Player Attributes / Profile

[Ogilthorpe]

Excellent work on the player profiles screenshots!

[laskey 16]

This could well have been covered in this thread, didn't see it though... but in EHM a lot of defensemen had only one listed position (LD OR RD)... I might be wrong but I think a lot of defensemen can play both positions well, maybe with a favoured side though. And perhaps some do only feel comfortable on one side. Same goes with forwards, many wingers can play both wings, and some centres can play a wing position.

Also along these lines I think it would be interesting if we could, for the powerplay and maybe for clutch situations, change the formation of the team... from 3-2 to a more attacking 4-1. This doesn't happen much I know but it's an idea. I don't know if this is possible though. Likewise, some players, like Kovalchuk did in New Jersey a bit, although they can't play defense well do play the point position on the powerplay, and it'd be nice if this could somehow come into play so that you could set this up without his play being worse from being 'out of position'.

[philou21]

I was doing it even if my foward didn't got that position and it worked well. At Atlanta Kovalchuk was always at the blue line and sometimes in my games I make him play there. But alot of players in EHM can play both side even if it's not write. It's just how comfortable he is.

[alexob18]

Me too B. I love it. When people post screenshots with 1-100 I get irritated trying to figure it out

Actually very easy.

100 / 20 = 5

so every 5 points in 1-100 scale is 1 point in 1-20 scale.

I'm well aware of this...
I'm just lazy and don't want to have to do it. My eye is trained for the 1-20.

[philou21]

Ah my god....lazy teenagers. Just good to stole sheep.

[Alessandro]

Tremendous job so far. Congrats and keep up the great work

[dabo]

This could well have been covered in this thread, didn't see it though... but in EHM a lot of defensemen had only one listed position (LD OR RD)... I might be wrong but I think a lot of defensemen can play both positions well, maybe with a favoured side though. And perhaps some do only feel comfortable on one side. Same goes with forwards, many wingers can play both wings, and some centres can play a wing position.

Also along these lines I think it would be interesting if we could, for the powerplay and maybe for clutch situations, change the formation of the team... from 3-2 to a more attacking 4-1. This doesn't happen much I know but it's an idea. I don't know if this is possible though. Likewise, some players, like Kovalchuk did in New Jersey a bit, although they can't play defense well do play the point position on the powerplay, and it'd be nice if this could somehow come into play so that you could set this up without his play being worse from being 'out of position'.

A player's ability to play different positions will be stored in a 1-20 interval. For example:

G = 0 (skater has 0)
LD = 5
RD = 5
LW = 15
C = 10
RW = 17

Then for example positions with >= 15 would be displayed in the game, so here the player would be RW/LW. Then if you for some reason want him to do a good job at center you would tell him to practice a new position (C) and his ability would increase depending on how easily he learns a new position (not the same for all players). In addition, I will have a position screen in the player profile like in NHL:EHM and FM that says if he is a natural RW and unaccustomed C etc.

[laskey 16]

Sounds good

[archibalduk]

This is just an idea for a long time in the future but I will mention it whilst I remember: I think it'd be cool if there was a setting where you can choose which face card template to use in the game (or choose not to have one at all). The card design would then overlay over the player image. So rather than us having to create a face picture for every single player with the card design, we could just have one card template which would overlay the player image on the profile page. Do I make sense?

No

Ha Maybe I'll bring it up again in a few years' time!

Would there be any way to revert this to EHM's 1-20 rating? I've grown rather fond of that.

As I said before you will be able to choose between 1-20 and 50-99. The attributes are currently stored in the 50-99 interval in the database but I can change to whatever NHL:EHM is using if it would become easier for people to rate players.

I'm not sure how 50-99 is comparable to 1-20. Surely it ought to be 1-100???

1-100 would allow for more accurate ratings of players. However it would also give more margin for error in that researchers would have to be even more accurate with their ratings of players. The Football Manager series has been very successful with the 1-20 ratings system so perhaps DHM (Dabo Hockey Manager - at least that's what I'm calling it!) also ought to use 1-20...

[dabo]

50-99 is from the ea sports' nhl games, I grew up playing those games (still do).

[philou21]

Yes me too but in EHM I don't know if it's because I start playing the game with the 1-20 thing but when I see screenshot of 50-99 I'm completely lost.

[laskey 16]

1 to 100 is obviously way more accurate, gives more precision, and is what I'd like. But that's just my opinion!

[philou21]

I can't disagree with you and I don't say the opposite, it's true. Anyway if I should getting used with new settings I can, it's like buying a new game and learn the controller.

[ArtVandelay]

1 to 100 is obviously way more accurate, gives more precision, and is what I'd like. But that's just my opinion!

What does that much precision give you?Is a guy with a speed of 62 really THAT much better than someone with a speed of 60?

And, if that guy with 62 happens to be a little off on a given day, he's probably not quite 62. Chances are, a player is in a range that averages to around 60 and he can be above or below any given day depending on mood, health, enthusiasm, etc.

Sorry, I've just always felt that such granular ratings can be overkill.

[ArtVandelay]

Along the lines of my above point - think about how a real person would consider a player. There are a small handful of ways to learn about a player:

1. Watch for yourself
2. Get a scouting report
3. Media reports

In what situation might anyone talk about any player in such detailed terms?

1. If you watch for yourself, you might develop a sense of nuanced differences between players, but 1-100 is extreme.

2. A scout would grade on a scale of 1-5 or 1-10.

3. The media would speak in vague terms like "really fast" or "really slow" or "average speed". Possibly some in-between as well - kind of like a scale of 1-5.

So the game should present the skills to the user in those terms. Behind it can be the 1-100 scale, but I don't think it's realistic for the users to actually see the detailed number - just what is reported from one of the 3 possibilities above.

[laskey 16]

Good point, I never considered that. Maybe less precision is good because of the reasons you just said. Love the username by the way

[archibalduk]

I agree with Art - the attributes should be presented as 1-20. The DB should probably also take this form - I don't think anybody is able to easily gauge a player from 1-100 for different attributes.

[drewst18]

This probably won't get a whole lot of support but I think that the ratings should be "dumbed" down.

We should make the game more about scouting and performance than what a guys ratings are. Ideally there would be no attributes (in game, would still be in database/code) and the entire game would be based around scouts like in real life.

I can understand how some people wouldn't really want to have no attributes, so I would look to dumb down atts to the following:
Skating (speed, accel, balance, agility)
Conditioning (Stamina, Injury and Strength)
Mental (Clutch, Work rate, Aggression and leadership)
Skill (Creativity, Vision, Deking, Flair)
Offense (Passing, Shooting, Deflections)
Defense - (Checking, Poke Check, Position)


These are 6 general categories that will give you a base idea of where a player is strong and after that it is up to your scouts to figure out the rest. If you have top scouts you get more info, subpar scouts won't be as accurate.

**EDIT - this should probably go in the other thread...sorry saw this one 1st and they seem to be same category"

[ArtVandelay]

This probably won't get a whole lot of support but I think that the ratings should be "dumbed" down.

We should make the game more about scouting and performance than what a guys ratings are. Ideally there would be no attributes (in game, would still be in database/code) and the entire game would be based around scouts like in real life.

I can understand how some people wouldn't really want to have no attributes, so I would look to dumb down atts to the following:
Skating (speed, accel, balance, agility)
Conditioning (Stamina, Injury and Strength)
Mental (Clutch, Work rate, Aggression and leadership)
Skill (Creativity, Vision, Deking, Flair)
Offense (Passing, Shooting, Deflections)
Defense - (Checking, Poke Check, Position)


These are 6 general categories that will give you a base idea of where a player is strong and after that it is up to your scouts to figure out the rest. If you have top scouts you get more info, subpar scouts won't be as accurate.

**EDIT - this should probably go in the other thread...sorry saw this one 1st and they seem to be same category"

I think you won't get a ton of support either but I agree with you - to an extent. I think, after seeing a player in person or getting a scouting report, you'd be able differentiate between a guy's stickhandling and shooting. Or between a guy's physical play and defensive skill.

[empach]

If we wanted to go with the most realistic experience I think drewst18's idea is on the right track. Not sure if it would be as enjoyable though. I love to try it as an experiment but it'd be a lot of effort for nothing if it didn't work out.

[drewst18]

personally I would just like the ability to turn atts off, and only see the flow chart thingy. Doubt that will ever happen though

[B. Stinson]

Please, please, please, please, please... I'm absolutely begging you on this one like I did with SI: can we have "Wizard Mode" back? (For those unfamiliar with the freeware EHM, Wizard Mode is an option to hide player attributes - leaving your judgement of their ability to only stats, scouting reports, and luck). OOTP 10 also has a nice selection of options for this style of play.

@ B. Stinson

Hiding attributes should be no problems.

[Ogilthorpe]

I would also like the game to have a freeware EHM Wizard type mode.

[bruins72]

I agree with Art - the attributes should be presented as 1-20. The DB should probably also take this form - I don't think anybody is able to easily gauge a player from 1-100 for different attributes.

Maybe make it so that all attributes must be entered on the 1-20 scale in the editor (so that the initial player ratings are done better) but allow users to select 1-20 or 1-100 for viewing the attributes in the player profile?

It's funny, when the SI version of EHM first came out, I had such a hard time adapting to the 1-20 scale after being used to the 1-100 scale of the old freeware version. Now it's the other way around.

This probably won't get a whole lot of support but I think that the ratings should be "dumbed" down.

We should make the game more about scouting and performance than what a guys ratings are. Ideally there would be no attributes (in game, would still be in database/code) and the entire game would be based around scouts like in real life.

I can understand how some people wouldn't really want to have no attributes, so I would look to dumb down atts to the following:
Skating (speed, accel, balance, agility)
Conditioning (Stamina, Injury and Strength)
Mental (Clutch, Work rate, Aggression and leadership)
Skill (Creativity, Vision, Deking, Flair)
Offense (Passing, Shooting, Deflections)
Defense - (Checking, Poke Check, Position)


These are 6 general categories that will give you a base idea of where a player is strong and after that it is up to your scouts to figure out the rest. If you have top scouts you get more info, subpar scouts won't be as accurate.

**EDIT - this should probably go in the other thread...sorry saw this one 1st and they seem to be same category"

I agree with you about NOT seeing these attributes in the player profile and just relying on scouting reports in those areas. We'll still need to determine what these attributes are though because the players will have to be researched and entered into the database.

[laskey 16]

This probably won't get a whole lot of support but I think that the ratings should be "dumbed" down...

I agree that it should take scouting to see all attributes, but that it should be possible with good scouting to see all, more detailed attributes. For example a defenseman could be skinny, awful at hitting and playing in the corners, but be amazing at pokechecking, positioning and blocking shots. A good scout would see this and be able to present you with all this information rather than just saying "Defense- 12" etc. I just think it's more realistic.