bhandsome08

As the title shows, I'd like to see a change in the promotion/relegation playoff system, specifically for the GHL-SHL playoffs.
 
The main reason I want this is because of the immense talent gap between the average silver and average gold player. The talent gap is really massive. If I were to guess, it would be something like this:
 
GHL: 88-90 overall on average, however in some game world's this is a bit less, maybe 86-88 average rating.
 
SHL: 78-80 overall on average, where you'll see a lot of tough competition due to the smaller talent gap.
 
BHL: Roughly 75 overall on average, but can range from low 70's to high 70's. 80's are quite rare at this level.
 
IHL: Roughly 70 overall on average, stars can range around the mid 70's, while fringe players are in the high 60's.
 
LIHL: Roughly 65-68 overall on average, it's probably the easiest to promote from here to the IHL and be competitive for promotion to BHL first season.
 
My request is to alter the promotion playoff from SHL to GHL. But I'll get to that later.
 
As you can see, the talent gap between GHL and SHL is huge. On average, the talent level is increasing by minimum 6 overalls, compared to roughly 2-3 overalls in every other division, in which some players can increase 3 ratings per season.
 
My Montmorency team started in the IHL, and I've built up from there. Do you know how many players I'm taking with me from that IHL season from the GHL? 0. My best player in the IHL grew from a 73 to an 83, and he would most likely play on the 4th line at GHL level, and because you don't get your extra cap before the end of the season, I'm more than likely losing him.
 
It all comes back to the fact that it's super tough to take players from the lower leagues to the higher leagues and maintain a significant level of success.
 
My suggestion is, especially for the GHL relegation ayoff because of the talent gap:
 
Scrap the relegation playoffs.
 
Quite simply, the amount of teams that are promoted both in real life (as seen in the German Bundesliga) and in this game from the lower leagues thanks to a relegation playoff is next to none. Maybe 20 percent.
 
I think the rage of finishing 3rd and losing to a higher level team in this game frustrates many, and due to the talent gap, winning is just too difficult.
 
From my experience, I've finished third in the SHL, sweeping by 6th place 3 games to 0, only to lose to a GHL team much better than me 2-1, with the GHL team absolutely dominating me when they were at home. Not to mention my only win was in a shootout. In the playoffs. A shootout.
 
I'm proposing a format like the English Premier League does.
 
3 teams are automatically relegated from the Premier League to the Championship.
 
2 teams are automatically promoted from the Championship to the Premier League.
 
The teams placed 3-6 in the Championship play in a 4 team playoff in which the winner is promoted to the Premier League.
 
A format like this could easily to translated into GPHM logic, and I feel like it will get rid of some of the rage in this game.
 
Let me know your thoughts.

I don't mind the current format, but it is difficult to move up thru playoffs.
How would it be if 15-16 auto relegate, 13-14 play to see who gets to stay in current league and loser plays loser of promotion playoffs.
And for promotion 1-2 auto promote, 3-6 play for auto promotion with loser of finals playing loser of relegation playoffs it will give one team 2 chances of promoting.
This format will guarantee 3 teams get promoted with the possibility of 4 promoting and will extend playoffs a bit also.

Who keeps offering u trades? Maybe a pic would be better

It's crazy -- 11 points (less than four wins) separates 1st and 10th!
 
@bhandsome BTW we play each other tomorrow. Good luck -- lets hope its a close, hard-fought contest!

I've already reported him and PM'd Anders to look into it. It would be helpful if "Fred Jamison" could be found in other game worlds/teams.
 
It's really looking like it will be a tough season, not much separation between teams

I've already put a "report cheating" request on the team. I would suggest that you do as well, if you haven't already.
 
That said, whatever happens, I plan on telling the coach to make a statement the next time we play the Bears
 
Also, in true passive-aggressive form, I have requested my assistant GM to barrage the team with trade requests for the player in question.

Anyone wanna look into this trade? Looks like "Fred Jamison" made the trade then resigned right after. The trade was made in BHL Day 19 between Chattanooga Cherokees & Fort Pierce Bears. Fred Jamison and Fred Lindholm could possibly be the same person.
Don't want this to end up like the Jon Cooper/Frank Smith situation that happened in Lumber.

Huh. A computer team just traded away their 81 ovr for 3 players 71, 69 and 68. In BHL.
 
Oh wait, it wasn't a computer team for a brief while. Huh.

That user has now been deleted along with his other accounts.
 
Let me know if you suspect he has returned with a different name/account.

Great idea.
I would do 32 teams though split into 4 divisions, within 2 conferences.
28 division games + 16 Conference games + 16 Inter-conference games = 60 games. 
And shuffle the teams in each division and conference so we're not playing the same teams over and over after every season. ei. put high ranking teams into one division/ conference and lower ranked teams into another division/ conference. Maybe it would create balance 

There should be measures in place to avoid any such cap problems in the first place. "Punishment" shouldn't even be needed.

I personally set them all in the order I want to prioritize them and then just leave the draft pick selection "with any pick". So I would have them:
 
A1 - Any pick
B1 - Any pick
A2 - Any pick
C1 - Any pick
B2 - Any pick
A3 - Any pick
C3 - Any pick
B3 - Any pick
C3 - Any pick
 
This way you will always get the player highest in your own order and don't have to worry about skipping players just because they are on the wrong round (happened to me during the first few drafts).
 
E:
I also add more than just 3 players from the first round, just to be safe I get a quality player with my first pick at least.

Add arrogant and cocky players to your team.
 
Also add heroic and determined players.
 
Having too many nervous players will screw your winner instinct over. I try to build my team around impressive, heroic players, and try to avoid nervous players at all costs, though 2-3 won't hurt.

You got it, spot on.
 
Checking lines are lines that can hit, Grinders are good for Checking lines.
 
Energy lines have high spirit and high physical attributes.  Enforcers are good on Energy lines although any player type with high spirit and high physical are good for Energy lines.

Wouldn't increasing the cap just add to the problem? Maybe the formula for creating new players could change in order to avoid the oversaturation of top-top players generated in the game. I'm thinking of something similar to EHM where regens are just the potentials and mentalities taken from retired players and then re-used for the players created in a new season. Or else a different change could be widening the range of hard-cap potentials and reduces the number of players that can reach above 90 overall. Both options would probably take a lot of work to implement, but they would both increase the need for specialized players rather than just being able to ice 4 lines of perfectly rounded players as it would reduce the supply of almost perfect players.

Limited roster spots and moving the trade deadline to an earlier date. Let's say no trading after game 40. It'll be like the NHL if they wanna make a push for playoffs.

Maybe increasing player salaries or lowering salary cap would help get more range.
 
It'd make it more realistic by having only a few 90s rated players and bring out the importance of "role" players.