Development report in custom league

Aube · 10-20-2017, 10:49 AM

I've been playing a custom league, and for the last 4+ months during the development report one of my centers, Payton Paiement, shows up as having increased his LD position by +1. The attribute never actually goes up, nor do I expect it to since he doesn't so much as play point on the powerplay; he plays as a center exclusively. For reference, this happened both before and after today's patch. I've linked to the save on my dropbox, it's the offseason so simming to the next development report should be quick if you wish to try to reproduce the issue.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qntyxq8ftc...gue.lg.7z?dl=0

Edit: Sorry, I thought I put this in the technical support section. I don't know if it can be moved there by a moderator, but feel free to do so.

Aube · 10-20-2017, 11:22 AM

If you have a look at this save and sim on through to July 1st, the draft evaluation shows no one more than half star potential, and includes 34 year olds. Something might be a bit off with the youth generation as well.

Aube · 10-20-2017, 12:37 PM

I'm not sure if this is specific to custom leagues, but the fictional universe I generated is VERY heavy on half star to one star players. This isn't a problem in itself, I like that skilled players are at a premium. However, the AI ends up filling up to their 60 man contract limit grabbing every old half star player they can to fill in their minor team, not really letting the minor team fill in their own rosters. This causes the top league teams to assign what looks to be HUGE negative value to all their useless old players.

Immediately after the draft, I wanted to see what I could offer for the rights to the first overall pick, a 5 star consensus 4.5 star by my scout's reckoning potential defenseman. As expected, it involved gutting a large part of the young up and coming core of my team. It was very steep and maybe not worth it, which I APPROVE of, but when i went for it anyways, I got t he notification that they had too many players under contracts. I added a one star 34 year old, and it still said the trade should be accepted. On a whim, I filled in all 4 of their slots that weren't their first overall pick with these 30+ year old useless players on one year contracts, removed everything from my side of the trade, added in a single two star old d-man, and they were completely ok with the trade. Removing those 4 players from his payroll SHOULD add value for him, it's great that that kind of thing has been added in since it gives you options for contract dumps if you have the free roster and budget space, which is as it should be, but I think it's WAY over the top when used en masse like this. The negative value of each of those old guys works out to a 2.5 to 3 star players (in this league, teams have between 2 and 7 3star+ potential players, with 3-4 being pretty common, so this level of player is relatively high if the game takes scarcity into consideration).

Negative value's a great concept to have implemented, but it might need a look at for edge cases, which may be more a custom league thing than an NHL thing and so likely less of a worry in the grand scheme of things.

JeffR · 10-20-2017, 06:15 PM

Thanks, I'll have a look at the save. Re: the trades, I'm wondering if it may be a problem with the sequence of the additions and deletions to the trade leading to a value miscalculation - unless those four guys were badly overpaid, the valuation system shouldn't have attached a value too far off 0 to them.

Aube · 10-20-2017, 08:00 PM

It's more than that, I can safely say. At least in this save file you can start a new trade, offer a young 2 star player from your team, a 4+ star on their team, then keep adding half star minimum wage old players until it evens out then goes all the way to 'sure to accept'. I checked the team I tested this on just now, they have 30+mil in budget space and only have 55 out of 60 contracts used up, so it's safe to say this isn't a 'negative value' situation, and happens outside of just adding and removing players to 'confuse' the AI.

10-20-2017, 10:49 AM	#1
Aube Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 65	Development report in custom league I've been playing a custom league, and for the last 4+ months during the development report one of my centers, Payton Paiement, shows up as having increased his LD position by +1. The attribute never actually goes up, nor do I expect it to since he doesn't so much as play point on the powerplay; he plays as a center exclusively. For reference, this happened both before and after today's patch. I've linked to the save on my dropbox, it's the offseason so simming to the next development report should be quick if you wish to try to reproduce the issue. https://www.dropbox.com/s/qntyxq8ftc...gue.lg.7z?dl=0 Edit: Sorry, I thought I put this in the technical support section. I don't know if it can be moved there by a moderator, but feel free to do so. Last edited by Aube; 10-20-2017 at 10:53 AM.

10-20-2017, 11:22 AM	#2
Aube Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 65	If you have a look at this save and sim on through to July 1st, the draft evaluation shows no one more than half star potential, and includes 34 year olds. Something might be a bit off with the youth generation as well.

10-20-2017, 12:37 PM	#3
Aube Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 65	I'm not sure if this is specific to custom leagues, but the fictional universe I generated is VERY heavy on half star to one star players. This isn't a problem in itself, I like that skilled players are at a premium. However, the AI ends up filling up to their 60 man contract limit grabbing every old half star player they can to fill in their minor team, not really letting the minor team fill in their own rosters. This causes the top league teams to assign what looks to be HUGE negative value to all their useless old players. Immediately after the draft, I wanted to see what I could offer for the rights to the first overall pick, a 5 star consensus 4.5 star by my scout's reckoning potential defenseman. As expected, it involved gutting a large part of the young up and coming core of my team. It was very steep and maybe not worth it, which I APPROVE of, but when i went for it anyways, I got t he notification that they had too many players under contracts. I added a one star 34 year old, and it still said the trade should be accepted. On a whim, I filled in all 4 of their slots that weren't their first overall pick with these 30+ year old useless players on one year contracts, removed everything from my side of the trade, added in a single two star old d-man, and they were completely ok with the trade. Removing those 4 players from his payroll SHOULD add value for him, it's great that that kind of thing has been added in since it gives you options for contract dumps if you have the free roster and budget space, which is as it should be, but I think it's WAY over the top when used en masse like this. The negative value of each of those old guys works out to a 2.5 to 3 star players (in this league, teams have between 2 and 7 3star+ potential players, with 3-4 being pretty common, so this level of player is relatively high if the game takes scarcity into consideration). Negative value's a great concept to have implemented, but it might need a look at for edge cases, which may be more a custom league thing than an NHL thing and so likely less of a worry in the grand scheme of things.

10-20-2017, 06:15 PM	#4
JeffR FHM Producer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Kelowna, BC Posts: 16,623	Thanks, I'll have a look at the save. Re: the trades, I'm wondering if it may be a problem with the sequence of the additions and deletions to the trade leading to a value miscalculation - unless those four guys were badly overpaid, the valuation system shouldn't have attached a value too far off 0 to them.

10-20-2017, 08:00 PM	#5
Aube Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 65	It's more than that, I can safely say. At least in this save file you can start a new trade, offer a young 2 star player from your team, a 4+ star on their team, then keep adding half star minimum wage old players until it evens out then goes all the way to 'sure to accept'. I checked the team I tested this on just now, they have 30+mil in budget space and only have 55 out of 60 contracts used up, so it's safe to say this isn't a 'negative value' situation, and happens outside of just adding and removing players to 'confuse' the AI.