[Adam B]

Originally Posted by Mancandy

It took you seven years to figure out that expansion teams are supposed to participate in the entry draft before their first season, so you have absolutely no room to talk about “realism” in this game.

We shouldn’t have to “look at a player history” to tell us. When Corey Crawford announced his retirement, he didn’t say “look at my stats and history and that’ll tell you why I retired.” He gave us a clear, understandable, relatable reason. When people make suggestions to improve immersion, your response shouldn’t be an immediate dismissible, it should be taking it into consideration, or at least saying that, even if you don’t plan on doing so. And while I’m here, when somebody asks a question like OP did - simple yes or no question - your response shouldn’t be to completely ignore them in favor of jumping down the throat of the first reply because they used a word that got under your skin. It’s not hard to be friendly and engaging with customers(if you can’t do it, that’s fine, customer service isn’t for everybody, but you probably shouldn’t be interacting with customers on behalf of the game if you can’t) and I guarantee this type of behavior drives people away from the board and away from the game.

You are going past the line here, and if you continue, you will lose the ability to post on our forums.

We do listen, a lot actually. First and foremost, I would apologize to Todd because re-reading, I thought his question had been answered. There isn't a way to change it. But I stand by what I said. There are often messages with players stating why they are retiring as well.

The majority did not find what you disagreed with about the Draft and Expansion draft dates to be a big deal. The thing we've gotten asked about most this year? Why we moved the draft.

You are reading too much into a post and trying to create conflict where there is none.

Originally Posted by Danielg342

Players also come out of retirement from time to time. I know he's not a hockey player but Jason Witten did.

Here's the thing. Sometimes there's a player I like and I'd like to keep him around. Yeah, it's not "realistic" but some of us don't want to play with absolute 100% realism. We'd still like to see if Wayne Gretzky can produce as a hockey player in his 70s, for instance.

In the first iteration of the Eastside Hockey Manager, there was a way to "undo" retirements (and set them too), as long as you remembered to ensure you had enough retiring players so that you didn't go over the database's limit. I'd love to have something similar in FHM, at the very least.

I grant I don't know how easy- or practical- it would be to program such a thing but one of the draws of FHM is how much control over the hockey world you have. The one aspect that's missing (aside from being able to create a professional multi-league tournament) is stopping retirements. Surely something can be worked out so that people like me who'd like the feature can use it in some capacity.

The only player I can recall who was retired and came back in the last 25 years was Mike Fisher. I'm not saying there isn't more, but I can't think of any (Justin Williams never actually retired).

I understand your point as well, but our database is significantly different than OOTP or any other product. Unretiring isn't possible. The closest thing to do would be import the player back, age him a year and put him on a 3 or 4 year contract. As I stated earlier, 1 or 2 year deals won't keep someone. You could also mess with development age. Someone had some fun results on Reddit.

Originally Posted by AdequateRandomGaming

Fair point for recalc, which I didn't know was on for Historical Challenges. IMO that feature should be either an option, or turned off. Somebody that really knows a certain era for a challenge can abuse this by trading players away that are on the verge of retiring for better talent/picks (at least for challenges that span multiple seasons)

As for the rest, you completely missed out on the word "immersion". Of course I can go look at all those things, then compare with real life to see at what age a certain player retired - but I shouldn't have to.

I don't understand the constant need to be utterly defensive when people only bring up quality of life suggestions that would make the game experience arguably better. If it's not possible, you can say so, no harm no foul. Just don't dismiss your customers to 3-4 different hockey databases outside of the game so they can figure out for themselves why a player retired at 25.

Now I know you guys don't like comparisons with OOTPB because they have had many more versions and the engines are different, but would an email like OOTPB generates during the season letting you know of players that are going to retire at the end of the season something that would be possible ? That would allow teams to plan ahead of time in certain situations and use assets to get what they need, since retirement happens on July 1st, which is the date in the year teams have the least amount of assets available due to retirement, contract expiry, etc.

Recalc was put on for Challenges to give consistency. Yes, you could cheat, but you could cheat more easily with Commissioner Mode and editing tools on. Nothing is quite foolproof. It's not so much about going to other places, but more people using the previous knowledge. It's hard to set something because no matter what we could do someone's going to be less than satisfied.

Also the truth about the comparisons; it's not that we don't like them. It's more about us emphasizing we are different teams, different engines and different development. When people say why can't you just steal x from OOTP, it's having to explain that fact over and over again that can get repetitive.

As for the other, I'm not sure! But I'll pass it along. The reason why retirements happen on July 1st is the database changing over and it's the only functional day that makes sense. Ideally in some far off future version, retirements will happen sporadically but that's probably a dream for the foreseeable future.

There is nothing wrong with offering constructive criticism. There is nothing wrong with having a debate. My job is to try and explain things to both the community and to the developers. It's not always easy both ways. I understand the frustration of seeing a player you like retire, but that's why I gave that background. Age is important. Contract status is important. How are players development is trending is important.

I'm going to leave this thread unlocked right now, but keep it civil.