|
||||
|
07-10-2014, 05:30 PM | #21 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
I don't understand...does this mean you've never created an FHM database? I've thought all along your proof was obtained by actual test results using FHM...is that not the case? How are you able to say "works like a charm"? And while I'm asking, how can you obtain ratings for Attributes like Screening/Shooting Range from historical stats? |
|
07-11-2014, 08:26 AM | #22 | |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 198
|
Quote:
As for how I derive those ratings... I have formulas that calculate ratings for players that will generate statistical results similar to their real life counterparts. There is a difference. In those two cases, having studied how FHM behaves I assign Shooting range differently to D and forwards based on goal production. For screening it's also based on goal production with modifiers based on a players size (all things being equal Cam Neely will have a better screening then Pavel Bure). It produces very consistent ratings. I don't care if people of the day thought Al Iafrate had a strong shot. I give him ratings that will get him producing stats appropriately. I use the game engine AS IS, not as I wish it was. Now... this is where I stop responding. Because really, I have outlined my methodology, my statistical methods and even exposed my full model. You can load those ratings into the game and test them to your hearts delight. I have been FAR, FAR, FAR more open then any of the "researchers" working on the game. I'd be very curious to know what "system" or research leads to a DB where Dave Semenko never plays more than a handful of NHL games, and guys like Gilbert Perrault and Henri Richard spend the last few years of their career on the reserve list (and I could list atleast 200 more examples of this in the late 70s/Early 80s alone... ad that's without going into details like poor Goal/Assist modeling). Last edited by G-Nuke; 07-11-2014 at 08:28 AM. |
|
07-11-2014, 09:56 AM | #23 |
Developer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 5,090
|
Jeff can answer all this much better than me but please keep one very important point always in mind:
FHM is not a replay hockey game. Even in historical mode the game is still a career simulation so e.g. it does not have any ratings/settings to limit players to small number of games during a season "just because they played not much in reality that season (for whatever reason)".
__________________
Buy Franchise Hockey Manager 10 |
07-11-2014, 12:49 PM | #24 | ||
Major Leagues
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
Like Sebastian said, "FHM is not a replay hockey game" Your focus on replicating stats from individual seasons is not representative of a simulation game (it is how a replay game works though). Iafrate had a howitzer, and should in game. Semenko as a tough guy/goon is likely suffering from the game not yet giving such players the value it should. Same with handling the career end of good careers (like Perrault/Richard), I don't think the game is handling it as well as it eventually will [I think the hidden Atts (including the Aging Att) are all still "10" for all players]. And as Jeff said earlier... Quote:
|
||
07-11-2014, 04:29 PM | #25 | |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 198
|
Quote:
Ah... that old chestnut. That used to be the excuse for bad baseball games too. An oldie but a goodie. You guys are a riot... it's like you are determined to repeat all the mistakes of every failed franchise simulation in history. Is that an iceberg ahead? No, no, it couldn't possibly be! Last edited by G-Nuke; 07-11-2014 at 04:34 PM. |
|
07-11-2014, 04:45 PM | #26 | |||
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 198
|
Since Nino quoted this, and since the entire FHM team has decided to enter Troll mode, (or as one user PMed me "Kick sand in my face for trying to be constructive") let me return in kind...
Quote:
Quote:
And when is all this monumental effort to research going to take place? Historical is not a priority, and likely never will be. So the mode is basically always going to suck. Quote:
Have you considered that bar none the biggest request is for access to the editor whether historical or current game? When you guys shut down editing in the last game you seriously pissed people off. In general people are rejecting this game because the team is arrogant, myopic and refuses to accept help from the community. Have fun with that iceberg. I now see that you guys are hopeless. I'll be in the life raft with all the sensible people that abandoned this game 6 months ago. Have fun! Last edited by G-Nuke; 07-11-2014 at 04:47 PM. |
|||
07-11-2014, 04:52 PM | #27 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Bear, DE
Posts: 1,618
|
I can agree with Jeff on one point, Nuke.. The injury ratings..
Perhaps a more constructive way to look at a player's injury rating is not to look at their NHL games played but at their OVERALL stat total of games played. For all we know, a guy could have been an AHL iron man. His lower offensive and defensive ratings would keep him out of the NHL and on a reserve list but he should not be there simply because he's injured. . . For the rest of your efforts, as a die-hard historical player who used to salivate as I installed the Lahman database into each new version of OOTP, I applaud and thank you. I do, however, have to commend the philosophy that OOTP 15 adopted with historical play. Not the code, I am not going to compare hockey to baseball, but the philosophy. I like that you have the option of developing players with the engine and I LOVE that Scouting is always 100% in historical games. THAT is one option FHM at least needs to adopt for historical sims.
__________________
Check out my Sims!! 2013 Boston Red Sox Or my blogs: http://www.medicsbk.com The Sports Medic |
07-11-2014, 05:07 PM | #28 |
Developer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 5,090
|
G-Nuke, I don't want to close this thread so please calm down and stay friendly. Please quote me where I "entered Troll mode" and I will apologize but nothing I can see in my posts is unfriendly.
The reason why I wrote the clarification about FHM ("not a replay game") is simply that both are two different types off games. Replay Games don't have a career mode (you simply replay one season) and try to reproduce them as closely as possible. FHM (much like EHM or FM) have a completely different purpose: give the user a chance to play as a GM/Coach over as many years as possible. Yes, we offer you a chance to play with historical rosters but the goal off FHM does not change. So using Injuries as a way to determine the GP by a player is nothing more then a hack, it is not the way FHM works and is intended to work. Same with all other stats as well, it is not as simple as "one rating = one stat", most of them are the sum of a lot of ratings from different players + e.g. position on the ice and game situation (ES/PP/SH). My fear is, that you want FHM to be something, that it is not build for. Yes, we will continue to enhance the mode over time (e.g. offering FHM development) but it will never be a replay game (like Faceoff Hockey never got a career mode). Clearly you are very passionate about historical mode and I totally respect this. I know Jeff is very passionate about is as well, so maybe you both should try to discuss it open-minded for each others ideas and restrictions. Thats the only way the mode (and the game) will improve over time.
__________________
Buy Franchise Hockey Manager 10 |
07-11-2014, 05:24 PM | #29 | |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 162
|
Quote:
|
|
07-11-2014, 09:36 PM | #30 | |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
__________________
Hockey is a lifestyle, you don't play hockey, you live it. |
|
07-11-2014, 10:09 PM | #31 |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
|
I too really wish there was an Editor available (instead of the Commissioner Mode/QuickStart method).
What Archibalduk has created for editing EHM07 would be great (the ability to export/edit/import data using excel files) |
07-12-2014, 05:43 AM | #32 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,910
|
Saying "this is not a replay game" is not really a complete answer. It is a partial answer.
If all players in all modes (not just historical but modern quickstart) were fictional, then there is no expectation how any player might do. But as soon as there are real layer names, expecting to rate those players correctly makes it a type of replay Even in 2014 NHL one should expect Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby will lead the league in points and say be between 100-120 doing so. In 1976 Lafleur, Clarke and Espo should be in the 110-130 range, while 1986 Gretz should be over 180, and the others in the 140+ range. Variation of course expected. Lafleur could realistically have had 95 points in one of his seasons (non injury) but if that was his yearly mark, then the game is not accurately producing numbers. Today if you play 2014 and Ovechkin scores 24 goals that's just not realistic, or if Dave Bolland led the league with 55 goals. Same thing. So its not a "replay" in that players should be very close to that year's numbers, they should be falling within a realistic range. I looked over what G sent. Given the state of the game, they are fairly decent numbers A note for Seb about historical. If you ever do getting working somewhat "realistically" then you would get a lot of sales from NA of players switching over from games they have to spend $40 for each season to $40 for all of them. But the game has to have "semi realistic numbers" and good playability. AND when/if the game could also switch eras (have everyone playing high goal pim 1980's style for example- another big seller). But there are sales to be made from it, but its a long way from getting them right now. Perhaps the long touted match engine patch will make the game play results more realistic to hockey. Even though I may be the most negative guy on the boards for this game- my love of OOTP keeps a wish going that this game can improve too- So while not a replay per such, just as Marcus wants ty cobb to be the best batter in the 1910's and likely hit between .350-410 a season, that is what hockey should do too. Maybe calling it "semi replay" helps to remind that some realism to the results of real named players is a must for any of the game modes (inc fictional and the modern world quickstart) to be actively pursued. Last edited by sprague; 07-12-2014 at 05:50 AM. |
07-12-2014, 06:04 AM | #33 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 1,209
|
I do think/hope a lot of these issues will be resolved with the game engine patch. I don't agree that it's a rating issue (e.g. doesn't Crosby have very high ratings in game?) - I think it's how FHM simulates the games.
Clearly using things like Injury Proneness to limit a player's GP is completely wrong. It's a lazy way of rating. The question is why did that player not play many games back in 1950, etc. Was it because he was on a particularly strong roster or was it simply that he was poor? If he was on a strong roster, how would he have played on an average roster? If he was particularly poor, what aspect was he particular poor at (e.g. was he a poor skater)? Of course there are players whose careers were blighted by injury and they rightly deserve higher Injury Proneness ratings. If you stick all of the low GP players with high Injury Proneness then you'll end up in game with all of the depth players constantly injured. That's clearly unrealistic. The key is to focus on how the players played and not how many GP/G/A they achieved. Obviously they play a part, but you cannot judge a player's ability purely from stats in hockey. Hence why players in FHM are being rated in the same fashion as other management sims like EHM and FM as opposed to OOTPB. FHM is more than a stats-producing game. It is supposed to simulate the game of hockey second by second. You can't get this just from GP/G/A. You need to research the strengths and weaknesses of the player. It's worth keeping in mind that the historical rosters are being rated by a single person (i.e. Jeff). It's a hell of a lot of work to rate rosters spanning something like 60 years. It's going to take time to finesse.
__________________
Webmaster of The Blue Line Eastside Hockey Manager & Franchise Hockey Manager community and resource |
07-19-2014, 09:27 PM | #34 | |
Minors (Rookie Ball)
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 41
|
Quote:
I sent you a PM about helping out with the helping out with the historic database. |
|
09-01-2014, 08:02 AM | #35 |
Bat Boy
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1
|
I think this option should definitely be added in the future; to have the Drafts follow the real-life draft positions of players. Shouldn't take too much time to implement since those stats are already known.
|
09-01-2014, 11:50 AM | #36 |
Minors (Single A)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 57
|
Is there any possibility in the sometime in the near future, we can have historical ratings be like a regular modern game where training and scouting actually do something in historical...
For example: the players start at their current database rating when drafted, but can develop or regress over time and NOT be recalculated every year according to how they played historically that year? I think I've been missing the point in this thread... What I mean is, basically applying the development engine we have in the modern game and simply applying it to the Historical game. For example, Sergei Fedorov starts out the highest overall rating in 1990 according to history, but then can regress or get better according to how we train him and injuries as well as age? Last edited by Bugsquasher; 09-01-2014 at 12:25 PM. |
09-01-2014, 09:18 PM | #37 | |
FHM Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brantford, ON
Posts: 2,888
|
Quote:
It is something they have on their wishlist as they have stated it but which version we do not know.
__________________
IN 1964 THE LEAFS WON THE STANLEY CUP :: IT'S ALSO THE YEAR THE CANADIAN FLAG WAS DESIGNED...coincidence? |
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|