Login

SFresh3 · 08-12-2020, 06:14 PM

08-12-2020, 04:47 PMGeekusoid Wrote:
08-12-2020, 02:59 PMsve7en Wrote: I still hold some of the concerns I did at the start.

There's twice as many role groups for forwards as there are defensemen, meaning you're either massively limited in options if you're a defenseman and excessively pidgeonholed as a forward.

Enforcement of this would be miserable.

It punished people who want to be responsible and balanced players.

It limits GM and player creativity in a way that doesn't align with the idea that restrictions breed interesting gameplay

This is meant to protect players from bad GMs, and protect the league from GMs looking to cheese, but I question if the first is that bad of an issue that needs fixing and the current role limits solve the latter better. GMs that I know already work with players to get them in spots that they want to be within reason.

I really have to side with what @sve7en is saying here.

Upon player creation, you get to select in the player build utility what type of player you want to build (the tactical roles are options). Deep down, and I may be talking out of my ass in the views of some, is that the issue here in what roles players are being used in is the unforunate byproduct of 80% or better of the players being built to run in the STHS era and ways of thinking....where you could stick a bunch of playmakers on a line and have it be successful, or go all snipers or mix them up, but just like in the builds of that era, everything became cookie cutter and it all came down to whomever could get the most TPE rostered to win.

The one thing that I absolutely love about FHM is that even lower teams can be competitive because there are so many more options, and those options allow a team and a player to be truly dynamic in this game.

Using one of the jets as an example: Commander Shepard.
An STHS veteran like many converted to FHM. Originally, a goal scoring type winger...but through his TPE gain and spending if you look at the attached image there is SO MUCH that he can do. Sure, his original role may not be the shadow role that he has been in....but on the team that different role has been an excellent addition to his line...and from his stats he's one of the best performing players we have.

Like @Muerto, as a GM I'm more than happy to work with every user on my team and in the prospect pool advance their vision of what they want their player to be. In fact, its one of the first questions I ask them whenever someone asks for build help. I would though, hate to see FHM limited as a GM and as a player (in what I can select and use) and turned into a new...flashier Simon T.

Looking at all of his options, what would make someone think 'I should put him as an Agitator'? He's obviously not building towards it at all, so why can GMs put him in such a sub-par role that he wouldn't ever think his player would want to play?

***Chevy*** · 08-12-2020, 06:29 PM

08-12-2020, 06:14 PMSFresh3 Wrote:
08-12-2020, 04:47 PMGeekusoid Wrote: I really have to side with what @sve7en is saying here.

Upon player creation, you get to select in the player build utility what type of player you want to build (the tactical roles are options). Deep down, and I may be talking out of my ass in the views of some, is that the issue here in what roles players are being used in is the unforunate byproduct of 80% or better of the players being built to run in the STHS era and ways of thinking....where you could stick a bunch of playmakers on a line and have it be successful, or go all snipers or mix them up, but just like in the builds of that era, everything became cookie cutter and it all came down to whomever could get the most TPE rostered to win.

The one thing that I absolutely love about FHM is that even lower teams can be competitive because there are so many more options, and those options allow a team and a player to be truly dynamic in this game.

Using one of the jets as an example: Commander Shepard.
An STHS veteran like many converted to FHM. Originally, a goal scoring type winger...but through his TPE gain and spending if you look at the attached image there is SO MUCH that he can do. Sure, his original role may not be the shadow role that he has been in....but on the team that different role has been an excellent addition to his line...and from his stats he's one of the best performing players we have.

Like @Muerto, as a GM I'm more than happy to work with every user on my team and in the prospect pool advance their vision of what they want their player to be. In fact, its one of the first questions I ask them whenever someone asks for build help. I would though, hate to see FHM limited as a GM and as a player (in what I can select and use) and turned into a new...flashier Simon T.

Looking at all of his options, what would make someone think 'I should put him as an Agitator'? He's obviously not building towards it at all, so why can GMs put him in such a sub-par role that he wouldn't ever think his player would want to play?

Simply to troll at that point

caltroit_red_flames · 08-12-2020, 08:55 PM

08-12-2020, 05:02 PMTnlAstatine Wrote: I think there should definitely be a push and pull between gm(coaches) and players, its like in real life when you are trying to teach your superstar to play more defense (lookin at your mcdavid and drai)

This was what was originally talked about in the switching to FHM discord. Somewhere along the way GMs just didn't do, and I guess that's our fault really for not having some sort of safety net to enforce it. Players should be going to their GMs and saying "I'm a sniper, play me as a sniper or I'm going to FA" but just like with contracts everyone is doing whatever their GM says for the good of the team. Sucks cause player agency should be what the league is about, instead it's about gaming the system and playing all agitators. Still pissed about that.

charlieconway · 08-12-2020, 09:57 PM

08-12-2020, 08:55 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote:
08-12-2020, 05:02 PMTnlAstatine Wrote: I think there should definitely be a push and pull between gm(coaches) and players, its like in real life when you are trying to teach your superstar to play more defense (lookin at your mcdavid and drai)

This was what was originally talked about in the switching to FHM discord. Somewhere along the way GMs just didn't do, and I guess that's our fault really for not having some sort of safety net to enforce it. Players should be going to their GMs and saying "I'm a sniper, play me as a sniper or I'm going to FA" but just like with contracts everyone is doing whatever their GM says for the good of the team. Sucks cause player agency should be what the league is about, instead it's about gaming the system and playing all agitators. Still pissed about that.

I think the biggest problem with contracts is that there's a disconnect between the value of contract dollars in real life and the value of contract sim bux. A dollar earned in the media forum spends just as well as one earned with your salary, and there's no worry about making as much money as possible for your family and your future post-retirement self. Not only is there no *real* incentive to make as much as possible in FA... there's an incentive to do the opposite: the less you make, the better players your team can field.

Andy · 08-12-2020, 10:21 PM

Oooo I have an idea! What if your role was for a week. So when you update you do your update and then you put your roll under TPE.

That way you’re locked into it for the week and the player and GM can work together hopefully. I know charging could work but I think then players could change daily vs just a line of text under their total TPE

Example:

Code:
Total TPE = 2020

Role = Rushing defenseman

This could also makes the sim a bit more real as coaches/ GM’s would be forced to change pairs/ lines instead of just changing roles of our players

***FuzzSHL*** · 08-12-2020, 11:20 PM

To an extent, I agree with the premise of this. However, at the end of the day, the proper way to make this work would very likely just add to the confusion for new players.

If this were to become a thing, I think it would have to be something that would only be asked of the player once they unbanked from juniors to go to the SHL. This way it gives players a few seasons to work through build options with their junior GM as well as giving them an opportunity to talk to SHL GMs about what roles they would possibly want to be and where they would fit in the long term plan. This would also add to the scouting depth for the SHL. I think asking this of new players right away would just make things more confusing, and delaying that choice until they have had time to develop in the league would be the only way this works, whether it is "select a role group" or "select x number of roles".

Aleksi Kettu

SFresh3 · 08-13-2020, 12:23 AM

08-12-2020, 11:20 PMFuzzSHL Wrote: To an extent, I agree with the premise of this. However, at the end of the day, the proper way to make this work would very likely just add to the confusion for new players.

If this were to become a thing, I think it would have to be something that would only be asked of the player once they unbanked from juniors to go to the SHL. This way it gives players a few seasons to work through build options with their junior GM as well as giving them an opportunity to talk to SHL GMs about what roles they would possibly want to be and where they would fit in the long term plan. This would also add to the scouting depth for the SHL. I think asking this of new players right away would just make things more confusing, and delaying that choice until they have had time to develop in the league would be the only way this works, whether it is "select a role group" or "select x number of roles".

I agree with the unfamiliarity with the site/process and the sheer TPE numbers, that this "rule" should be only come into affect once you get called up to the SHL. The Js GMs should be working with every player to get a feel for where they want to go, give them build suggestions and role ideas, but leave it more fluid. Then when you understand more about FHM, the builds, and roles, make the choice of whatever roles your player can fit into when you enter the big league.

caltroit_red_flames · 08-13-2020, 12:23 PM

08-13-2020, 12:23 AMSFresh3 Wrote:
08-12-2020, 11:20 PMFuzzSHL Wrote: To an extent, I agree with the premise of this. However, at the end of the day, the proper way to make this work would very likely just add to the confusion for new players.

If this were to become a thing, I think it would have to be something that would only be asked of the player once they unbanked from juniors to go to the SHL. This way it gives players a few seasons to work through build options with their junior GM as well as giving them an opportunity to talk to SHL GMs about what roles they would possibly want to be and where they would fit in the long term plan. This would also add to the scouting depth for the SHL. I think asking this of new players right away would just make things more confusing, and delaying that choice until they have had time to develop in the league would be the only way this works, whether it is "select a role group" or "select x number of roles".

I agree with the unfamiliarity with the site/process and the sheer TPE numbers, that this "rule" should be only come into affect once you get called up to the SHL. The Js GMs should be working with every player to get a feel for where they want to go, give them build suggestions and role ideas, but leave it more fluid. Then when you understand more about FHM, the builds, and roles, make the choice of whatever roles your player can fit into when you enter the big league.

I don't agree. A player doesn't need to know the sim to know they want to score goals or play defense really well.

spooked · 08-14-2020, 03:57 PM

Why can't we just let players pick a role and give them a free role change or two per career with some amount to pay for it?

If letting GMs try to do it themselves is causing exploit abuse to occur, just remove that aspect of lineups and make it fair across the whole league by having it be decided by each player and force GMs to balance rosters through actual roster and drafting decisions. Having a bunch of random rulebook stuff to do with lineups just makes it more confusing.

SlashACM · 08-14-2020, 04:06 PM

The agitator thing wasn't to troll, we found it enhanced players point totals, not lowered them. Cloutier is actually a better sniper as a goon then as a sniper

SFresh3 · 08-14-2020, 11:49 PM

08-14-2020, 04:06 PMSlashACM Wrote: The agitator thing wasn't to troll, we found it enhanced players point totals, not lowered them. Cloutier is actually a better sniper as a goon then as a sniper

Huh, strange that when you put him in a role that specifically lowers the opponents bravery (literally their willingness to get in the way of shots) it opened the lane for his superior shooting skills to actually work.

Now, call me crazy, but I don't think Clouter had any thoughts of ever being played as a Goon with a fighting attribute of 5 (the KEY ATTRIBUTE for Goons) so you're just throwing players in roles to game the system, rather than to actually Simulate a Hockey League.

ml002 · 08-15-2020, 12:37 AM

08-14-2020, 04:06 PMSlashACM Wrote: The agitator thing wasn't to troll, we found it enhanced players point totals, not lowered them. Cloutier is actually a better sniper as a goon then as a sniper

Hamilton found that 99 scoring and 40 passing enhanced player point totals too

Credit to Copenhagen, Wasty, FlappyGiraffe, InciteHysteria, and caltroit_red_flames
[Image: MM4nqx6.png]

***Chevy*** · 08-15-2020, 08:04 AM

08-15-2020, 12:37 AMml002 Wrote:
08-14-2020, 04:06 PMSlashACM Wrote: The agitator thing wasn't to troll, we found it enhanced players point totals, not lowered them. Cloutier is actually a better sniper as a goon then as a sniper

Hamilton found that 99 scoring and 40 passing enhanced player point totals too

Is that like the “new meta” of 5 attack and 5 hitting that all of the top teams have in common and the lower half of the standings don’t?

***golden_apricot*** · 08-15-2020, 09:44 AM

08-15-2020, 08:04 AMGeekusoid Wrote:
08-15-2020, 12:37 AMml002 Wrote: Hamilton found that 99 scoring and 40 passing enhanced player point totals too

Is that like the “new meta” of 5 attack and 5 hitting that all of the top teams have in common and the lower half of the standings don’t?

the hitting at attacking sliders are set to 5 because those teams can get away with it and still win, they are not decisively better than other tactics, but these get players more fantasy points so we roll with them. Its not a meta in the sense that it is better, because if it was junior teams would see the same results and that is not true

***Chevy*** · 08-15-2020, 11:02 AM

08-15-2020, 09:44 AMgolden_apricot Wrote:
08-15-2020, 08:04 AMGeekusoid Wrote: Is that like the “new meta” of 5 attack and 5 hitting that all of the top teams have in common and the lower half of the standings don’t?

the hitting at attacking sliders are set to 5 because those teams can get away with it and still win, they are not decisively better than other tactics, but these get players more fantasy points so we roll with them. Its not a meta in the sense that it is better, because if it was junior teams would see the same results and that is not true

On the contrary, I first encountered it during WJC last tournament against a very tough & competitive Canadian team and a surprisingly active Finland team who used it . I brought this up in advice on how to counter it in the Team USA management chat and was told that it was exactly what Hamilton was using last season and "haha, we've found the new meta boys".

As for junior teams, I don't see many running 5's. I see a couple running 4's and, in particular, your Armada were running the 5's early on (globally, though now it seems you just set hitting to 5) similarly to the Canadian national team and while not active. Also visible from the view only setting, your lines aren't set to run that setup but the sliders are already well in place to do so.

In my own testing as well I have been able to take a team with an average season run and squeeze a few more wins out of them (No, not Winnipeg) by switching over to these tendencies as well. While I'm not saying that they are the absolute reason for various successes, I do believe they do have a larger contributing factor than someone might think especially since it has been used to some degree of success in different situations with different teams over the last two seasons.

I do however, plan to perform more scientific testing on this.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us