Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 25 Available - FHM 10 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 25 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Prior Versions of Our Games > Franchise Hockey Manager > FHM - General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-10-2014, 05:30 PM   #21
Nino33
Major Leagues
 
Nino33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Nuke View Post
Quick starts are not an option for many obvious reasons:
A) I would still need to re-rate every player, every season manually after season 1.
B) Save games have a funny habit of not working from version to version, so even if I got a set working they wouldn't last
I thought at the least it could prove your success/better method (even if only for one season)






Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Nuke View Post
The databases sit in 3 formats, CSV, MS Access, and for a while they were is a SQL Server 2008 database while I was working on some of the bigger formulaic issues.
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?
Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 08:26 AM   #22
G-Nuke
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
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?
I've used the editor to edit my own save games... yes. I've tested the ratings... yes. But in order to keep ratings consistent, I don't keep the source in FHM save games... that would be retarded. How would you even keep things consistent? I'm using standard applied formulas that flatten offensive production across eras, and then rate based on these adjusted stats. Then I tinker with those formulas. You can't do that in game.


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.
G-Nuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 09:56 AM   #23
Sebastian Palkowski
Developer
 
Sebastian Palkowski's Avatar
 
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
Sebastian Palkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 12:49 PM   #24
Nino33
Major Leagues
 
Nino33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Nuke View Post
I've used the editor to edit my own save games... yes. I've tested the ratings... yes. But in order to keep ratings consistent, I don't keep the source in FHM save games...
When you said "testing" I thought you meant you had actual "starting databases" and you'd actually compiled spreadsheets with results, and that everything could be viewed/replicated (I guess I thought this as over the years working on EHM that's how I've always tested)




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:
Originally Posted by JeffR View Post
Now, I'm not saying the database is capable of providing a very accurate picture of every player right now. It's going to take a while, and a lot of work, to get to that point. But shortcuts like trying to make crude equivalencies between stats and ratings won't help the process. It just distorts the overall picture by turning a large number of players whose NHL stats don't tell the whole story about them into weird abstractions of those numbers. That may be appropriate for something like a single-season stat replay game like Strat-O-Matic, but FHM (like OOTP before it) isn't designed as that kind of game. Doing ratings in that manner will just create a big mess that will eventually have to be corrected, making the long task of developing the database even longer.
While I don't care at all about Custom Leagues, I agree with your other points in your initial post...but I accept Jeff saying "It's going to take a while, and a lot of work, to get to that point"
Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 04:29 PM   #25
G-Nuke
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski View Post
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)".

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.
G-Nuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 04:45 PM   #26
G-Nuke
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:
Originally Posted by JeffR View Post
Now, I'm not saying the database is capable of providing a very accurate picture of every player right now. .
Yes, we both agreed that your DB is an inconsistent mess. You can't even get high-profile players like Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux working... that's pretty embarrassing Jeff.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffR View Post
It's going to take a while, and a lot of work, to get to that point. But shortcuts like trying to make crude equivalencies between stats and ratings won't help the process..
Rating players in a manner that produces results closer to real life isn't the goal?

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:
Originally Posted by JeffR View Post
It just distorts the overall picture by turning a large number of players whose NHL stats don't tell the whole story about them into weird abstractions of those numbers. That may be appropriate for something like a single-season stat replay game like Strat-O-Matic, but FHM (like OOTP before it) isn't designed as that kind of game. Doing ratings in that manner will just create a big mess that will eventually have to be corrected, making the long task of developing the database even longer.
Jeff... THESE AREN'T REAL PEOPLE. This is a statistical simulation game. Generating stats is all it does. Are you going to somehow factor in that Lafleur picked up smoking in the early eighties? WTF?

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.
G-Nuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 04:52 PM   #27
AlpineSK
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
AlpineSK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 05:07 PM   #28
Sebastian Palkowski
Developer
 
Sebastian Palkowski's Avatar
 
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
Sebastian Palkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 05:24 PM   #29
Puckhead
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski View Post
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.
Great to see you so calm although the tone is pretty harsh in this thread. Please let us all discuss on a fair level here...
Puckhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 09:36 PM   #30
Aliean
Minors (Double A)
 
Aliean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski View Post
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.
doubt what he is trying to get at is a replay game.he wants what i want and that is making the players to be as accurate as possible.it lacks everywhere in this game.seeing crosby get 50 points in a 82 game season and then seeing a complete random player doing 100 points that aren't even half as good as crosby.editing need's to be allot better then it is now that's why i want a proper editing tool aswell so i can fix 90% of the terrible random given skill to players.its the same with fm series so much bad editing that people have to fix 90% of the game before its playable
__________________
Hockey is a lifestyle, you don't play hockey, you live it.
Aliean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2014, 10:09 PM   #31
Nino33
Major Leagues
 
Nino33's Avatar
 
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)
Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2014, 05:43 AM   #32
sprague
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.
sprague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2014, 06:04 AM   #33
archibalduk
All Star Starter
 
archibalduk's Avatar
 
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
archibalduk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 09:27 PM   #34
Fred Shero
Minors (Rookie Ball)
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski View Post
As I said earlier, Historical Mode is not our main priority at this point but of course we still want to make improvements to this mode as well. See my answers below:



Please be aware that all player in FHM (historical or not) are hand-edit. We have a great team of researchers but the work-load is just very, very high. We found a way (with templates, careers spots, ...) that gives us a chance to at least have basic NHL historical leagues but of course it will take a lot of time to grow our historical database. If anyone wants to help out, just give me a shout!




Yeah, not sure why this is in FHM. If there is no reason (I have to ask Jeff) we can drop that in the patch, if there is a reason we change that for 2015.




Will be changed in 2015!



Since we don't share any code with OOTP it is not that simple. In addition, we have our own vision for FHM, that is a lot different than OOTP. In this particular case we will, at some point, add more options (e.g. FHM based career) but most likely it will never have the same options as OOTP.



Real historical minor leagues are no option, we just don't have the men-power for that. I don't know if fake minor leagues would work, most likely people would complain about it as well?



For the same reasons I mentioned above that is nothing for the near future, as our priorities are in a different direction. Maybe in the future, when the game is much more evolved.


I sent you a PM about helping out with the helping out with the historic database.
Fred Shero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2014, 08:02 AM   #35
Nordiques88
Bat Boy
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1927p View Post
I would like to add to an optional feature that rerates players to be drafted to somewhat match what happened in real life (alexandre Daigle going 1st overall for example). This is something i know they can do but I'd say its a lower priority and rightfully so.
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.
Nordiques88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2014, 11:50 AM   #36
Bugsquasher
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.
Bugsquasher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2014, 09:18 PM   #37
dave1927p
FHM Moderator
 
dave1927p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brantford, ON
Posts: 2,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugsquasher View Post
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?

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?
dave1927p is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:25 AM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Out of the Park Developments