Immersion in FHM (and other games) + little FHM update

[Simple Mathematics]

Originally Posted by moore4807

REALLY?

Perhaps you might visit YouTube videos Hockey fights...
2/9/11+ 3/24/14 Boston vs Montreal
2/11/11 NYI vs. Pittsburgh
4/5/12 Philly vs Pittsburgh
2/7/13 + 5/6/13 Pittsburgh vs Boston
11/1/13 Philly vs. Washington
1/18/14 Calgary vs. Vancouver
I believe in keep fighting in the sport as its been from the beginning, the 70's were one area where the rubber band got stretched too far but then got stretched equally as bad with the Gretzky/Lemieux(?) years where flopping became an art form. Hockey is and always has been both a physical contact sport and artistry on ice, but that contact is forever going to cause sparks to fly!

Line brawls happen very sporadically these days. You get a handful per year. Bench clearing brawls do not happen anymore. Ever. After all, it's an automatic suspension if you jump off the bench, so I don't even know what a team would do if it had 14 players suspended.

Believe me, I'm a huge fan of fighting. I'm a Flyers fan so it's basically in my blood. I just want the game to be realistic.

[AlpineSK]

Originally Posted by moore4807

REALLY?

Perhaps you might visit YouTube videos Hockey fights...

1/18/14 Calgary vs. Vancouver

I agree 100% that fighting should remain in the game as well as in hockey..

As for the perception of how often fights happen (especially line vs line or bench clearing) I watched this fight.. It was GREAT.. I'm surprised Torts didnt come over the bench himself.. I did notice though that at the 3:45 mark in the video, the commentators even say "This just does not happen anymore at this level. You don't even see it in junior hockey anymore"

I can't recall seeing many bench clearing brawls in the NHL in my time as a fan.. I've seen some massive fights (Colorado vs Detroit comes to mind) but bench clearing ones no.. I know this game isnt targeted just at NHL fans though. Do bench clearing fights happen often in the KHL or european leagues? If they do I'm missing a lot of good stuff..

[moore4807]

Originally Posted by Simple Mathematics

Line brawls happen very sporadically these days. You get a handful per year. Bench clearing brawls do not happen anymore. Ever. After all, it's an automatic suspension if you jump off the bench, so I don't even know what a team would do if it had 14 players suspended.

Believe me, I'm a huge fan of fighting. I'm a Flyers fan so it's basically in my blood. I just want the game to be realistic.

Well your last line probably would have changed the whole tone of my reply...

Realism is a tough cookie though. aggressive people sometimes snap and then all the "always", "nevers" and" I can't believe it's" suddenly become "oh wow it's happened again" especially in hockey. I'm thinking about all the tough guys who wrapped a stick around or over somebody's head. Then the spearing (Phil Kessel vs. John Scott) and that line brawl nearly went into the bench.

It's the pest (think Steve Ott, Matthew Barnaby) agitating until all h*ll breaks loose and then the .01 percent suddenly happens and +150 mins of penalties in a period occurs! I just don't want the game to lose the ability to go Broad Street if I choose to play that way. If my players aggression and physicality are nearer 20 than 1, then I expect somebody to either go to the dressing room from a hit or the Friday Night fights to happen. If I'm playing a team like Buffalo with John Scott, then wouldn't I certainly be stupid if I don't do something to protect my investments from him?

[umwoz]

I'm curious about the "player rating" or "game rating" that tells how well the player performed in a game.

Is it through the filter of your scouts/coaches ability to grade a player? Or is it an objectively based good/bad system? Would be interesting to have a player look like his rating is bad, only to fire your coach and see that it was a personnel issue rather than a player one.

[Hadehariast]

Originally Posted by umwoz

I'm curious about the "player rating" or "game rating" that tells how well the player performed in a game.

Is it through the filter of your scouts/coaches ability to grade a player? Or is it an objectively based good/bad system? Would be interesting to have a player look like his rating is bad, only to fire your coach and see that it was a personnel issue rather than a player one.

I think it will be based on a good/bad system, where certain events (giveaways, takeaways, goals, assists, etc.) will contribute to a +/- to an arbitrary starting value (6.0 seems like a popular one in other games). Given that the new game engine will be simulating a lot of events on the ice during every second of game time, it could be possible to see smaller "micro-events" like winning a battle in the corner or making a good outlet pass add to the score in small amounts.

Sebastian, have you considered adding manager past experience to the game? Something like in FM: "unknown player", "semi-pro player", "worldwide star" e. g. It was great entering the game as Diego Maradona

As for team talks and interviews, I like them! And I think that if you will look at casual gamers, they like it too. It would make hockey players look like the people from flesh and blood. Although, of course, it's your decision.

[viktors89]

Originally Posted by umwoz

I'm curious about the "player rating" or "game rating" that tells how well the player performed in a game.

Is it through the filter of your scouts/coaches ability to grade a player? Or is it an objectively based good/bad system? Would be interesting to have a player look like his rating is bad, only to fire your coach and see that it was a personnel issue rather than a player one.

I have no idea how will it be done but the logic way to do it seems to follow a good/bad system that it's run through every game, very much like hadehariast commented, and then do an average of all game ratings.

What you propose is interesting but I think it gives too much complexity, when I play I want to see if the player is doing good or bad with an objective opinion, no need to complicate it more

[Sebastian Palkowski]

The Game Rating is based on a Good/Bad System, so every Goal, Assist, GA, TA, Hit, successful pass, bad pass, FO, ... will influence the value. We also take into account the situation on the ice (e.g. ES or PP, where the event takes place) and the role of the player.

During a game you can see the value change as the match progresses, after a game you get the final value in the after game report. In addition, you get the last 5 values shown on e.g. the roster screen, you get the average season value (one value for each game type, Pre-Season, Regular-Season, PO) which also get stored as career stats.

[moore4807]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski

The Game Rating is based on a Good/Bad System, so every Goal, Assist, GA, TA, Hit, successful pass, bad pass, FO, ... will influence the value. We also take into account the situation on the ice (e.g. ES or PP, where the event takes place) and the role of the player.

During a game you can see the value change as the match progresses, after a game you get the final value in the after game report. In addition, you get the last 5 values shown on e.g. the roster screen, you get the average season value (one value for each game type, Pre-Season, Regular-Season, PO) which also get stored as career stats.

Just because I'm dense upstairs, I have to ask - Is this change going to be color coded to the affected number? (IE; a players passing rating going down will be either yellow or red, going up will be green or blue?) I'm asking this because for realism/choice I would think this would be something the coaching staff would have to notice for the player attributes to change, much like scouting. If I have below average asst. coaches then shouldn't I suffer the penalty that goes along with having that non awareness?

The immersion factor of an assistant coach telling the head coach in game that "Nick Grossman isn't skating well and we should bench his butt" is much more attractive option to me than seeing a - 1 skating, -1 energy...

If I'm misreading what your saying or there is a "hide this feature" option then smack me around. But I don't want the level of the game to get too easy.

[Sebastian Palkowski]

I talked about the Game Rating going up/down based on e.g. successful/missed passes.

The Game Rating basically tells you how each player performs during a game.

Originally Posted by moore4807

Just because I'm dense upstairs, I have to ask - Is this change going to be color coded to the affected number? (IE; a players passing rating going down will be either yellow or red, going up will be green or blue?) I'm asking this because for realism/choice I would think this would be something the coaching staff would have to notice for the player attributes to change, much like scouting. If I have below average asst. coaches then shouldn't I suffer the penalty that goes along with having that non awareness?

The immersion factor of an assistant coach telling the head coach in game that "Nick Grossman isn't skating well and we should bench his butt" is much more attractive option to me than seeing a - 1 skating, -1 energy...

If I'm misreading what your saying or there is a "hide this feature" option then smack me around. But I don't want the level of the game to get too easy.

[moore4807]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski

I talked about the Game Rating going up/down based on e.g. successful/missed passes.

The Game Rating basically tells you how each player performs during a game.

OK I told you I was dense...

Currently I go into the game screen and sim the periods - then read the stats to determine my players performance and making corrections (adding/subtracting T.O.I., players moving up or down the lines) and I do this based on my own observations and looking at the performance of the player (generally from the skater 1 dropdown) AND the opponents stats...

Now from that description can you penetrate my denseness and shine a light on the changes this in game ratings will make or improve?
I really am supportive of this game, I just don't see the improvement other than the game player not having to do any "work" in the game. Will there be a hide this feature option?

[Bruins86]

Originally Posted by moore4807

OK I told you I was dense...

Currently I go into the game screen and sim the periods - then read the stats to determine my players performance and making corrections (adding/subtracting T.O.I., players moving up or down the lines) and I do this based on my own observations and looking at the performance of the player (generally from the skater 1 dropdown) AND the opponents stats...

Now from that description can you penetrate my denseness and shine a light on the changes this in game ratings will make or improve?
I really am supportive of this game, I just don't see the improvement other than the game player not having to do any "work" in the game. Will there be a hide this feature option?

Just a thought on my end, i do agree that if your looking at a offensive player it can be easy to see how he is doing by looking at point totals, shots taken etc. I like the avg rating system more for my defensive players who are alot harder to tell if they are being effective in the roles that i want them to play. Most stats you can get from the game tell you how the team does defensively as a whole but not so much for the individual player. I am hoping that if i have someone like Dan Paille who i don't expect to much of anything offensively but expect to get sold PK play and such that his game rating will show a 8 or whatever because he did what is expected of him.

I hated in EHM how if i had a really good defensive player his avg rating wold be 6.5ish at best making it hard to tell if he was playing good or not, because the rating were geared for offence and physical play rather than good defensive work like Positioning and stuff like that.

My ideal system would be to have two different game ratings one for offensive work and one for defensive work. I do agree however on the ability to hide the rating for people who don't want to see them.
Again just my 2 cents

Edit: i should also specify that i don't watch the games so much and kinda just sim day to day.

[moore4807]

Originally Posted by Bruins86

Just a thought on my end, i do agree that if your looking at a offensive player it can be easy to see how he is doing by looking at point totals, shots taken etc. I like the avg rating system more for my defensive players who are alot harder to tell if they are being effective in the roles that i want them to play. Most stats you can get from the game tell you how the team does defensively as a whole but not so much for the individual player. I am hoping that if i have someone like Dan Paille who i don't expect to much of anything offensively but expect to get sold PK play and such that his game rating will show a 8 or whatever because he did what is expected of him.

I hated in EHM how if i had a really good defensive player his avg rating wold be 6.5ish at best making it hard to tell if he was playing good or not, because the rating were geared for offence and physical play rather than good defensive work like Positioning and stuff like that.

My ideal system would be to have two different game ratings one for offensive work and one for defensive work. I do agree however on the ability to hide the rating for people who don't want to see them.
Again just my 2 cents

Edit: i should also specify that i don't watch the games so much and kinda just sim day to day.

You made an excellent point I never even thought of...and agree fully on.

I found the immersion factor and my ability to compete greatly increased by doing the period by period sims, I could see how the AI opponent weighted their lines against mine, and by changing the T.O.I. I could keep my best defensemen on the ice against the opponents #1 lines more often - which depends how you set your team up. My #4 line is my checking line and often gets the bulk of the minutes when I have the late lead as Marcel Goc is leading the league in FOW and LW Bergenheim and RW Kopecky are both positive +/- so it is definitely better than the AI minutes assigned to them before.

There is also the fact of managing game minutes so at the games end I don't have defensemen playing 30+ minutes and my first liners having 25+ minutes.

This is the one feature where FHM is clearly superior to EHM and along with scouting is probably the most underused... but as you pointed out its just my $.02 and opinions are like...

[beezer2434]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski

I did some reading in one of the epic threads about how sport management games in general should let the user imagine a living world. I totally agree with that, in fact that is, what I love so much about Football Manager. Of course it took FM a long time to reach that level they have now (and a lot of people work on FM) but thats not an accuse for us to not even try. Just start and evolve over the years.

That said, I know FHM 2014 lacked in this area. There are a few reasons for that, nothing I want to repeat again as I left the past behind me and moved on. More important of course is, that it was/is our main focus for FHM 2 (and beyond) to change exactly that. FHM 2 shapes up pretty nice (at least in my opinion) and even if it is still not the right time for more details (you don't have to wait to much anymore, we just need to wait for the next open Newsletter window to send out the details for FHM 2) I want to at least start a discussion on this topic:

Immersion, as it is called nowadays, plays a big part in our plans for FHM going forward. So what does it mean (for me)?

My favorite game mode in sport management games is playing day to day, play out my matches, do all the roster management, line/roster changes and player interaction on a daily basis, drafting, trading/transfers. Basically the way you play FM and EHM (or the old German football manager games like Anstoss).

Sometime last year I sat down and started to play FHM 2014 that way and quit frankly, I did not like the experience very much. It did not feel like playing a career in a living hockey world. With that in mind I started to think about what is missing and went to the drawing board for FHM 2. The results will be revealed shortly and before hopes skyrocket again, it is a start (even if I think it is a big step forward) to a long process, not a "FHM 2 has all the great features from FM now".

Just as a little appetizer, here are a few of the small changes, that make the game so much more fun for me to play:

- completely re-designed history (including team/league PO history) area.
- added info here and there (e.g. expanded draft info) that really adds to the experience.
- much better reputation tracking for GM/Coaches (e.g. rankings).
- coaches now have better ratings to make them different from each other.
- Historical $-values in historical leagues, looks much better now.
- a Game Rating that gives you an idea on the game performance of your players (a lot of work went into the design to get it right for all kinds of player types. Not an easy task.).
- Real game flow in the Match Engine, "seeing" (as in reading ) the puck movement via passes and moving, icing, offside, dump-in's, clearing attempts, breakaways (it is still in testing but reading the pbp when a player is on a breakaway in OT, that will be a lot of fun).
- a massively expanded news-text db.

I could go on and on but that has to wait until we make the official announcement. The newsletter (with feature list and release info) seems to go out on Friday, 20th February, maybe I will release the info before here on the board (I can't wait to talk about FHM 2, I`m very exited ).

Before someone asks, the match engine patch will still be released before FHM 2. The plan at the moment is to release it as a beta patch once our internal testing is done so everyone who is interested in it can download and test it. Feedback will be very important for us in regards to improving the Match Engine for the FHM 2 release.

Is the newsletter still being sent out tomorrow?

[viktors89]

Originally Posted by moore4807

OK I told you I was dense...

Currently I go into the game screen and sim the periods - then read the stats to determine my players performance and making corrections (adding/subtracting T.O.I., players moving up or down the lines) and I do this based on my own observations and looking at the performance of the player (generally from the skater 1 dropdown) AND the opponents stats...

Now from that description can you penetrate my denseness and shine a light on the changes this in game ratings will make or improve?
I really am supportive of this game, I just don't see the improvement other than the game player not having to do any "work" in the game. Will there be a hide this feature option?

If you do sim like this I don't think it's going to be an improvement for you, but for a lot of people that don't want to take so much time to analyze, it is an improvement. I include myself in that bunch.

The hide option would be cool for people that prefer to analyze everything with their own system, hopefully they add it.

[julius]

I think adding in a game rating for each player is a great idea and the developers should be commended for responding to this community request. Obviously we need to see how it works and what factors will affect it and by how much (i.e will making a bad pass or missing a check count as much as scoring a goal?) but I am really pleased that this attempt is being made. As others have already stated, it is a way to recognize individual contributions that aren't fully captured by the main game stats and moves closer to an immersive experience (since we can't actually "see" these guys perform). But for those who wish to use only the game stats to assess their players, there should be an option to hide this. I doubt that many will.

[Sebastian Palkowski]

A goal is much more worth then a single pass.

[Sebastian Palkowski]

Originally Posted by beezer2434

Is the newsletter still being sent out tomorrow?

No, because we don't have the internal capacities with everyone working on OOTP/iOOTP at the moment. But we will post the info from the newsletter as a thread here on the board in the next 3-4 days so thats basically the same info.

[julius]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski

A goal is much more worth then a single pass.

This certainly makes sense, but how much more? And if the bad pass was intercepted and leads to a goal against, maybe not? This is all good stuff, Sebastian, and I am looking forward to seeing how this feature works. I admit that I rely heavily on these ratings in FM, where they seem to work well.

[Bruins86]

Originally Posted by julius

This certainly makes sense, but how much more? And if the bad pass was intercepted and leads to a goal against, maybe not? This is all good stuff, Sebastian, and I am looking forward to seeing how this feature works. I admit that I rely heavily on these ratings in FM, where they seem to work well.

If i had to guess the weighing system between different aspects of the game will probably be tweaked as long as the game is in development meaning FHM 3,4 etc. It to me seems like alot of trial and error so to speak. Although i cant say for sure since i am not a developer obviously.....yet jk lol

Edit: Also Sebastian, was wondering if there are any plans to break the game ratings system between offence and defense and have them shown separate sometime down the line?