bremitt

Members
  • Content Count

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by bremitt

  1. I think picks should be treated like players... What i mean by this is allow Picks to be put on the trade block or set them to Untouchable, and allow them to be listed as a Transfer need. When you are a rebuilding team, you want picks, a lot of picks, and it would be nice to tell everyone that you want picks, also, a rebuilding team doesn't really want to give up your picks, so being able to set them to Untouchable would be great, that way I'm not getting a bunch of annoying, bad offers for my picks when i want to keep them. Also as a competitor, you might be willing to give up your picks to get that player that may push you over the edge to go from competitor to favourite, so it would be great to be able to put your picks on the trade block, let everyone know that your picks are available for the right return. As far as i know, picks can't be Trade Blocked, Untouchabled or Transfer needed. It would really help in trying to communicate your intentions to other teams. If i am wrong, and this can be accomplished, please let me know...
  2. i was hoping perhaps, to have an expansion on roster sizes. I definitely understand putting a roster cap in the tiered worlds, as the more a higher tier team hoards players, the lower levels will suffer in quality of players. So i get that and wouldn't really ask for those to be expanded. My request would be for the North American style world. I still understand having the roster cap, spread the quality of players out, but i was wondering if maybe the cap could be expanded by say......5 players? My roster has the required 20 players you need to fill up a nightly lineup, then i like to keep a scratched centre, 2 scratched wingers (one each hand) and 2 scratched D (one each hand), that makes 25 players, this only leaves 5 spaces available for development players. Now, you need a 3rd goalie on hand in case one of yours gets hurt, you could use a development goalie for this, but if you're going to need him to serve as a backup for a long period of time, he won't get much playing time, which could hamper his development. So, if you decide to bring in a stronger, older 3rd stringer, that leaves 4 places for development players. As a manager that likes to build through the draft and develop from within, I feel like this just isn't enough. Adding another 5 players to the roster limit would allow for 9 total spots, 1 goalie, 3 D, 5 forwards (or however you want to arrange it) this seems a little more congruent to a proper development system. Another issue is the Farm club player status. Most of my players on the farm club get really tired all the time, because of this, if my main roster players are tired and need a need a day off, i can't just promote a player from the farm to cover for a game because they are all tired, hence the reason i keep extra's scratched on my roster. But i don't want to keep younger, development players as healthy scratches for the progress hindering reasons I mentioned above. If the farm player usage issue could be fixed so that they were always fit, it would solve my player development issues a bit, allowing for development players to be in the farm, getting play time, and then can be called up when i need them to fill in, it would erase the need to keep some older healthy scratches on the roster taking up contracts.
  3. Not sure if mentioned, so i will apologize if it has and I am just being redundant. The Process of having to go to a players page, let it load, click on assign/recall, let it load, then authorize that choice, then let it load, is rather annoying. Could it be possible to set it up so that when you are on your roster page, and you click on a player, and the pop up comes up with his ratings and traits, at the bottom, like how you can simply click on "add to shortlist" or "remove from shortlist" have another bottom that we can assign/recall that player? That way we can just quickly go down our roster list and do it all from one page in a much faster process.
  4. bremitt

    player ego

    That is a fair point, and by your definition that makes sense. To me, i always thought that Confidence was believing in yourself and your abilities, Cocky is making sure everyone knows how much you believe in yourself. A Confident player would have the puck behind his net and believe he could go coast to coast, but he sees a teammate open and passes the puck. A Cocky player would believe he could go coast to coast and attempt such a thing, much to the ire of his linemates. I've heard the saying, there is a fine line between confidence and cockiness. I guess another way to say it, that just came to me, would be to say that confidence is believing you can do it, cockiness is just being obnoxiously confident. to summarize, i never took cockiness as someone who is overcompensating for his lack of confidence, but is someone who is full of themselves and always thinks they are hot poop...
  5. bremitt

    player ego

    I think you misunderstand me... I'm not talking about "Anxious" in their "Big Game" rating, i mean when they are "anxious" in their confidence level. It changes (from my understanding) based on how often they are played and how well they are playing. This isn't about a confident player not handling pressure, it's about a player who has very low confidence, and yet his profile says that he is cocky. To me, a person who is cocky, is always confident.
  6. bremitt

    player ego

    now i understand the idea behind making players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" seem like a bad thing, and if you have a lot of these players, that would be a detriment to the dressing room chemistry, and this suggestion would sort of make having a lot of those players a positive, but here goes. Not sure if a suggestion is even the proper term, but more of an observation. My team is bad, and they have been doing bad, and I ran a lot of players through my team this season, so there are a lot of players that have been sat for long periods of time. I get that this hurts their confidence and I understand the reasoning behind this in the game. But I have players that are "cocky" and "arrogant" who are "anxious" or "uncomfortable", wouldn't these players always have high confidence? isn't that what being cocky or arrogant is? always thinking your hot stuff, which means they would have little issues in the confidence department. Now, if you changed it so that "cocky" and "arrogant" players were always confident, or at least had a confidence floor of "good", this would mean that bringing in those types of players would be a positive because they would always play at a higher level than someone who is the same skill level but has "uncomfortable" or "anxious" confidence. So I can understand that it sort of defeats the purpose of having personality issues being bad for a team. But if you could find a balance between them always being confident but they hurt the team chemistry enough that it's not worth it, etc, it may work. Or you could leave it as is, and that would be fine. As stated, not really a suggestion, just a funny observation.
  7. thanks for the heads up, and for those wondering, my team is the Superb Green Knights...
  8. so, if anyone is checking this... I inherited trash. I am at the bottom of LIHL and as the trade deadline approaches, pretty much my whole team is for sale. Spence, Huntley and Palardy are listed as untouchable, everyone else is expendable. Even my untouchables are available if your offer blows me away. Looking for good picks and good prospects or good YOUNG roster players, i don't want your garbage as i am already over flowing with it...
  9. I know there is no team editing, unless you are an All-Star account, and i understand why this is and accept this, my issue, to a degree (it is very minor) is that i was in LIHL when Farm teams were implemented, i was able to create my farm team, set up a theme with my main club. I recently was promoted to IHL and in doing so, was awarded another farm club at the AAHL2 level, and i was just assigned a team. Would it be possible, when being given a new farm club after a promotion, to do a 1 time edit of that team, and then after that 1 time edit, the details are fixed (unless you are an All-Star of course)? If the answer is no, i will gladly thank you for your time and back slowly from the room...
  10. the majority of my prospects that are playing for my farm club are tired or worse, does anyone know if this hurts their development? and if it does, how do i change it?
  11. and i get that, but it just seems like it is every game, and doesn't matter the rating, i could have a 74 guy (i've mostly been LIHL with my just earning my first promotion and only a hand full of games in) and he'll play crappy, my 56 backup will come in and stand on his head, almost every time...just seems too often to be a "bad game" or the backup gave the team a spark
  12. not sure if this is a bug, unintentional or intentional in the coding, or what...but my backups usually come in to out perform my starters...there has been many games where my starters will be dreadful, letting in 4 or 10 or so, get substituted out and my backup does great (95% sometimes), sometimes even earning the comback win...and if you are thinking "well he's just the better goalie, should get the start", i'll put him to start next game, and the other guy as the backup, and it still works out with the starter playing poorly, the backup up coming in and being outstanding... why would this be, and if it will continue, is it possible to set a setting that allows me to bring in the backup after 1 minute of play?
  13. i think i went through this too, and when the season ended, all their salaries came off the books...so it shouldn't be an issue
  14. I understand that there is an effort to keep lower leagues at a lower skill level, which I agree makes sense. What i think doesn't make sense, when there is a player that would normally be too good to accept an offer for my league but has no other interested teams, so after a time (maybe towards the end of the pre-season or even as late as a few games into the regular season), is it not better (by his logic) that he gets signed by a lower league (he can still ask for the moon financially, and only accept 1 year contracts so that he is free to hopefully find a job in a higher league next season) than to not work at all?
  15. bremitt

    RFAs

    i tried to put my suggestion and reinforce/explain my suggestion in hockey terms, but I don't feel like it is coming across like it should, so in the simplistic terms i can think of... Players under the age of 23, wouldn't be able to refuse to negotiate with their drafted teams...and if they are offered what they are asking (or the team is able to negotiate them down a tad) they will accept...but rather than be able to then just sign these players to a max term so that they never have to lose them, if the player would normally have no interest, then they can only be signed up until they are 23...it's that simple... so they are still asking the same as they always would, they won't have a free agency period where the top teams who can't afford these players can sit around until their salary demands go down. And there isn't already a "exclusive negotiating period" in playoffs, because right now, these players just refuse to negotiate, all I'm suggesting, is that until these players are 23, if you are the team that drafted them, they are unable to refuse negotiations and will accept reasonable offer...
  16. bremitt

    RFAs

    sure, you can say that the RFA period is during the playoffs, the difference i am saying is that i want to re-sign a guy, and have the room to do so, but he's 20 and already moving on...where with giving him a little bit of RFA time means a team get to hold on to their assets just a little bit longer, and have a chance to do go somewhere. If everytime a guy gets above 65, he leaves his LIHL team behind for bigger pastures, that team is gonna have a tough time. Having a top prospect for at least 3 more seasons could mean the difference between a promotion or not, not to mention, being able to be competitive after the promotion. Considering you drafted the guy, and if you are in the LIHL, drafted a guy that every team in a higher level has passed on, most more than once, this would be your stud to build your team around, be the face of your franchise. But before he's even of drinking age (in many parts of the United States) he says adios, and you're left wondering what was the point of drafting him. RFA rules in the NHL aren't to hold the players back, it's to help the teams and help them hold on to their assets a little bit. I'm just suggesting a small way to help lower teams out a little bit. By my RFA rules, if he didn't want to be on the lower league teams, he'd still be able to say "no thanks" by 23 and move on to make his millions and play in the best league he can, i'm not saying they'd be stuck drudging it out in the LIHL until he's far past his prime. I love the idea of players having personalities, far too often these games are just numbers and coding, giving the players personalities help define them as individuals.
  17. bremitt

    RFAs

    I don't think you are understanding my proposal, because it wouldn't be abusable at all. If a team is unable to sign their RFAs due to cap situation by the start of silly season (day 1) they become UFAs, so they can go anywhere they want, they could wait 10 days, but the player would probably be gone by then... a RFA would remain an RFA until 23 (or whatever age is decided upon) and a contract can't be signed past his 23 birthday, unless, you could add a side coding that if he would normally want to come back to your team, you can sign longer, but a player that would usually not sign with your team, but is an RFA, would only accept contracts that would take him to his 23rd birthday season. IF a team mismanaged their cap, and were unable to afford the RFA while he asks the same thing he would ask if he was a UFA, then at Day 1 of the new season, he is a UFA, even if he is only 20, so a top league team wouldn't be able to keep the rights of their RFAs, wouldn't be able to wait until his demands went down, if they can't re-sign him, he is a UFA.
  18. bremitt

    RFAs

    I understand that a player would go out and want to get get paid as much as he could and play at as high a level as he could, and that's why i ask for a little RFA addition, to help the teams that can't get anywhere because their top players leave them for more money and greener pastures. by the way, the player did sign for one league higher, but for the same money i would of gave him, or maybe even less... That's why my RFA restrictions are a lot less severe than the NHL, plus, the players are just numbers and code and data, they have no rights
  19. bremitt

    RFAs

    the thing is, i had a great player coming off of his entry level contract, so he was 20, and i had the cap space and the desire to re-sign him, but he said adios. The only difference my extra little additions would make is, this player would of been an RFA and ergo, i would have been able to re-sign him up to a 3 year contract.Hoping that by that time, by team would of gotten a promotion and then he would (possibly) be willing to sign with me again. If my team is still bad by then, he is a free agent and able to test the market. He would ask for the same contract as if an UFA, so the better teams can't hoard good players for cheap. And it would be in the spirit that if i was mismanaging my Cap and couldn't afford to renew this player, he'd become a free agent at 20 like he can now.
  20. sorry for the long reply time, been on vacation and wasn't really able to do much more than make sure a good lineup was set for each game day. I ended up in Fishbowl, I am the Lacombe General, and not doing as well as i would like. a 12 hour world could maybe work for me, if the turnover was at the right time, but it doesn't work out. In an effort to maximize sleep, i only allow enough time for me to wake up and get dressed before heading out the door for work. I work early, so on the 12 hour schedule, i am in bed before one game, and not getting home from work until a second game has passed. so if there is an injury or such after the first game, i wouldn't have the time to compensate before the next game. 1 game a day really does work decently for me though, i play a few of these sorts of games (Hattrick, Buzzerbeater, Brokenbat) and those schedules (with the exception of Brokenbat) are even more relaxed with Hattrick playing 1 league game a week and Buzzer Beater playing 2. With only 1 game a day in Game Plan Hockey Manager, it allows me to sign in for a 5-10 minutes a day and take care of all my needs, instead of having to sign him more frequently and irritate my wife.
  21. i saw mentioned about Waiver Protection clauses, which defeats the purpose of waivers, cause then teams would be signing all their players with these clauses, unless they are limited. But then you would only be saving them for your top players or future top playesr, but if they are your top players, they probably aren't getting sent down. If they are future top players, then the age system comes into play and you have a few years before they get to that point where they may be JUST good enough to play in the league, and you might want to send them down to get more playing time, but they've hit the waiver age, so you have to think twice, and make that hard decision. And it is that hard decision that makes me want Waivers and Roster Limits in the game. i can't see why people would cut their rosters down to only 22 players, that's only one lineup plus 2 players. A) you need a couple of extra players to cover for injuries and fatigue, etc. what about your drafted stud that isn't good enough to make it now, but will be in a few years. if you have a lineup (20 players) have 2-3 bench riders for injury relief, and 2-3 future prospects, that right there is already 24-26 players...and i personally try to make sure i have more than 2-3 prospects in the system. i previously suggested about waivers claims being available to your league and the league below, after some thought, this is a bad idea. Most players good enough to be even a future prospect for one league, is probably undoubtedly going to be good enough to be a regular player or at the very least a very near future super star and the league lower. So i revise my idea to only you league can claim your players. This otherwise every time you put a player on waivers, unless you are in LIHL, it is almost a guarantee claim by a league lower, and to prevent higher up teams from trolling (as mentioned). although, if a player is claimed on waivers, he should have to be on that teams parent club, and if he was to be sent down, even if it was immediately, he would have to pass through waivers again. So a higher league team claiming a lower league team probably wouldn't be too much of an issue (if there is roster limits) as this player would probably be not good enough for his team (after all, he wasn't quite good enough for a team a league lower) and he would probably just send him back on to waivers. What a roster limit and waiver system means to me is. Players can be sent down to be developed, but can be called up if the team is in need of an injury replacement. There comes a point in a players career where he has been around enough (either through age or games played) that he is not really a prospect much longer and should be a regular, or if he doesn't develop how you wanted him to, a fringe player. A Roster Limit stops you from having extra players like this just to be safe. A Waiver system stops you from being able to send these players down freely with no consequences. This sets up managers to possibly, one day, make a TOUGH DECISION, and creates challenges in the game (who doesn't want to be challenged) as well as creates a little bit of parity as the lower team (with in the same league) will be able to pick up some depth players that boil over the edge of the top players roster pot.
  22. agreed, when you go to "Team", "Roster", "Transfer", it would be nice to see the Salary of the "Assigned Players". It shouldn't be too hard for someone to quickly mentally translate their farm team salary into actual contract salary, but if it is needed, it could display their parent club salary. But it is a nice quick way to see who's contracts are up, etc.
  23. as Matt stated, the problem would be if your farm teams manager goes in a direction you don't want, and considering the Farm team is a vessel for you to develop your future players, them being developed in a way you don't want, defeats the purpose. The firing idea is intriguing, but how would you like to be the manager that gets fired? it's either do everything the parent club manager says, or risk a firing, so it's not really much fun. Plus, i could see some jerks that would just want to manage the farm teams to screw over the parent club. Farm team Trolls...no one wants that...
  24. and when you take into consideration that in the NHL, Goalies (even the good prospects) aren't often taken in the first round...
  25. i would say, the problem with going to in depth with Advanced Statistics is, at least on the player side of things, in real life, a hockey game is decided by many factors, there are a few players that Advanced Statistics say are bad but are decent players, and then there are others that Advanced Statistics say are good, but they aren't anything special. In this game (i would assume) the game engine runs on the players ratings and statistics, if you give too in depth stats, you would probably be able to find a definitive stat and just use that, ignoring all else. As for team Advanced Stats, you would be able to see what the team is doing well and poorly, but the game isn't telling you what players to replace to improve those stats. I would like to see more in the "team stats" on the "league" page. Even some of the basics seem to be missing, like shots for, shots against, PIMs...etc