.png.89070b1700d17dc29d5856f05a15adea.png)
Paul T
-
Content Count
723 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
143
Posts posted by Paul T
-
-
Been thinking about this more. I'm for the IR designation, but also feel like it could be exploited. For example, if you have a player on a bad 1-way salary, you shouldn't be able to put them on IR as a way around it. So I'm thinking the IR spot works with some variation of the following rules:
1) Player MUST be injured in order to put them on IR
2) Player must remain on IR for a minimum of 5-10 days
3) IR does not totally relieve the player's salary - a portion of it (anywhere from 25-50%) should still count towards the cap
I feel like that would give managers some relief without allowing them to exploit it.
-
Initially I was in agreement with the "it's your fault" comment... but after thinking more about this, an IR designation with a minimum of 5-10 days makes a lot of sense. Injuries seem to be very random, and usually you can make some wiggle room by having a good amount of 2-way contracts, but if multiple players with larger contracts get injured, you should be able to call up players instead of being totally screwed. Even if a certain portion of the players contract counts towards the cap while on IR, 10-50%.
This would be especially helpful for long term injuries. I've seen a few 30-40+ day injuries, which can really crush a team.
TheWeekKnights reacted to this -
Lol, spoke a bit too soon about my own luck. I just over-payed big-time in a trade for a player and now he's 32 days injured out for the season. Plus I wasn't gonna resign him, I'm a little bit peeved that I only got 2 games out of him for what I payed, but whatever.
That's freaky because my 34 game injury came literally the day after I mentioned in Biscuit chat that I was somewhat lucky this year with injuries. Watch what you say!
-
That explains it then since PP goals don't count toward +/-
-
Ouch. Bad line changes for sure!
Only a guess here because of all the shorthanded time on ice I notice... were all your opponents goals power play goals?
-
Holy Crap - how did you lose? You had 38 hits on them even - how were they walking?
Literally every stat was in my favor. Every single one. LOL.
I get the rematch and chance at retribution today, so we'll see how that goes.
-
Check out this game.
-
I like this idea - and it would be really cool to be able to send a message along with the trade rejection.
To be totally honest though, I tend to message managers prior to offering trades to see if they have any interest. Most of the time, if you are serious about trading and not just tossing a bunch of trades against the wall to see what sticks, you can negotiate via message, then submit the trade. And when other managers throw trades my way that I don't like, I always send a message afterwards explaining my decision. Which I think is good for 2 reasons. (1) it will (should) prevent the same manager from offering more trades back to back, which I have seen happen and can get annoying (2) it may help negotiating a better trade, rather than each manager counter-offering back and forth 10 times in a row, which I have also seen happen.
-
Looking forward to your update.
I've read that it takes more than half a season to get used to a new tactic, so I've been afraid to change it. Never have.
-
Any one else seeing this?
Yup.
-
Just wanted to bump this suggestion as I think it would be a great addition to the game for many reasons.
In looking at stats from Biscuit, 23 BHL games have gone to a shootout this year. Checked GHL as well and the number of SO games was 21. We are 22 games in, so that is 1 per week per league. For the higher leagues, the point differential is always very tight, so shootout wins/losses can have a huge impact in the final standings, which could be the difference between making/missing the playoffs, top 2/bottom 2 promotion/relegation, etc.
Suggestion #1: the ability to edit your shootout lineup.
Suggestion #2: tracking shootout goals, attempts & percentages (much like face-offs) on the player stats screen to see success rates... for both players and goalies would be amazing.
-
A rare shootout win. I'll take it.
-
This isn't meant as a complaint... just a general comment in that I am going to be absolutely ECSTATIC when my team can use its strong winner instinct and finally win a 1-goal game!!
In games where the score is decided by 2 or more goals, the Def Leppards are 12-0. One goal games... 0-4.
C'mon boys, get it done!
-
-
I try not to get too salty after losses because I love the parity, but holy shit! How did I lose this one?
HurjaHerra reacted to this -
We should be the cookie that everyone here want to eat.
See me there-> made a biscuit play on words.
/\
This!
I haven't looked at the trade that sparked this debate, so don't have an opinion on that, but I see both sides of the CPU trading debate. It is frustrating when other players exploit the CPU via trade. Hell, I've seen a few trades between two managers that were questionable. When I joined in S9, I didn't realize you could trade with CPU teams until I saw a few managers do it toward the end of S10. Then I made a few trades myself in S11 (I thought they were fair). Especially when a few teams went after a player who I had shortlisted, so I thought it was fair game and didn't want to miss my opportunity. We all want to gain an advantage/win, but at the same time, we want to keep the game fun and fair.
I have read quite a few old posts around this topic and feel like these arguments could go on forever. Also, CPU trading hasn't been banned yet and per Anders, it will remain part of the game (I agree, it should). So what is the solution?
I should first say that in my experience, trading with the CPU wasn't easy. I gave up a lot and had to make sure my own assistant felt the trade was lopsided the other way. That's not to say that it can't still be exploited... it definitely can. But from what I've read and my own experience, the system has improved. So what can we do to suggest further improvements (if any are even needed) to keep the game fair, but also keep that level of competitiveness? One suggestion would be that CPU teams do not give up picks or prospects. The draft pick system can be exploited, especially if you get one from a team who is ready to promote. Also, if a team doesn't have a manager, a future manager wouldn't be as concerned with current success as it would with future success. So trading picks or prospects to a CPU team for a better player makes sense, but giving up picks/prospects does not. A good example of this was the SHL Rhinos last season (now Chattanooga Kings in Biscuit). Many teams gave them picks and prospects for established players. I remember thinking this team was set up good for the future and now with a new manager, they are crushing it. Another suggestion would be to lock a team from trading for a certain period after a manager resigns (say 5-10 days). At the very least, it would give all other managers time to prepare their CPU trades, rather than have certain managers go at it right away.
MattBerserkers reacted to this -
Wow, some of the national team players are playing in the Swiss and German hockey leagues! That means all the talent is not in GHL -> LIHL! It's good to see talent spread out, even among non-playable teams.
Yeah, I thought that was kind of cool as well. Also what a change from S11. Last season the Italians would have been an average BHL team. This season, a dominant BHL team and competitive SHL team - with the addition of 18 year old C Marco Ilan 88 OVR and 18 year old F Federico Poli 83 OVR. If Italy can keep producing young talent at that rate, another 15-20 more years and we will be challenging the Canadians and Americans for world champion.
-
This is related to the National Teams thread from S11: http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/8229-s11-national-teams/
I figured I would keep this updated in case national teams are ever introduced to the game. Dibs on Italy. This is updated for S12.
Update for Season 13 below.
-
Do "Concerned" players perform worse?
I apologize if this has already been answered somewhere, but after searching the forums, I couldn't find an answer to this exact question. It is noted that "Frustrated" players perform worse. Just wondering if a player being concerned has a negative impact on game performance.
I will add that a "Concerned" player led my team in scoring last season, and he wasn't my highest rated player... so based on that small sample... I think the answer is no, and I'm hoping the answer is no.
Thanks,
Paul
-
And what about the opposing teams winner instinct and overall talent level? You can't just look at partial data and end up with a solid conclusion.
rainsilent, you are right. I was simply providing data without actually digging deep into it. I hope no one thinks I am trying to prove solid conclusions with my data. That's why I add comments like "(in my own mind)" and stated you probably know much more than I do. Still, I like to provide facts where I can and offer opinions on certain subjects, even if they aren't solid facts. If others have facts to either support or reject my data, then great.
While I'm at it, I don't actually think that the goalies being Tough were the main factor for the upsets. I hope everyone was able to see the sarcastic humor in my comment.
Also another major factor was the starting goalie for the Protons not having full confidence. To be frank Arttur Kaila did not have a particularly good playoffs. In fact game 1 of the series he had a pretty bad game and cost the Protons the game despite the Protons otherwise completely outplaying the Marauders. I have no doubt that the lower confidence of Kaila played a role in that outcome.I actually made this comment to bouncer a few weeks ago. This doesn't really relate to the "traits" topic, but I have noticed (with both my team and a few others) that teams perform a bit worse immediately after trades. Teams appear to "slip up" for a week or two after a trade, then get back to form. This probably has something to do with the player's confidence not being full, or possibly another factor - and could support my opinion in my original post that a team's Confidence & Teamwork are more important than Winner Instinct. Again, this is mere opinion based on observations and not solid fact to say that is how the game is coded. Probably a discussion for another thread.
-
That being said, my top point scorer over the past two seasons was "Tough". He is only a 79 OVR and I have a few players in the 80's with better offensive abilities. I have also noticed a few other players who are Tough/Agitator getting better game results than the Gentle dudes. Again, I could be making false assumptions based on my own team's results... but I'm OK with that until I realize otherwise.
Odd, major-underdog, upsets in Season 11. SHL Tomahawks over GHL Trojans. GHL finals and semi-finals with Marauders beating Vandals/Protons.
What do the Marauders and Tomahawks goalies have in common? They are both TOUGH. I think I'm onto something... (goes out and signs all tough players regardless of skills...)
bhandsome08 reacted to this -
As for winner instinct it becomes more evident and impactful in closer leagues. Teams with higher team winner instinct will more often than not find ways to win close games. Again though that requires close games and relative parity between teams. I have never had an overly talented team offensively (defensively is another story though) yet I am regularly at the top of the standings in my league. Why? I play the odds of keeping games as close as possible and then winning those close games. If you want to see the impact of winner instinct look at all of the games that your team played where the difference was 2 or fewer goals. That said my team wins games in OT like nobody's business but can't win in a shootout to save their lives.
My team was 10-6 in games decided by two or fewer goals (excluding OT/SO). 4-2 in games decided by 1 goal (excluding OT/SO). In shootouts we were 1-4. Compared to my overall record, my Strong winner's instinct didn't really help me in the closer games, so the jury is still out on it's supposed impact (at least in my mind). In games decided by 5 or more goals I was 17-0. But you have much more experience with this game than I, so I'll take your word for it.
Finally dirty is about manager preference and statistical certainty. Even on the lowest aggression level your team will take penalties. It is an inevitability. So why not pick up a few players lower talented players that have the tendency to take penalties and play them on your lower lines and eat up as many PIMs as they can? Also some managers just want aggressive teams like the "Big, Bad Bruins" of old however be mindful that your team doesn't turn into the undisciplined Jets that regularly burn themselves with too many PP goals against.I am from Boston and the team I grew up watching was the "Big Bad Bruins". Of course I want my team to play like that!
That being said, my top point scorer over the past two seasons was "Tough". He is only a 79 OVR and I have a few players in the 80's with better offensive abilities. I have also noticed a few other players who are Tough/Agitator getting better game results than the Gentle dudes. Again, I could be making false assumptions based on my own team's results... but I'm OK with that until I realize otherwise.
When I lose, I'll just blame the refs like Canadiens fans...
I don't really see the need for Anders to give specifics.Agreed. Like I said, I'm very curious about all of this, but think it's better left to be figured out on our own.
-
I am curious about traits as well, but part of me also likes the mystery and having to figure it out. I'm torn 50/50 on whether or not I'd like Anders to tell us what the hell is going on
but on second thought, I'm leaning towards the mystery/having to figure it out.From personal experience, below are my thoughts on each trait. Some might agree, some might disagree, but it is what I have seen with my team.
EGO - haven't noticed much in terms of in game results for specific players, but Ego affects Teamwork as a whole. My team performs MUCH better when my Teamwork bar is green (and Teamwork/Confidence is more important than Winner Instinct - at least for my team, maybe not for others).
DIRTY - I prefer Tough/Agitator players, but that's partly because of my preference in real life (I love players like Wayne Simmonds, Lucic, Gudas, Marchand, etc). I have noticed that my Tough players perform better, but also take more penalties, so it's a double-edged sword - but that could all depend on your tactics as well. On the flip side, taking more penalties cost me a few games this year, but I'll take my chances.
LEADERSHIP - I don't care about this at all, other than picking captains.
BIG GAMES - I have noticed a "slight" upgrade in performance from Determined to Nervous players. i.e. Assuming the players are similar, I would probably take an 80 OVR Determined player over an 81 OVR Nervous players, but maybe not an 82 OVR Nervous player. I'd rather have the skill when it is multiple notches higher. Big Games is more noticeable for team's Winner Instinct... but I still haven't figured out when Winner Instinct is that important.
AMBITION - Here is where I may disagree with most. Two of my players who improve the most are Lazy - more-so than my Ambitious and Enthusiastic players. So I am either getting extremely lucky with my Lazy players, or completely screwed with my Ambitious players. Right now I don't value this trait at all, other than the thought that it might change in a future release.
-
Alright! I made it through the BHL playoffs this year. I'm looking forward to seeing how my team stacks up with an SHL team. On paper I look like an extreme underdog. And I'm not sure whether I should be bummed out that my 2nd line Center is injured another 4 games and will miss the remainder of the playoffs, or excited that I only have 1 major injury at this point.
TomasRodri21 reacted to this
.png)
but on second thought, I'm leaning towards the mystery/having to figure it out.
Suspensions
in Suggestions
Posted
This is amazing (more-so to think about than to actually put in the game)!
Another variation of this would be another training option. Easy, Medium, Hard, PEDs. With the "PED" option having a greater chance of long term injury.