05-19-2022, 05:26 PM(This post was last modified: 05-19-2022, 05:59 PM by Rancidbudgie. Edited 2 times in total.)
Word Count (Part 1): 3501
Part 3 of 3
General Management of the SHL - A Biopsy of the League’s Most Influential Position
Part 3: On the Future of the GM Position
This is part three of a three-part article. In the previous articles, I looked to empirically examine whether or not the team management position is experiencing an increasingly high turnover rate, and if this turnover is supplemented by a suitable amount of replacements or not, and whether it is getting harder for the League to find proper applicants for the opening positions. I also talked to members of the site, and shared their personal perspectives on some potential problems and challenges the team management positions are currently facing.
In this third and final installment of the article, I hope to end things on a more positive note, taking a present glance at some recent changes by the league to hopefully address these potential hiring issues, and hypothesize what might be the next step for the SHL as a whole in regards to its very identity as a community.
Potential Addresses to these causes: A glimpse of the future
Recently (in the middle of my initial composition of this article to be exact), Commissioner @WannabeFinn came out with a state of the union post that outlined some major changes to the upcoming SHL seasons, as well as highlighting some structural things and the league mindset moving forward. This was generally met with hopeful praise, given the content of the post, but I’d like to go over a couple of the major points in this article, and analyze whether or not they address some of the concerns brought up in this media piece, and may positively contribute to the potential GM hiring pool. The link to the full S65 State of the Union post can be found here - https://simulationhockey.com/showthread.php?tid=124185
Point 1: Addressing FHM6 and Test-simming Burnout
(direct quote from WBF, emphasis mine)
“Beginning in S66, the SHL and SMJHL will transition to Franchise Hockey Manager 8. It’s hard to overstate how much work and preparation have gone into the decision to pull the trigger on this change, from back-end/index work to hours of testing to ensure that this will be a significant positive improvement for the league. The work done on this predates many members of head office, and will continue throughout this coming season as we prepare to make the change. We know that you are likely to have a lot of questions and/or concerns about this change, and we welcome those discussions. We will have more information on this switch in the coming weeks, but for now, I wanted to communicate the official timeline on this. We will be looking at all options on the table when it comes to restricting access to test simming on FHM8. The test simming culture that has developed over the past several years has become a detriment to the overall league experience and a deterrent for aspiring GM’s, and we hope that we can mitigate these issues.”
Once again, the SHL will be switching its sim engine, but this time it will be a linear progression to the newest iteration of FHM, installment number 8. There are a lot of moving parts here, and it is somewhat worrisome that this echoes the sudden next offseason change in sim engine like the old STHS-to-FHM6 switch two years ago. However, the goal here was explicitly stated - HO, or at least the Commissioner, distinctly recognizes what the GMs observed, that “test simming culture” is actively harming the league experience. A specific mention of it being a deterrent to hiring aspirant GMs tied in nicely with this article, and personally I think that this is the correct attitude to approach the league from the top-down. I will withhold judgment to see if the change to FHM8 itself is what addresses this, but the intent of WBF and HO seems to be coming from the right place to handle these issues.
GMs largely agreed, with a sense of cautious optimism, most of them remembering their similar initial positive feelings after the switch from STHS. One GM offered some specific foresight: “I could be wrong, but from my understanding FHM8 will not only shift the meta but also significantly inhibit if not completely eliminate the automation testing some teams have employed to gain a knowledge gap.”
If this quote turns out to be true, it would be a massive win for potential managers to simply not have to devote larger blocks of time to test simming, and be able to focus on the more realistic managerial aspects of the job. Any other slight parity increases would be a bonus after that point. Once again, this is a “wait-and-see” change, but has the massive potential to address one of the largest cited reasons for GM burnout - test simming on FHM6.
Point 2: Addressing Parity
(direct quote from WBF, emphasis mine)
Minimum Salary Tier Adjustments
“Beginning in S67, contracts will be reviewed and adjusted yearly on the first day of the league year (the day free agency opens) to reflect the TPE tier a player is actually in. Previously, players in Tiers 1-6 could be signed for up to three seasons at the TPE tier they were in at the beginning of that contract. We have seen instances of players with well over 1,000 TPE playing on salaries as low as $2,000,000, no hometown discount or retention necessary. Starting in S67, contracts will be adjusted prior to each season for players who have moved into a tier that requires a greater salary to satisfy the minimum. For example, if a player has 1200 TPE at the beginning of S67 and is signed to a three-year deal at the Tier 5 minimum of $4,000,000 per season, but earns past 1300 TPE prior to the start of S68, their contract will be adjusted to the Tier 6 minimum ($5,000,000) for that season (S68). This change only applies to players who are going up a contract tier, it does not affect players who may regress into a lower tier. It’s our hope that this change will provide a much-needed nudge in the way of player movement and boost the value of younger, cheaper players. We hope that providing 2 full seasons of advance notice will reduce the likelihood of any last minute budgetary issues. We will continue to monitor the salary cap and how it functions, as it is a key tool for maintaining the health and competitiveness of the league.”
This specifically addresses the comment one anonymously-quoted GM made about the “balkanization of the league” (bonus points to that person for using balkanization in a sentence), and foster more of a league-wide community with competitive aspects, rather than a competition/arms race/tribal system at the expense of that community. I had a couple of GMs comment on this piece, and so far it is a relatively polarizing proposal - while some GMs agreed that there needed to be a little more player movement to grow the league community, as well as hopefully increasing parity a little bit, others thought that the changes were needless. “People who are forced out due to salary cap are more likely to just retire to go back to a team with their friends than seriously consider FA”, one GM commented.
Some more comments on the impending (or already implemented) league changes from GMs:
“The changes and clarifications to the rulebooks that the head offices have been working on for the better part of two years, as far as I know, has developed a lot [in regards to making GM tasks easier/clearer]. I felt pretty good about it when I was a GM”.
“I’d say [the difficulty of the GM role] has stayed about the same for the last three years/seasons. If anything, it’s maybe gotten easier thanks to the work of the commissioners”.
“I will applaud HO on recently increasing pay and giving out PT passes to make things easier on GMs”.
“I think most of the systemic functional parts of the job [Team management] have been fixed over time. Pick tracking is better, HO is more responsive, GM tasks are better defined, tools like the bank system make prospect development way easier, budget team is more effective than they used to be. Quite frankly if you’re stuck in a rebuild or something the actual GMing part of the job can be extremely hand-off without having meaningful impacts on the team’s performance which I think is a good thing”.
Overall, managers seemed to positively (or at least neutrally) view their interactions with HO members in recent years, and were overall optimistic of many of the changes that have occurred over the last little while, and the changes that are slotted for the future. They certainly had more positive things to say about HO than they did their fellow GMs, which once again indicates that these physical changes the league (rulebook-wise) sees are overall steering things in a constructive direction. The main macro-issue seems to be that in some instances, the management groups of the league differ in opinion on what the main focus the job of General Manager of a team should be, and there is some conflict as to how much the spirit of the league should be honoured first if it is to remain a healthy and sustainable community.
This piece also needs to come with a reminder - unlike the NHL Commissioner, Gary Bettman, who is largely a figurehead who is a public face for the wills and wishes of the NHL owners - the role of Commissioner in the SHL represents the face of the league and HO, and represents the very real influence of those who are in charge of picking the direction for where the league is going, and what it may become. Given the two pieces I quoted from WBF, it appears that this ideological quandary of the League is beginning to be talked about at the higher level where changes in policy are made, rather than solely by users in Thunderdome posts.
While not directly expressing it, the “justification” portion of WBF’s S65 offseason changes indicated that one of the most important things right now, beyond the physical day-to-day management of HO (which according to most managers has been steadily improving and building upon itself), is establishing and reinforcing the identity of the league - whatever that may be. Those appointed to head positions in the league do not have the NHL’s burden of earning money, or getting TV deals, or trying to expand the game to the Sun Belt of the United States. They are not being paid real dollars for this. Their position, which they devote their own time and energies to, eventually boils down to ensuring that the SHL can build a community that will have happy and healthy members through a love of generated stats about hockey, playing for teams that are our own creation. We have opportunities for anyone on this planet to be able to log on, make an account, and immediately begin contributing. Like contributing to the many roles that keep this site running such as updating, forum moderating, banking, and especially simming, but also roles that give the SHL identity, culture, and life. Graphic designs created by users to encapsulate the values of an online sports team in creative and vibrant colours, and give real life to the logos and designs of these teams. Historians that are curating and compiling statistics for everything from hallowed record books to inspiration for history-themed articles (a few of which I’ve written!). To media writers who take time to create an on or off-ice image of a hockey player, be they from Canada, Austria, Ireland, Romania, Antarctica, the Moon, or the Mushroom Kingdom. Players that are modelled after Sidney Crosby, Roope Hintz, Ben Bishop, Admiral Ackbar, the demigod Maui, a walrus in hockey gear, or a literal cup of Ramen Noodles.
And above all, the facilitators who take charge in their own communities, connecting with other people and talking on discord about the sim itself, IRL hockey, DnD, food, or anything else you might just want to chat about or express yourself with. This is what takes the structure of a sim league with hockey flair, and makes a community out of it. Most SHL members don’t just sit at the computer, or on their phone, crunching through updates to change some of their players numbers so that they will produce other higher or lower numbers for a sim.
The SHL is, and should be actively incentivized to be, a team activity that brings people from all over the world together with a common interest, and keeps them active here because we can be awesome people. When we encourage and incentivize players to have the time and energy to contribute and participate in the community in creative ways that interest them, in ways that add something more to the league, that is when we are achieving the axiological goals of the site’s existence.
In short, the SHL is at a crossroads of identity. Do we acknowledge that a perceived lack of parity is harming the site? Do we actively try to fight managers or players having success? @Henrik articulated an important question for the league moving forward: “That’s something we have to decide on as a community. Where do we draw the line? Should we be actively handicapping users that aren’t tech savvy or should we expect them to learn if they want to succeed? Is that realistic in our league?... Our strength is and always has been the community and the players and I think we should celebrate that.”
Conclusion/Send off
This article was a little set up from the start of the first part to be very doom-and-gloom, with me leading with the observation that league management positions seemed to be harder to fill, and perhaps I am “begging the question” by deliberately looking for a problem that causes this, and asking the members quoted here what they personally think is harming GM applications. However, I can come out of this feeling a little more enlightened into some of the social functions of the league, and how they might impact the hiring and development of good GMs. There will always be turnover due to real life, and a flow of new voices in management is always a good thing. But the amount of replies I got indicating that the person wanted to stay in the role, and had the time to do it, but left after a souring experience with parity or a negative culture, was saddening to hear multiple times. With this in mind, I want to highlight something imperatively important - almost EVERYONE I talked to had the attitude that GMing had many amazing qualities to it inherently, but that the specific grievances they perceived were things that made it not worth the enjoyment. To paraphrase philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (yes, I teach Philosophy, and I’m damn well going to weasel it in here), “True happiness is the elimination of misery, rather than the maximization of pleasure”. There were plenty of things about management that each person made emphasis of, and there is legitimate appeal to an amazing community position in the league. Many GMs complimented the recent changes by HO to give the position more positive appeal, which was cited as being both 'necessary and good', but in terms of not preemptively pushing away potential users who would make great GMs and have the free time, there are some negative obstacles that will likely need to be lessened or eliminated to see a stronger positive culture change. Removing the bad typically gives you far more “bang for your buck” than good incentivization to create overall happiness for the management position.
With that being said, I wanted to take the time to highlight a so far underrepresented part of this article so far - what GMs and Co-GMs enjoy (or enjoyed) most about their time in one of, if not the, most important jobs in the league. Below is a compilation of quotes I thought embodied the positive aspects of the role, as well as a couple of personal messages to potential GMs from those who have already enjoyed the position.
“I love my team, my alumni, and my locker room. They give me some of the most joy in this league. Our LR is always full of people bullshitting about almost anything but SHL, unless there is a sim active. We have so many inside jokes, we know each other's families, dogs, siblings, life stories, and stuff. We are very close and I think that's the most important thing for me in this league.” - @SDCore
"I really liked GMing for the most part. I didn’t think I would enjoy the culture building as much as I did but it was really rewarding. I really enjoy drafting and scouting. For me, the week or so leading up to the draft is the best. You get to talk to a ton of new people, you get to interact with other GM’s in a pretty friendly way for the most part and it’s genuinely a really good time”. - @Henrik
“Feeling like I made a difference in someone’s SHL experience is what was really rewarding about the position. I loved getting to meet new people and build a community in the team LR. I loved the sense of comradery in both the team I was building as well as the management groups I surrounded myself with. I loved watching things develop and change behind the scenes. Also drafting as a GM is some of my favorite memories in the league”. - @SpartanGibbles
“I loved how real it felt to GM a team. You have to deal with their personalities in the LR in addition to the requirements around scouting, trading, and generally building a roster. It was very rewarding to have a late round pick become a steal. It was also very rewarding to build a team with a fun group of people and see some success in the sim”. - @LordBirdman
“I love the SMJHL GMing because I’m directly in a development role. I love bringing in new folks and getting them accustomed to the league and seeing them go on to bigger and better things, getting jobs on the site, becoming respected members, etc. That’s my favorite part”. - @Ragnar
“I love being in a position of responsibility in the league and it is my way of giving back to the site which is otherwise entirely free.” - @Acsolap
“I loved getting to know the people. For the most part, the SHL has built up a really solid community… I really do enjoy my time here, and I want to see it continue to be a cool thing. Getting to work within my team and with the SMJHL Head Office to make the league a better place from my vantage was another huge draw for me.” - @Blitz
“I love being a General Manager. I love managing and building a team, interacting with the players and other users, and all in all I just really enjoy the team aspects of being a General Manager… All I can do is try to make my team the most enjoyable that I can, and hope that it is enough to keep players coming back to the league every week”. - @FuzzSHL
“In the SMJHL the best thing was to work with firstgens and prep them for the SHL. Help them build and develop their players and try to figure out what kind of person/player they are. Also the turnover time of the team was fun as players were called up after 3 or 4 seasons. So you had to have short term planning/vision for the franchise. In the SHL the best part was long term bonding of the team and long term vision. I’m grateful to have done both”. - @Katth
“I really would encourage anyone to give it a chance. Start off in WJC, which is usually a person's first experience to being a team general manager. Get involved in your team's war-room to see the ins and outs of decision making, as well as rule enforcement (every positive has a negative). The worst thing that can happen, is that you become a GM and then after experiencing it for a couple seasons you decide ‘nah, this isn't for me’.
But, if you never take the few minutes it takes to formally apply for a position that opens up. If you never test yourself and the waters...you'll never really know what you can really do.” - @Chevy
Thank you for reading this ponderous tome of compiled quotes and commentary! I hope it was, at the very least, informative as a conversation starter. I feel like this has definitely opened up my personal perspective on potentially GMing (if I now ever get the free time), as well as allowing me to step back and self-evaluate what I think the ultimate ideals and overall philosophy of the league should emulate. As always, I would love to hear your perspective.
This is a great piece. I think one of the things you mentioned that is underrated as a cause is that balkanization. When are no internal candidates to take over a team as GM, that's when I get worried about filling the opening. Walking into a established culture that you likely have minimal connection and guiding it in a way that makes it your own and doesn't upset the members that predate you is not a easy task. And a borderline unfair task to ask of a first time GM. Why would you leave your friends to go run a team of strangers. In my mind this is another reason i'd like to encourage more player movement.
I really respect the time, work, thought and tone you put into this. And i'm glad you got so much feedback, well done.
05-21-2022, 01:53 AM(This post was last modified: 05-21-2022, 01:56 AM by gordieboom. Edited 2 times in total.)
I like GMing, but three reasons i would never step into a role as GM on this site.
- I am from Europe (draft is probably the most important and fun part)
- I don’t own a copy of FHM
- WJC was my first experience and it wasn’t an enjoyable one.
05-21-2022, 10:32 AM(This post was last modified: 05-21-2022, 10:35 AM by Memento Mori. Edited 1 time in total.)
05-19-2022, 05:26 PMRancidbudgie Wrote: Point 1: Addressing FHM6 and Test-simming Burnout
(direct quote from WBF, emphasis mine)
“Beginning in S66, the SHL and SMJHL will transition to Franchise Hockey Manager 8. It’s hard to overstate how much work and preparation have gone into the decision to pull the trigger on this change, from back-end/index work to hours of testing to ensure that this will be a significant positive improvement for the league. The work done on this predates many members of head office, and will continue throughout this coming season as we prepare to make the change. We know that you are likely to have a lot of questions and/or concerns about this change, and we welcome those discussions. We will have more information on this switch in the coming weeks, but for now, I wanted to communicate the official timeline on this. We will be looking at all options on the table when it comes to restricting access to test simming on FHM8. The test simming culture that has developed over the past several years has become a detriment to the overall league experience and a deterrent for aspiring GM’s, and we hope that we can mitigate these issues.”
Once again, the SHL will be switching its sim engine, but this time it will be a linear progression to the newest iteration of FHM, installment number 8. There are a lot of moving parts here, and it is somewhat worrisome that this echoes the sudden next offseason change in sim engine like the old STHS-to-FHM6 switch two years ago. However, the goal here was explicitly stated - HO, or at least the Commissioner, distinctly recognizes what the GMs observed, that “test simming culture” is actively harming the league experience. A specific mention of it being a deterrent to hiring aspirant GMs tied in nicely with this article, and personally I think that this is the correct attitude to approach the league from the top-down. I will withhold judgment to see if the change to FHM8 itself is what addresses this, but the intent of WBF and HO seems to be coming from the right place to handle these issues.
GMs largely agreed, with a sense of cautious optimism, most of them remembering their similar initial positive feelings after the switch from STHS. One GM offered some specific foresight: “I could be wrong, but from my understanding FHM8 will not only shift the meta but also significantly inhibit if not completely eliminate the automation testing some teams have employed to gain a knowledge gap.”
If this quote turns out to be true, it would be a massive win for potential managers to simply not have to devote larger blocks of time to test simming, and be able to focus on the more realistic managerial aspects of the job. Any other slight parity increases would be a bonus after that point. Once again, this is a “wait-and-see” change, but has the massive potential to address one of the largest cited reasons for GM burnout - test simming on FHM6.
ISFL was once my main league, and ahead of the S27 season the ISFL switched to a newer edition of the same game. I GM'd before, during and after the switch. One of the stated reasons by HO (I can't find it in a post, so may have been stated privately to GMs) was to address a similar 'test simming culture'. There were lots of 'break points' for certain attributes that people had found (most notably speed), which resulted in a perceived lack of build variety. The big difference between ISFL and SHL is that the fact that the sim was 'solved' resulted in relative parity, rather than a lack of it. In the season before the sim switch, 9 of 14 teams finished within one game of .500.
On the new sim, test simming was much harder to automate. This may have resulted in a reduction in test simming, but it meant that test simming took much longer and was more involved (when it was more automated, I would test sim while doing household tasks and come back to the PC every 5-10 minutes to make changes). Without knowledge of these break points and other wisdom about what worked and what didn't, parity became much worse (at least temporarily, I am no longer active in ISFL) and teams that had a greater knowledge of the new sim (as well as the teams that were rumoured to have written programs that re-automated the process) had a huge advantage. The teams that were 1st and 3rd in TPE in the ISFL missed the playoffs entirely in the first season of the new sim with suboptimal strats and builds, because restricting test simming made test simming and overall sim knowledge more important than ever. Build variety was also worse than on the old sim, but perhaps this could be attributed to the way the new archetypes were made rather than the decreased effectiveness of test simming.
As long as there is an advantage to be gained from test simming (which, as we all know, there absolutely is), people will test sim. People want to win, understandably so.
You may get different answers by asking different GMs, but I spent more time test simming after the sim switch, felt far more burned out and it was a big reason why I eventually stepped down a few seasons later. I'd personally be very hesitant about restricting GMs from test simming, I think a better way to address the daunting nature of it is to provide people with more resources that make test simming easier and level out the amount of knowledge people have about the sim. This would actually address the 'culture' issue, rather than just pushing back against it. The problem with this is that it seems SHL has a much less collaborative culture than I've seen in other leagues - when myself and others (see this, this, or this article for some examples off the top of my head) conducted extensive studies about the sim or test simming generally, we shared the information with the rest of the league. The problem with the 'test simming culture' is not that people are test simming a lot, it's that the information is so guarded as a result of how competitive the SHL is.
TL;DR: The road to hell is paved with good intentions, you can bet the same users and teams putting in more effort now will do so again on the new sim and specifically restricting test simming is a bad idea imo.
05-19-2022, 05:26 PMRancidbudgie Wrote: Point 1: Addressing FHM6 and Test-simming Burnout
(direct quote from WBF, emphasis mine)
“Beginning in S66, the SHL and SMJHL will transition to Franchise Hockey Manager 8. It’s hard to overstate how much work and preparation have gone into the decision to pull the trigger on this change, from back-end/index work to hours of testing to ensure that this will be a significant positive improvement for the league. The work done on this predates many members of head office, and will continue throughout this coming season as we prepare to make the change. We know that you are likely to have a lot of questions and/or concerns about this change, and we welcome those discussions. We will have more information on this switch in the coming weeks, but for now, I wanted to communicate the official timeline on this. We will be looking at all options on the table when it comes to restricting access to test simming on FHM8. The test simming culture that has developed over the past several years has become a detriment to the overall league experience and a deterrent for aspiring GM’s, and we hope that we can mitigate these issues.”
Once again, the SHL will be switching its sim engine, but this time it will be a linear progression to the newest iteration of FHM, installment number 8. There are a lot of moving parts here, and it is somewhat worrisome that this echoes the sudden next offseason change in sim engine like the old STHS-to-FHM6 switch two years ago. However, the goal here was explicitly stated - HO, or at least the Commissioner, distinctly recognizes what the GMs observed, that “test simming culture” is actively harming the league experience. A specific mention of it being a deterrent to hiring aspirant GMs tied in nicely with this article, and personally I think that this is the correct attitude to approach the league from the top-down. I will withhold judgment to see if the change to FHM8 itself is what addresses this, but the intent of WBF and HO seems to be coming from the right place to handle these issues.
GMs largely agreed, with a sense of cautious optimism, most of them remembering their similar initial positive feelings after the switch from STHS. One GM offered some specific foresight: “I could be wrong, but from my understanding FHM8 will not only shift the meta but also significantly inhibit if not completely eliminate the automation testing some teams have employed to gain a knowledge gap.”
If this quote turns out to be true, it would be a massive win for potential managers to simply not have to devote larger blocks of time to test simming, and be able to focus on the more realistic managerial aspects of the job. Any other slight parity increases would be a bonus after that point. Once again, this is a “wait-and-see” change, but has the massive potential to address one of the largest cited reasons for GM burnout - test simming on FHM6.
ISFL was once my main league, and ahead of the S27 season the ISFL switched to a newer edition of the same game. I GM'd before, during and after the switch. One of the stated reasons by HO (I can't find it in a post, so may have been stated privately to GMs) was to address a similar 'test simming culture'. There were lots of 'break points' for certain attributes that people had found (most notably speed), which resulted in a perceived lack of build variety. The big difference between ISFL and SHL is that the fact that the sim was 'solved' resulted in relative parity, rather than a lack of it. In the season before the sim switch, 9 of 14 teams finished within one game of .500.
On the new sim, test simming was much harder to automate. This may have resulted in a reduction in test simming, but it meant that test simming took much longer and was more involved (when it was more automated, I would test sim while doing household tasks and come back to the PC every 5-10 minutes to make changes). Without knowledge of these break points and other wisdom about what worked and what didn't, parity became much worse (at least temporarily, I am no longer active in ISFL) and teams that had a greater knowledge of the new sim (as well as the teams that were rumoured to have written programs that re-automated the process) had a huge advantage. The teams that were 1st and 3rd in TPE in the ISFL missed the playoffs entirely in the first season of the new sim with suboptimal strats and builds, because restricting test simming made test simming and overall sim knowledge more important than ever. Build variety was also worse than on the old sim, but perhaps this could be attributed to the way the new archetypes were made rather than the decreased effectiveness of test simming.
As long as there is an advantage to be gained from test simming (which, as we all know, there absolutely is), people will test sim. People want to win, understandably so.
You may get different answers by asking different GMs, but I spent more time test simming after the sim switch, felt far more burned out and it was a big reason why I eventually stepped down a few seasons later. I'd personally be very hesitant about restricting GMs from test simming, I think a better way to address the daunting nature of it is to provide people with more resources that make test simming easier and level out the amount of knowledge people have about the sim. This would actually address the 'culture' issue, rather than just pushing back against it. The problem with this is that it seems SHL has a much less collaborative culture than I've seen in other leagues - when myself and others (see this, this, or this article for some examples off the top of my head) conducted extensive studies about the sim or test simming generally, we shared the information with the rest of the league. The problem with the 'test simming culture' is not that people are test simming a lot, it's that the information is so guarded as a result of how competitive the SHL is.
TL;DR: The road to hell is paved with good intentions, you can bet the same users and teams putting in more effort now will do so again on the new sim and specifically restricting test simming is a bad idea imo.
You absolutely nailed this and what I've tried to get at in a few conversations.
05-21-2022, 10:32 AMMemento Mori Wrote: ISFL was once my main league, and ahead of the S27 season the ISFL switched to a newer edition of the same game. I GM'd before, during and after the switch. One of the stated reasons by HO (I can't find it in a post, so may have been stated privately to GMs) was to address a similar 'test simming culture'. There were lots of 'break points' for certain attributes that people had found (most notably speed), which resulted in a perceived lack of build variety. The big difference between ISFL and SHL is that the fact that the sim was 'solved' resulted in relative parity, rather than a lack of it. In the season before the sim switch, 9 of 14 teams finished within one game of .500.
On the new sim, test simming was much harder to automate. This may have resulted in a reduction in test simming, but it meant that test simming took much longer and was more involved (when it was more automated, I would test sim while doing household tasks and come back to the PC every 5-10 minutes to make changes). Without knowledge of these break points and other wisdom about what worked and what didn't, parity became much worse (at least temporarily, I am no longer active in ISFL) and teams that had a greater knowledge of the new sim (as well as the teams that were rumoured to have written programs that re-automated the process) had a huge advantage. The teams that were 1st and 3rd in TPE in the ISFL missed the playoffs entirely in the first season of the new sim with suboptimal strats and builds, because restricting test simming made test simming and overall sim knowledge more important than ever. Build variety was also worse than on the old sim, but perhaps this could be attributed to the way the new archetypes were made rather than the decreased effectiveness of test simming.
As long as there is an advantage to be gained from test simming (which, as we all know, there absolutely is), people will test sim. People want to win, understandably so.
You may get different answers by asking different GMs, but I spent more time test simming after the sim switch, felt far more burned out and it was a big reason why I eventually stepped down a few seasons later. I'd personally be very hesitant about restricting GMs from test simming, I think a better way to address the daunting nature of it is to provide people with more resources that make test simming easier and level out the amount of knowledge people have about the sim. This would actually address the 'culture' issue, rather than just pushing back against it. The problem with this is that it seems SHL has a much less collaborative culture than I've seen in other leagues - when myself and others (see this, this, or this article for some examples off the top of my head) conducted extensive studies about the sim or test simming generally, we shared the information with the rest of the league. The problem with the 'test simming culture' is not that people are test simming a lot, it's that the information is so guarded as a result of how competitive the SHL is.
TL;DR: The road to hell is paved with good intentions, you can bet the same users and teams putting in more effort now will do so again on the new sim and specifically restricting test simming is a bad idea imo.
You absolutely nailed this and what I've tried to get at in a few conversations.
Some of us have been after this concept for a while. The competitive advantage gained from that knowledge gap is brutal at points.