs Winner F
 
The current path ensures that there will never be the top 2 teams fighting it out in the finals. It also makes it so that the teams rank 4th and 5th have the highest chance at getting the easiest path to the cup. And since the 5th place team is also entered into a better playoff lottery compared to the top 4 teams, it makes it the ideal position from a purely playoffs and potential future success standpoint. My suggestion is to simply change the following series:
 
 
Series E: Winner A vs Winner D
Series F: Winner C vs Winner B