co

[Darth Analyst]

Hi,

This is my first post, so I would like to begin by thanking the developers for a great game!

I normally prefer to play with a fictional expansion team in the NHL, and I started noticing that after a few years it was very difficult to draft players who were not prone to injury or controversy. In order to find out if this was correct, I did a little study. I ran a game for 15 years (without playing myself) starting in 2025 and checked the attributes for injury proneness and controversy of the top 10 players drafted to the NHL and the last 10 players drafted to the QMJHL for each year between 2020 and 2040.

Here is what I found with respect to injury proneness.



NHL top 10 Q last 10


injury proneness
2020 9,2 10
2021 8,5 10
2022 8,9 10
2023 9,1 10
2024 10 10
2025 9,5 10
2026 10 10
2027 10,2 10,7
2028 11,1 10,4
2029 10,9 11,3
2030 10,2 11,6
2031 12,3 10,3
2032 10,8 9,9
2033 12,4 11,4
2034 11,2 13,5
2035 11 11,7
2036 12,8 9,6
2037 12,4 10,7
2038 8,8 10,3
2039 10,6 11,4
2040 11,1 11

The draft pools between 2020 and 2025 should consist of players that are - I think - hardcoded into the database. Between 2026 and 2030 it should consist of a mix of hardcoded players and computer generated players. And from 2031 it should - I think - exclusively consist of computer generated players. The averages look like this.

Averages injury proneness
NHL QMJHL
2020-2025 9,2 10
2026-2030 10,48 10,8
2031-2040 11,34 10,9

As you can see, the averages look fine up until 2025. (All Q prospects that were included in the study had a value of 10). But the averages for injury proneness is higher for computer generated players, but not catastrophically so.

It is possible to lower the frequency of injuries in the game options, so while this look like an unfortunate type of inflation, it is not a big problem.

Matters are however different for controversy. Here is what I found.

NHL top10 Q last 10
controversy
2020 9,4 13,6
2021 9,2 15,4
2022 9,5 15,4
2023 9,1 15,4
2024 8,5 15,4
2025 10,6 15,4
2026 10,6 15,4
2027 12,6 15,4
2028 11,7 15,4
2029 11,5 15,4
2030 12,5 15,4
2031 12,7 11,8
2032 14,3 13,1
2033 13,1 13,1
2034 13,5 13
2035 13,2 13,8
2036 12,3 15,4
2037 13,8 14,7
2038 12,2 14
2039 12,9 13,9
2040 13,4 13,5

Controversy averages
NHL QMJHL
2020-2025 9,38 15,1
2026-2030 11,78 15,4
2031-2040 13,14 13,63

As you can see, the numbers are fine for the top end prospects that are hardcoded into the game and drafted up until 2025, but for some reason the numbers for the bottom Q prospects that are hardcoded into the game is sky high. (I guess the same would be true for all junior leagues, but I haven't checked)

Starting in 2026, the numbers start to rise for the top end prospects in the NHL as well. And the average for the computer generated players that populate the draft class in the 2030s is far too high with an average of 13,14.

Here, unfortunately, we do not have an option to adjust the frequency of team harmony events, so this is a much more serious issue than the problem with injury proneness.

[tomkmb]

Originally Posted by Darth Analyst

Hi,

This is my first post, so I would like to begin by thanking the developers for a great game!

I normally prefer to play with a fictional expansion team in the NHL, and I started noticing that after a few years it was very difficult to draft players who were not prone to injury or controversy. In order to find out if this was correct, I did a little study. I ran a game for 15 years (without playing myself) starting in 2025 and checked the attributes for injury proneness and controversy of the top 10 players drafted to the NHL and the last 10 players drafted to the QMJHL for each year between 2020 and 2040.

Here is what I found with respect to injury proneness.



NHL top 10 Q last 10


injury proneness
2020 9,2 10
2021 8,5 10
2022 8,9 10
2023 9,1 10
2024 10 10
2025 9,5 10
2026 10 10
2027 10,2 10,7
2028 11,1 10,4
2029 10,9 11,3
2030 10,2 11,6
2031 12,3 10,3
2032 10,8 9,9
2033 12,4 11,4
2034 11,2 13,5
2035 11 11,7
2036 12,8 9,6
2037 12,4 10,7
2038 8,8 10,3
2039 10,6 11,4
2040 11,1 11

The draft pools between 2020 and 2025 should consist of players that are - I think - hardcoded into the database. Between 2026 and 2030 it should consist of a mix of hardcoded players and computer generated players. And from 2031 it should - I think - exclusively consist of computer generated players. The averages look like this.

Averages injury proneness
NHL QMJHL
2020-2025 9,2 10
2026-2030 10,48 10,8
2031-2040 11,34 10,9

As you can see, the averages look fine up until 2025. (All Q prospects that were included in the study had a value of 10). But the averages for injury proneness is higher for computer generated players, but not catastrophically so.

It is possible to lower the frequency of injuries in the game options, so while this look like an unfortunate type of inflation, it is not a big problem.

Matters are however different for controversy. Here is what I found.

NHL top10 Q last 10
controversy
2020 9,4 13,6
2021 9,2 15,4
2022 9,5 15,4
2023 9,1 15,4
2024 8,5 15,4
2025 10,6 15,4
2026 10,6 15,4
2027 12,6 15,4
2028 11,7 15,4
2029 11,5 15,4
2030 12,5 15,4
2031 12,7 11,8
2032 14,3 13,1
2033 13,1 13,1
2034 13,5 13
2035 13,2 13,8
2036 12,3 15,4
2037 13,8 14,7
2038 12,2 14
2039 12,9 13,9
2040 13,4 13,5

Controversy averages
NHL QMJHL
2020-2025 9,38 15,1
2026-2030 11,78 15,4
2031-2040 13,14 13,63

As you can see, the numbers are fine for the top end prospects that are hardcoded into the game and drafted up until 2025, but for some reason the numbers for the bottom Q prospects that are hardcoded into the game is sky high. (I guess the same would be true for all junior leagues, but I haven't checked)

Starting in 2026, the numbers start to rise for the top end prospects in the NHL as well. And the average for the computer generated players that populate the draft class in the 2030s is far too high with an average of 13,14.

Here, unfortunately, we do not have an option to adjust the frequency of team harmony events, so this is a much more serious issue than the problem with injury proneness.

Yeah I've noticed as you get deeper into the game that it's virtually impossible to find a prospect who isn't prone to controversy - kind of frustrating after a while because really, it hurts the effect of it in terms of making a player 'stand out' - you know, it's okay to maybe consider taking on one bad apple if his talent level is high enough but when you've got no choice because 90% of the player pool all have high controversy ratings it becomes meaningless.

[WoolyKnights]

Great analysis Darth

[GMO123]

Will this be fixed, corrected?

[treestreetgaming]

Originally Posted by GMO123

Will this be fixed, corrected?

Probably low on the priority list, especially with them wanting new content in the next update.