MWiles

It would be nice if we could just go from player page to the next player on the roster instead of having to go back to the team page,then back to the roster page, and then going to the next players page.

already thought of something else (you guys are going to get sick of me fast).

With the draft prospects, rather than have the players ratings displayed on his page before his draft, maybe have a 5-10 range, like instead of player A having a 86 shooting rating , he could be 83-88 shooting, or even 80-90 shooting.This way, drafting isn't an exact science, you can create more scenarios where the 1st player picked isn't always going to be the best. Finding an algorithm to have full on busts or late round steals would be great too. The problem with that would be, A, i don't know how to make that happen in a fair manor, B, everyone who drafts a bust would get really pissed off and might rage quit...

also to do with draft prospects, I've only experienced one list of prospects, and maybe this is just an unusually good draft, but i think their ratings should be lowered. This draft has a 92 overall player, and many high 80's. If the idea is realism, there shouldn't be more than a handful of players that will make an impact in their draft year, with a lot of players (even high drafted players) needing to develop over a couple (or 3 or 4) seasons before they become regular pro players. Bringing along a highly rated prospect every once in a while would be great (a la Crosby, McDavid) but most years, i would think, for those top picks that DO make their team in their draft year, should be of a secondary scoring, or a sheltered role, etc.

I only recently discovered and started playing Game Plan Hockey Manager. I discovered the game probably around a week ago. I looked and so no teams were available, i cried a little, i got over it. I checked back a day or 2 later, and a team had opened up in a fast (6 hour) world. I quickly made a profile and took over this team, not sure of how often teams became available. This world proved too fast for me. I got my team, relocated, changed the team name and jersey, and then it was time to get to bed. I woke up and went to work, came home, to realize my team had already played 3 games in that span. One of my good players was hurt and only had 1 game to go before he was available again, unfortunately, when i was able to sit down and set up my lineup, i had played 3 more games and a good player was a healthy scratch for 2 of those.

This world proved to fast for me, and i had noticed that there was a team available in the slow (24 hour) world, so i resigned, waiting 2 hours, hoped it was still available, and eventually, got my new team. So far, i am enjoying what i have seen, i don't even think i have discovered all there is to discover yet, and still haven't really taken the time to get to know my NEW new team, but it is a weak team and most of the players are on the last year of their contract, so i'll have a lot of turnover after this season, which is now 1 game from being over.
 
I used to play Hockey-Dynasty, was a little late to that party, as i think i only got in about 3 seasons before it died. I still play Good Hockey, but that's a shallow hockey sim, and it's basically been dead for a while, it just hasn't realized it yet. I'm always looking for a good Hockey GM simulation, and i think I've stumbled onto a gem with Game Plan Hockey.

Now, with my life story out of the way, and maybe being so new doesn't give me a the requirements to make suggestions, but here's a few things i noticed that could enhance the game (unless they are in the game and i just haven't discovered them yet. Did i mention that I'm new?)

1. Roster Limits. With Affiliate teams coming in now (and that is absolutely fantastic) how about a roster limit? The NHL standard of 23 players (which usually results in 14 forwards, 7 D, and 2 Goalies) would be good, or it could be another number just to make the game a little unique. Injured players don't count, allowing you to pull up players to replace them until they recover. The team i inherited had 39 players on it, that is a tad ridiculous, I think anyways. As soon as the affiliate teams became available, i sent 13 players down.
 
2. Positions. I find the centre and forward thing a little odd, as a centre is a forward, and why not just have centres and wings? but that is minor, and not really the point of this suggestion. I did a little bit of reading in the Forums and heard people talking about off hand penalties, as well as out of position penalties (putting centres on wings, playing forwards at D, etc) I think it is good to have these kind of penalties, but not in such a black and white way. I would like to see the rosters broken up in to all the positions (C, RW, LW, RD, LD, G) but also, have the ability to change a players position as you see fit. The kicker (and where the out of position penalty comes in) have the positions much like "Roles". Have each player have 5 positional ratings (a goalie is a goalie and nobody else can be a goalie, that's just how it is), you can make a player any position of your choosing. Player A could play anywhere on the ice, forward of back. Some positions will come more naturally for him, some he may just be good at, some, he's OK, and some he's bad. I would suggest that you have to set his position before the game and then place him in that position for the game, if he is out of position, he would suffer a performance penalty much like if he was assigned a position he was bad at. This would help with the off handed penalty as well. There are advanced stats that suggest a right handed player is better on the right side and a left handed player is better on the left side, at least when it comes to defence, but there are exceptions to the rule (ovechkin). So, to create sense of realism in the game, have most of the players that are right handed be natural RW/RD and those that are left handed be natural LW/LD with the hand not mattering for centres. But with a percentage (5%, 10%?) of players being natural at both wings/Ds, or even being natural at their off handed position. Have a higher percentage being natural at their proper side, and being good at their off-side, that way, there's a penalty for putting a player on his off-side, but not a big one. This system would also help for create players that can play all around the lineup, while limit it so that not EVERY player is so versatile. I would also suggest that a very small percentage of players be good or natural at both a D position and a forward position, creating players like a Brent Burns or Dustin Byfuglien. Being able to switch players around creates better solutions, plus more in depth strategies, for the instance when an injury occurs, is it better to call up the next centre in line? or can you slide a wing over to the centre and pick someone else. 

a bit of a twist on the Positions suggestions, i know i said about having to pick assign a player a position before the game, but i just thought of this alternate. Don't assign players positions at all. When you are putting them in the lineup, put them anywhere you want (much like it is now) and the game engine would factor in his position skill for whatever you assign him to. This would allow for being able to put a player on an off wing on a power play or penalty kill with out an obvious penalty. If you assign player A as a RW, and he is right handed, but on the power play you want him on the LW so that he can be in better position to one time bombs all night (I'm not sure if the game engine actually takes this into account) then his powerplay performance would suffer due to his out of position penalty. But if player A is natural or good at the LW position, taking the "position assignment" out of the game, would allow him to play the left side of the PP without as much penalty. If it was implemented this way, still have his position skill count on special teams play, but if it was done with having to assign a position to a player before a game, then maybe have no out of position penalty for special teams play so that you can put wingers and D on their off hand side so that they can be set up for one timers, even going as far as allowing forwards to play D on the power play as some teams do this in real life.

3. Beginners guide. I have seen a lot of people talk about getting one of these set up, I'm not sure if it has been done yet or not, but my suggestion on the guide would be to not go too in depth. I think a guide that explains what everything means (for example, I would like to think myself someone that knows the game of hockey, but when i read on a players page where it said their spirit rating, i just wasn't sure what this referred to for a real world player), but some have even suggested the guide to explain how a beginner should set up their roster, what things to look at in a players ratings, what tactics to use, etc. I think that making sure everyone knows what each rating affects a players performance, and how each tactic will affect the style of how your player will play, but i think telling the GM how to go about setting these things, which tactic to use with what kind of player, that defeats the purpose of playing the game. These sort of things, I think, are best left to the GM to experiment, figure out what he likes best, what works best for his club and go from there.

I'm sorry for the long winded novel, when i try to explain a concept, i like to make sure there are no misunderstandings, and i appreciate those that are still with me at this point and didn't just close the page as soon as they saw that this post had a 9 billion word count. This is all i can think of right now for some suggestions (reasonable ones at least, there are ideas about waivers, and scouts that may just be too much of a pipe dream) and may add if something else strikes me at a later date. I look forward to hearing your critiques or praise (preferably praise) and any comments or counter-suggestions you may have.

Hey all,
 
If I didn't already make it clear in my recent introductory post, I love just about everything about this game - so if nothing changes, it's all good with me.  After managing for a full season, the two minor suggestions I will make are:
 
1. The ability to add player traits to the filter when searching for players.  Example: Say you're looking for a first line center with at least 85 Passing and 90 Spirit - and you also want to make sure he's not a Cocky A-Hole .  It would be cool to be able to check off the traits you are looking for (and want to avoid) in your searches.
 
2. Email notifications upon receiving team messages.  This is just a personal preference.  I log on just about every day to check things out anyways, but as someone who manages both work and personal emails from my phone, it would be nice to have an email notification option when new messages are received (game results, player improvements, trades, etc.). 
 
Also, just wanted to add my 2 cents on the help files.  I think the amount of guidance that has been provided is perfect.  It gives you just enough knowledge to get started - and the answers to many other questions can be found if you look hard enough.  I think knowing exactly what needs to be done to make a successful team, in some ways, takes the fun out of it.  So far I've enjoyed getting to know my team, trying different things, seeing what works and what doesn't (trying players in different roles, on different lines, you get the point).  I want my team to be successful, but the fun part is the journey to get there, not the immediate success.  Just figured I'd share that.
 
Thanks for reading.
 
- Paul

I know I get tired of getting that too
I like the suggestion though.

I am in the need of a couple of centers and I have a goalie I can trade. I would like to be able to see quickly teams that may be in need of a goalie so I can Initiate a trade for a center. I could focus on those teams instead of initiating a trade with each team and see if they need a goalie.... I could see a list of teams in need of one.

If I'm understanding correctly, the player's contract negotiation message will change after 37/57 days? I like it.
 
Just to add stuff, I've got some suggestions for the wording.
 
For a player that would have confirmed interest: "I'm quite pleased with the team, I hope that we can talk about an extension in the future!"
For might interest: "The team seems to be trending upwards, I'll have to think a little more before deciding whether I would like to talk about an extension."
For no interest: "I've enjoyed my time here, but unfortunately I think it will be time for me to part ways with this team."
 
edit: Could someone just let me know if frustrated players have their own reasons why they don't want to rejoin a team. I haven't had to deal with that yet, but I think it would be cool if they did.

Greetings. 
  
    GW Howitzer, BHL: Well, it's day 65, season is drawing to an end.   On any kind of professional team, the GM would already have solid plans for the next season's lineup.
 
   We have 13 active lineup players on the last year of their contract, and only 2 are willing to negotiate a new contract.
So we have 11 players in our current lineup, whom will not negotiate, only saying: "I'm happy with my current contract".  
  As you all know: this could lead to an utter disaster for next season.  The problem is less severe in the GHL, as at least the player won't price himself off of the team, unless he's not a real keeper. If he's a real keeper, then the GM will sign him, and work the cap around that new salary.
But in the lower leagues: it's more difficult to plan and balance. 
 
   It's good not to just complain, but better to try and come-up with solutions along with the complaint. 
So how about a contract deadline day, by which the player must let management know his intentions. (EX: is he willing to negotiate, how much salary he wants, no chance, whatever.  Just let us know, or we'll cut-off the "extra benefits", from Irma, the team's masseuse. 
 
  How about day 37?  At the very latest: day 57.
 
Cheers, and hope you are all enjoying this cool game. 

This one is not really a single new suggestion, but an amalgamation of a bunch of previous trading suggestions that I think would vastly improve trading and is somewhat needed. I just happen to be doing this because I've gotten a few trade offers recently with random picks thrown in exchange for a bunch of extra minor league players who don't look like they'll ever compete on my team but then am unable to remove the picks from the trade which annoys me to no end. 
 
Suggestion #1: Let draft picks be removed from trades. I think I've typed it before, but I can't find it in suggestions so it's probably somewhere hidden in bugs. This is the straw that broke the camels back and I don't think much else needs to be said.
 
Suggestion #2: Track previous trade offers. It's been suggested in the past here http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/7261-track-trade-offers/ and here http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/5260-trade-partnershistory/  by Wingedbeaver and themattinthehat. Trade offers/negotiations can sometimes take days or even weeks. People forget what has previously been offered and sometimes accidentally send the same offer a second time. Sure people can right stuff down, but most people don't and notes can accidentally be thrown away or deleted after a little while. Another current option is to pm the person and negotiate through private messages before committing a trade, but that can take a long time and it's easier to have trade talks alongside a screen where I can quickly scan every player in a trade versus having to look and find each player on a team.
 
An addition to this suggestions would be to let people add notes to their trades and counteroffers. Let people quickly explain why they made/like/dislike a certain part of a trade and let managers see these notes along with the previous negotiations.
 
Suggestion #3: Transfer/trade needs. 
http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/5152-transfer-needs/ - canucks
http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/4421-trade-section/ - Victoria Royals
 
Essentially these suggestions just want to expand the current Trade Wants/Needs for teams. Let teams specify that there looking for that defensive forward with 85 defense and 80 spirit rather than the broad "two-way forward" suggestions right now. Also, it should be possible for teams to specify that they're looking to rebuild and acquire draft picks rather than limiting it wants to prospects. Personally, I consider a team looking specifically for draft picks to be just starting a rebuild and looking for star players while teams that just want prospects are finishing their rebuild and just wanting that extra good guy or two that they can lock up for a long time.
 
Suggestion #4: Grand trade want/need page. I wish that there to be a page with all teams that we can trade with so that we can easily see who would be good trading partners. Baden's suggestions here http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/8076-trade-needs/ is similar and gets a little more specific. I'm pretty sure his idea is if he has a player he wants to trade away (say a goalie) for something more need, he can filter away to all teams that would definitely want to acquire that certain goalie and/or would be already willing to give him the type of player that he is after.
 
Suggestion #5: Let us set certain picks & prospects as unavailable.
http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/7443-let-picks-and-prospects-be-untouchable-or-on-trade-block/ - ineffableleafs
We have all most of us have all had that pick or prospect that everybody wants but we are completely unwilling to trade it away for whatever reason. Let us just lock it/him away so that we don't get pointless offers and don't accidentally waste other people's time. Besides a locked pick/guy can always be unlocked through a PM.
 
Suggestion #6: Retained salary. 
http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/7288-trading-retain-salary/ - ineffableleafs
It just adds an extra element to trades as well as open up more realistic possiblities for those guys that are signed for just a little bit too much.
 
In my opinion, implementing some/all of these suggestions are important enough that they should get added in v1.3X. Of course I'd love to hear everybody else's opinion on the matter.

yes, that would be more preferable  +1

it would be nice to be able to compare 2 or 3 players when looking at the FA's or say when you are looking at your players on other teams'