Player creator

[dabo]

I really think the templates are going to be key. Once dabo gets to the point where he's getting ready to implement these, we should compile a list of player types that we would need templates for and pick which attributes are important to that type of player.

The time is here.

Here are some quotes of ideas I like and good starting points trying to figure out a good way to generate new players.

If we look at the NHL as being the top league in the hockey world we can set up the player templates that way. The templates could based on the player's style and their career peak. For example, you could have "Franchise Playmaking Center" and "Checking Line Winger". You could also have "Minor League Energy Winger" or "Junior Hockey Goon". The career peak part of it would kind of tie in with CA. So when a player retires, have a new player generated of the same player type and have the career peak have a small chance of improving or worsening. For example, if you had a "Second Pairing Offensive Defenseman" retire, the new player that is spawned will most likely also be a "Second Pairing Offensive Defenseman" but there's a small chance he could be spawned as a "Top 2 Offensive Defenseman" or maybe a "Botton Pairing Offensive Defenseman".

To mix things up and have a chance of talent coming out of countries like Denmark or Norway, you could have it so when a new player is spawned there is a 90% chance that he comes from the same place as the retiring player and then split the other 10% between less likely places. So when Brodeur retires, there's a 90% chance that the new player spawned to replace him will be Canadian. There is also a 2% chance that he's German, a 2% chance he's Norwegian, 2% chance he's Danish, 2% chance that he's Swiss, 1% chance he's Austrian, and a 1% chance he comes from a random country (all others). That would give it the potential to mix things up a bit.

Also, I hope this isn't taking things too far off topic but I think the game should look at the USA and Canada a little differently than other countries because of the way that the CHL leagues (WHL, OHL, and QMJHL) determine player eligibility. So you'd have Canada West, Canada Central, and Canada East along with US West, US Central, and US East (or however those CHL leagues break it down). So when a new player generated, they don't have to come from the same birth city as the player they're replacing, they just need to come from the same region. Does that make sense?

I agree in principal - as we could weight templates, etc. However it would be a statistical possibility that a large number of good players could retire and their replacement regens could all be very poor. The more seasons of a game you play, the greater likelihood of this happening. Clearly it would be a slim chance but there would still remain that possibility that a user's game could be ruined/hampered because all of the talent suddenly dries up. That is assuming we used some sort of random CA/PA generator.

Having said that, I think the ideas proposed by Dabo and Bruins72 could address this (slim) possibility. Based on what they have suggested, why not have the regeneration of players (by regeneration I mean one play retires and a new player is generated) made up of three parts:

1) Firstly, the regen player's PA is the same as the retired player's CA plus something like 15% or minus something like 5%. Remember that when a player retires they are likely to be past their peak and so their CA will not represent their peak CA. To compensate for this, the regen's possible PA range should be much higher than the retired player's CA or only slightly less. The game would generate the actual PA by randomly choosing a number between this range. If the PA was simply the same as the retired player's current CA then slowly each generation of players would have lower and lower PA's

2) We could assign a template based on the retired player's position. So if the retired player's primary position was a winger then the template use for the regen would be a forward's template (e.g. sniper, two way, etc).

3) Nationality. Although we do have the occasional superstar from countries where they wouldn't ordinarily be expected, the balance of talent ought to be kept fairly balanced. Perhaps we need some sort of neighbouring countries entry in the database for each country? So if a retired player is Canadian then his regen will be from either Canada (say a 90% likelihood of this, as suggested by Bruins72) or from a neighbouring country (10% likelihood) - in this case it would be the US. Take another example - retired player is Swedish so there would be a 90% chance of the regen being Swedish and a 10% chance of him being from a neighbouring country (i.e. Norway, Finland, Denmark).

Perhaps it would be a good way of ensuring a reasonable balance of talent and of talent from different nations whilst allowing for some variation? Perhaps I have complicated things a little?

1) Firstly, the regen player's PA is the same as the retired player's CA plus something like 15% or minus something like 5%. Remember that when a player retires they are likely to be past their peak and so their CA will not represent their peak CA. To compensate for this, the regen's possible PA range should be much higher than the retired player's CA or only slightly less. The game would generate the actual PA by randomly choosing a number between this range. If the PA was simply the same as the retired player's current CA then slowly each generation of players would have lower and lower PA's

Hmmm... that could be an interesting idea. I like the idea of randomizing the new PA. So with the method that you described, if a player with a 154 CA retired, the regen's PA would be somewhere between 146 and 177. I wonder if the 15% might be a bit too much? Maybe scale it back to 10%? Anyhow, I like the general idea of this.

2) We could assign a template based on the retired player's position. So if the retired player's primary position was a winger then the template use for the regen would be a forward's template (e.g. sniper, two way, etc).

I really think the templates are going to be key. Once dabo gets to the point where he's getting ready to implement these, we should compile a list of player types that we would need templates for and pick which attributes are important to that type of player.

3) Nationality. Although we do have the occasional superstar from countries where they wouldn't ordinarily be expected, the balance of talent ought to be kept fairly balanced. Perhaps we need some sort of neighbouring countries entry in the database for each country? So if a retired player is Canadian then his regen will be from either Canada (say a 90% likelihood of this, as suggested by Bruins72) or from a neighbouring country (10% likelihood) - in this case it would be the US. Take another example - retired player is Swedish so there would be a 90% chance of the regen being Swedish and a 10% chance of him being from a neighbouring country (i.e. Norway, Finland, Denmark).

I think your "neighboring countries" method could work too. The only thing it doesn't really allow for is the random odd talent from a country like Japan or something like that.

Perhaps it would be a good way of ensuring a reasonable balance of talent and of talent from different nations whilst allowing for some variation? Perhaps I have complicated things a little?

I think these things are always going to be complicated if they're going to work. Plus, brainstorming is good!

So, this is decided so far:

• Template system (exactly how it will work is not decided)
  1-25 (1-125) attrubute ranges (the last 5 (25) will be reserved for generational players)

The following has to be figured out:

• What player types are we gonna use? and what are their respective strengths and weaknesses?
  CA and PA, how are we gonna handle this?
  How to ensure talent/skill levels stay about the same while still allowing fluctuations from year to year (each draft is not equally deep)?
  The number of players coming out of each country should be fairly stable as well as the number of players on each position.
  Allow for the possibility of great players to come out of countries not considered top hockey contries (Denmark, Norway etc.).

If anything is missing let me know and I will add it. I will start by writing my thoughts on the "to-do" list.

* What player types are we gonna use? and what are their respective strengths and weaknesses?

Skater (forward)

• Defensive
  Two-way
  Sniper
  Playmaker
  Power forward
  Enforcer
  Dangler
  Grinder

Skater (defenseman)

• Defensive
  Offensive
  Enforcer (or is there another name for defensemen?)
  Puck-moving(same as offensive defenseman?)
  All-around

Goalkeeper

• Stand-up
  Butterfly
  Hybrid
  Unorthodox

When it comes to the attributes for each player type I think we could use B. Stinson's suggested overalls as a base (we don't have anything for goalkeepers yet):

Overalls:
Offense = (Shooting), (Stickhandling), (Passing), (Mental), (Physical)
Defense = Hitting, Poke Check, Shot Blocking, (Passing), (Stickhandling), (Mental), (Physical)
Physical = (Physical)
Mental = (Mental)
Passing = Backhand, Passing, Puck Control, Anticipation, Composure, Decisions, Teamwork
Shooting = Backhand, Deflections, Deking, Passing, Puck Control, Slapshot, Wristshot
Sickhandling = Backhand, Deflections, Deking, Passing, Poke Check, Puck Control, Slapshot, Wristshot
Skating = Acceleration, Agility, Balance, Speed

Will spend some time thinking about something more concrete.

* CA and PA, how are we gonna handle this?

I found this quote in one of the guides, is this something you think should be used in this game as well?

Forwards
200 - Generational (Gretzky)
190 - Superstar (Ovie)
180 - Franchise (Gaborik)
170 - 1st liner
160 - 1st/2nd liner
150 - 2nd liner
140 - 2nd/3rd liner
130 - 3rd liner
120 - 3rd/4th liner
110 - 4th liner
100 - 4th liner/AHLer
90 - AHL
80 - AHL/ECHL

Goalies
200-190 - Generational (Roy)
180-170 - #1 Goalie
160-150 - 1A Goalie
140-130 - 1B Goalie
120-110 - Backup
100-90 - AHL
80 - ECHL

Defense
200 - Generational (Orr)
190 - Superstar (Lidstrom)
180 - #1 D
170 - #2 D
160 - #3 D
150 - #4 D
140 - #5 D
130 - #6 D
120 - Reserve D-man
110 - AHLer
100 - ECHLer

* How to ensure talent/skill levels stay about the same while still allowing fluctuations from year to year (each draft is not equally deep)?

As suggested I like the idea of when say a 2nd line Sniper retires a new forward will be created as either a 1st, 2nd or 3rd line talent and not necessarily as a sniper. But as archibalduk wrote, a retired player's PA will most likely not be the same as when he was first created so perhaps the inital PA could be stored separately as a constant.

* The number of players coming out of each country should be fairly stable as well as the number of players on each position.

I think we could use some mix between archibalduk's and bruins72's suggestions. We could leave a tiny change (no matter where the retired player is from) that the new player will come from a small hockey country.

In the database each player's ability to play a certain position is stored in the range of 0-20 (where 0 is used for skaters' ability to play in goal and the other way around). So let's say a retiring center has the following:

LW Ability: 9
C Ability: 18
RW Ability: 14
LD Ability: 2
RD Ability: 4
G Ability: 0

Then when the new player is generated his likely primary position could be determined in this order:

C (most likely)
RW
LW (least likely)

...or we could just pick one of the forward positions completely random.

* Allow for the possibility of great players to come out of countries not considered top hockey contries (Denmark, Norway etc.).

Already mentioned this.

I will post some more thoughts later and I have probably forgotten something too. Please let me know your ideas and thoughts.

[laskey 16]

Just a brief point before I consider other things from your post and inevitably reply again...

I'm fully behind allowing great players to come from obscure hockey countries, but I would recommend that it not JUST be great players to come from these nations.

For example, I'd say it would be pretty unrealistic if as the game progressed China, Britain, Holland, Belgium etc each had one bonafide NHL superstar, but no other players of note. It would be more realistic if the POSSIBILITY for a Japanese Mario Lemieux to emerge were there, but also the more likely possibility for a 3rd or 4th line NHLer from those countries would have to exist.

I think it would look pretty silly if the first Belgian, the first Chinese and the first whatever NHLers all tied the league lead in scoring. It seems more realistic for me if a couple of semi-stars and role players emerge and then gradually over the years/decades the country starts to produce better players. Now and again maybe a random, brilliant player could break this mould but I think it should be a general rule.

Also, I think any great players from these smaller hockey nations should more often than not leave home at 17/18/19 etc to play in a league with better chances of developing them or of getting noticed by NHL/pro team scouts. In real life in Britain, most of the top young players head over to Canada or the United States to play in the OHL, Jr A or college leagues and often it brings out a new level in their game. Maybe a fantastic Chinese winger could be generated but with little desire to leave home due to mental attributes - this could harm his development and he could fail to reach his potential. Over here people often wonder about how Tony Hand could have done if he'd stayed in North America for longer, and it would be cool if this could play into it.

Just my 2 cents, yet again no idea how this could/couldn't be implemented.

[dabo]

Of course, I only wrote "great" player because it seems impossible in NHL:EHM.

[ArtVandelay]

* What player types are we gonna use? and what are their respective strengths and weaknesses?

Skater (forward)

• Defensive
  Two-way
  Sniper
  Playmaker
  Power forward
  Enforcer
  Dangler

Skater (defenseman)

• Defensive
  Offensive
  Enforcer (or is there another name for defensemen?)
  Puck-moving(same as offensive defenseman?)
  All-around

Goalkeeper

• Stand-up
  Butterfly
  Hybrid

Add Grinder to forwards. Would a definition of each be useful? From there, the relevant attributes could be gathered.

Skater (forward)

• Defensive: a player who focuses on goal prevention. A great defensive forward can shadow the game's top offensive threats. A good one plays smart positionally and is tough to beat one-on-one in open ice. These players are usually hard-workers and team-first players. Speed is useful for a defensive forward.
  
  Two-way: a player who is equally adept on the attack and when defending. Backchecks diligently but also can lead or join the rush. His attention to defense frequently pulls him off the attach earlier than other players and his desire to score or create plays pulls him off his defensive duties earlier than a true defensive forward. However, the truly great ones seem to be able to do it all without taking shortcuts in either direction. Think of Ron Francis in his prime as a great 2-way forward.
  
  Sniper: At a high level, a sniper likes to shoot. Good ones position themselves well and find open ice to receive passes from playmaking linemates. Great ones combine positioning with a quick release on their shot. Brett Hull comes to mind as the ultimate sniper. Skatingand stickhandling are not always top priorities for being a good sniper. A truly amazing sniper, however, will have the above skills plus speed and stickhandling - think Pavel Bure.
  
  Playmaker: The guys who creates offensive plays. Can score and pass but is typically more concerned with creating a scoring chance and doesn't feel compelled to be the guy taking the shot all the time (unlike a sniper). Skating, stickhandling, vision, and passing skills are essential for this player. Anticipation helps as well. The very best playmakers are tough to defend because defenders can't always guess pass since they also have great shots. The 2 greatest ever were Gretzky and Lemieux. One owns the single season goal-scoring record along with the single-season assist record. The other might have done the same if not for injuries.
  
  Power forward: Typically a big player who is strong on his skates. Usually hits hard but more importantly can take a hit without falling - John Leclair. May or may not be a fighter. Typically more of a scorer than passer - but can go the other way. dustin Byfuglien looked like the ultimate power forward in the playoffs.
  
  Enforcer: likes to fight. willing to fight. usually, but not always a team-first guy (some are showboats). not always a really good fighter either.
  
  Dangler: not sure - I suppose a subset of sniper or playmaker who completely shirks all defensive responsibility.
  
  Grinder: a forward with good balance and strength - not always big, though. Good ones win the battles along the boards or can kill time on the boards on the penalty kill. Often, but not always, strong defensive forwards.

[laskey 16]

There CAN be a bit of a difference between offensive and puck moving defenseman. For example players like Sheldon Souray who have huge slapshots are considered offensive defensemen and play the powerplay. However their real skill isn't puck moving or passing - it's shooting. Most offensive defensemen are puck movers though, I think it's fair to say.

ArtVandelay has covered most of my other points already I think. Few additions - two way forwards and defensive forwards are often particularly good at faceoffs and positioning.

I would define a dangler as an incredibly skilled but one dimensional player, often small and unable/unwilling to get involved physically. Possesses great hands, good shooting but little hockey sense and is likely to 'hog' the puck and fail to pass to teammates in better positions. Defensively a liability and completely focused on offense. I'm thinking of players like Alexei Yashin, Alexandre Daigle.

It's an interesting point that there are very few defensemen who are pure enforcers. The Boogards, Colton Orrs and Brashears of the world (players who do little else but fight) are pretty much all forwards.

[dabo]

I think a definition for each player type would be very useful, great idea. I will add grinder to the list but to me a grinder sounds a lot like a power forward. What is the big difference? Does a power forward have better overall scoring ability and a grinder is just a hard worker?

[axwel3221]

Art here, Dangler could be like Two-Way, so there could be likes of Pavel Datsuyk, and Grinder and Defensive (many NHL'ers) and so on?

EDIT: Not mentioned, Grinder should be a great forechecker.

[Ogilthorpe]

I think a definition for each player type would be very useful, great idea. I will add grinder to the list but to me a grinder sounds a lot like a power forward. What is the big difference? Does a power forward have better overall scoring ability and a grinder is just a hard worker?

These may be of some use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_grinder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_forward_(ice_hockey)

[ArtVandelay]

I think a definition for each player type would be very useful, great idea. I will add grinder to the list but to me a grinder sounds a lot like a power forward. What is the big difference? Does a power forward have better overall scoring ability and a grinder is just a hard worker?

I don't think a grinder is necessarily great defensively. He willingly goes into corners an scrums to dig for or protect the puck. He's not necessarily a great hitter either in the purest sense.

He's similar to a power forward in that he's tough to take down, but th similarities end there for me. Power forwards should have an offensive dimension that a simple grinder wouldn't have. Perhaps some of the skills would be the same, but they'd utilize them for different purposes or mindsets.

This goes back a bit, but I always think of Patrick Flatley when I think of a grinder. Maybe Brent Fedyk, too.

[empach]

Yeah the main difference between a grinder and a power forward would probably be the offensive dimension. Most grinders have very limited offense.

We could change the defensive enforcer to rugged defenseman. Enforcers that play defense tend to get moved to forward as in the NHL enforcers play limited minutes and teams prefer to have a more competent player in their top six D-men.

I'd like to suggest

Agitating Forward or Pest
These are players who usually range from 2nd to 4th liners in the NHL. Hated by opponents they are most valuable for their attempts to antagonize opponent players either by physical play or verbally through legal or illegal actions. Think Steve Ott.
They tend to have some speed, usually hard workers with good determination. They tend to be smaller players, sometimes with decent offensive skills. Guys like Ott tend to cause a lot of controversy and are sometimes criticized by fans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pest_(ice_hockey)

Energy Forward
These are 4th and sometimes 3rd line players in the NHL with limited talent. They are hard workers with determination, probably low stamina as they don't usually play much. Usually players with limited scoring ability but strong physical play and, as often as possible, strong skating abilities. They may overlap with grinders so perhaps we only need one.
Some info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_(ice_hockey)


A couple additions I'd like to add to ArtVandelay's player types. I'm mostly focusing on common deficiencies, not all players will suffer from them but they are common comments I'll hear about players on these types.

Forwards:
Defensive: tend to have limited offensive talents.

Sniper: tend to be weak defensively and tend to avoid physical play. They also tend to be selfish, hogging the puck and rarely passing.

Playmaker: The good ones will have high creativity. They tend to pass rather shoot.

Power Forward: They are usually bigger players and most are at least a touch slower.

Enforcer: Most enforcers have limited hockey skills and can only play a few shifts in the NHL.

[axwel3221]

not to pick on you, but links aren't there.

[23qwerty]

I think a definition for each player type would be very useful, great idea. I will add grinder to the list but to me a grinder sounds a lot like a power forward. What is the big difference? Does a power forward have better overall scoring ability and a grinder is just a hard worker?

Rick Nash and Jarome Iginla are power forwards.

Grinder is a lot harder to define, maybe John Madden, Max Talbot, Chris Neil, Mike Grier, Rob Niedermayer, Jere Lehtinen?

Power Forwards are generally far more more skilled and offensively oriented.

[ArtVandelay]

Some examples of the types - old and current (you'll see the era I remember most is fairly obvious)

FORWARDS
Pest/Agitator: Sean Avery, Ian Laperriere, Claude Lemieux (a more talented agitator)
Energy Forward: Ryan Callahan, Randy McKay back in the early/mid-90s, need some help on others as most of my current knowledge is limited to the Rangers
Defensive: John Madden, Bob Gainey, Jan Erixon, Guy Carbonneau, Mike Peca
Two-way: Ron Francis, Pavel Datsyuk, Rod Brind'amour(?), Chris Drury, Steve Yzerman (at the end of his career)
Sniper: Brett Hull, John MacLean, Stephane Richer, Phil Esposito, Alex Ovechkin
Playmaker: Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Michal Nylander, Joe Thornton, Adam Oates
Power Forward: Cam Neely, John LeClair, Brendan Shanahan, Dustin Byfuglien, Bill Guerin, Jarome Iginla
Enforcer: Derek Boogard, Bob Probert (though he could also score), Colton Orr
Dangler: Pavel Bure, Ilya Kovalchuk(?) - I still feel like this is typically a subset of Sniper
Grinder: Patrick Flatley, need help again for current ones because I don't know as many players as I used to and the Rangers aren't known for having too many of these kinds - perhaps a Grinder is simply a less talented power forward or defensive forward who gets relegated to 3rd and 4th line duty

DEFENSEMEN
Defensive: Craig Ludwig, Dan Girardi, Kevin Lowe,
Offensive: Al Iafrate, Al MacInnis (if you want your kid to have a 100 mph slapper, name him "Al")
Enforcer: Hmm...someone said these guys tend to become forwards - I think he's right as I'm struggling with this one
Puck-moving: Sergei Zubov, Phil Housley, Brian Leetch, Bobby Orr
All-around: Niklas Lidstrom, Ray Bourque (or are these guys offensive/puck movers who are solid defensively?)
Crease-clearer/Punisher/Rugged (adding this as I think it's distinct from the others): Jeff Beukeboom, (again, I don't know the current ones as the Rangers haven't had a guy like this since Jeff Beukeboom)

GOALIES
Stand-up:
Butterfly:
Hybrid:
Freestyle (adding this for the purpose of my examples - perhaps this could be called Gymnastic?): Dominik Hasek, Ed Belfour

Regarding "Freestyle/Gymnastic" - I consider it separate from Hybrid because Hybrid implies there's some level of thought behind the style - training. Guys like Hasek are purely reacting with no consideration for style. The tend to look like fish flopping around on dry land. It's really amazing when a goalie like this is successful - it's why Hasek was so much fun to watch


My ultimate thinking behind all these definitions and examples is that it can help point to the attributes that define the templates more clearly.

[dave1927p]

another category for defenceman is special teams specialist or power play specialist (think ryan ellis)

what about players who are offencsive minded only and never play defence? what category is that? Think Petr Nedved, Radek Dvorak, Mikhail Grabovoky, Alex Semin - skilled guys who could careless about defence...would grabovsky fall under "Playmaker"? Can playmakers be only 1 way players? What If they are average at playing defence would that make mean they are still considered "playmakers" or "All around" ...i wouldn't think that would make them "All Around" ....and to me an "all around" player is a "Power Forward" ...just something to think about


ArtVandelay, i think that instead of calling it freestyle, perhaps "Unorthodox"? Tim Thomas a good example...he just flops all over the place but seems to stop alot of them but when they go in, he looks baaaaad. It would be cool if these types of goalies have a harder time making it to the big leagues then the others as well because there is alot of truth to it. Maybe your goalie coach can even try to change their style taking a big risk that he may improve as a goalie, but it may backfire (see Toskala) and then it could even ruin his career ( he can never get that confidence back)

Speaking of goalies, i hope that you are able to get them to have shorter and way more inconsitency in your sim then EHM did in theirs.

[ArtVandelay]

what about players who are offencsive minded only and never play defence? what category is that? Think Petr Nedved, Radek Dvorak, Mikhail Grabovoky, Alex Semin - skilled guys who could careless about defence...would grabovsky fall under "Playmaker"? Can playmakers be only 1 way players? What If they are average at playing defence would that make mean they are still considered "playmakers" or "All around" ...i wouldn't think that would make them "All Around" ....and to me an "all around" player is a "Power Forward" ...just something to think about

The way I was thinking about this template thing (and I shouldn't only think it - I should state it "out loud" so I can see if my assumptions are correct), was that we would create the "types" and those types would have certain attribute emphasized more than others. The others could be more randomized.

So, for example, you may have playmaker emphasize the following (this is by no means thorough - an example for discussion purposes):

Passing, Vision, Stickhandling, Anticipation

Those attributes would be given a range between (just pretending here) 10 and 25 (to include generational players).

However, attributes such as Shooting, Speed, Hitting, etc, would be even more random - say, between 1 and 25.

So the way you'd get a Gretzky or Lemieux would be to get a generation player in the Playmaking template with a lucky 25 for Shooting as well.

You could also get a great playmaker whose non-playmaking attributes would be extremely low - like a Nedved (though, with proper coaching, he was actually fairly responsible).

You could, of course, also have one who gets high attributes in playmaking along with high non-playmaking attributes making him, essentially, a 2-way player (Ron Francis, Dave Keon).

The idea here, I believe, is to create templates to base the players on but not to limit the game from creating the extremes within each template.

[laskey 16]

Examples of grinders, in my opinion:

Samuel Pahlsson
Kris Draper
Kirk Maltby
Mike Brown
Rob Niedermayer
Adam Burish
Max Talbot
Arron Asham
Ian Laperriere
Dan Carcillo

the above are also players that posters on HfBoards consider grinders - http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=617257 - and there are a lot of knowledgeable hockey fans on there.

In my personal opinion, the term 'dangler' refers to someone who is not a two-way forward, despite the suggestion from others in this thread. Danglers to me are more one dimensional. Think of shootout specialists like Jussi Jokinen and Erik Christensen, but also as I mentioned already players like Alexei Yashin and Alexandre Daigle. Great stickhandling and speed skills but little hockey sense, physicality and defense.

[dave1927p]

ootp does the best job i've seen for player generation in a sim allowing you to customize everything. I loved making the talent half as good of normal (50 out of 100) in ootp and see what happens. would be neat to have that customization in a hockey sim...

[Panfork]

I guess I'll pitch in my opinion of what are the main roles, a description of those roles, and examples.

Forwards

Sniper
Desc: Excels in most or all aspects of goal scoring. Specifically has a terrific shot and the ability to get into an open position. Doesn't really contribute defensively.
Examples: Ilya Kovalchuk, Marian Gaborik, Eric Fehr, Petr Prucha


Playmaker
Desc: Has good vision on the ice, with a good ability to find the open man. Prefers to make the pass rather than the shot.
Examples: Joe Thornton, Andy MacDonald, Henrik Sedin, Patrik Kane, Vinny Prospal, Scott Gomez


Dangler
Desc: Superb stickhandling talent, a decent shot, not so much of anything else. They usually don't possess much else use besides their ability to work through the offensive zone and occasionally net a pretty goal. A defensive liability, they're losing their usefulness in the NHL, and many flourish much more in European leagues where there's more room out on the ice.
Examples: Maxim Afinogenov, Alexei Kovalev


Power Forward
Desc: Considered to be well-rounded players, Power Forwards usually have good size, aren't afraid to play physically, but still work hard on the forecheck and chip in offensively.
Examples: Brandon Dubinsky, Ryan Getzlaf, Alex Burrows, Jarome Iginla


Grinder
Desc: Grinders are useful for a good forecheck. While having a strong will and a large amount of bravery, they're often not very skilled and achieve most of their goals by standing by the net and forcing the puck in. They won't always be the most physically intimidating on the ice, but they'll still fight for the puck on the boards as if they were. They'll also still take shots, even if they won't be known for getting it in every time.
Examples: Ryan Callahan, Max Talbot, Jordin Tootoo


Checking Forward
Desc: Usually 3rd or 4th liners. To make up for their lack of a skillset, they excel in the defensive side of their play. Not as good on the forecheck as grinders, and usually aren't all that mobile. They often play physically, but not always.
Examples: John Madden, Wayne Primeau, Brian Boyle, Sam Pahlsson, Craig Adams


Enforcer
Desc: Fights. And that's usually it. Some enforcers have a small offensive upside and can pot 5-10 goals a year, but most are there for one thing, and one thing only, and that's to take down the other team's players.
Examples: Derek Boogaard, Steve MacIntyre, Brandon Prust, Jody Shelley, Ryan Hollweg


Agitator
Desc: Provokes and instigates trouble. Gets under other players' skin to stir up the other team's more talented players. Will often have a quality amount of physical play and offensive ability. Ironically they're often smaller, less talented versions of Power Forwards that can't keep their mouth shut.
Examples: Steve Ott, Darcy Tucker, Cody McLeod, Sean Avery



Defenseman

Offensive Defenseman
Desc: Self-explanatory. A defenseman who's game is focused on offense. Often will not provide solid defense, because of their impulse to always rush into the play.
Examples: Marc-Andre Bergeron, Tomas Kaberle, Michael Del Zotto, Ryan Whitney


Defensive Defenseman
Desc: Also self-explanatory. A defenseman who's game focuses on the defensive aspects of things. Shut-down defenseman. Has physical play.
Examples: Robyn Regehr, Karl Alzner, Paul Martin


Puck Moving Defenseman
Desc: Sort of like an offensive defenseman, but minor differences. Has a more balanced game, works to get the play going. Doesn't rush into the play, but more or less starts the play. Stats often don't reflect their true value. They usually don't have a physical gameplay.
Examples: Michal Rozsival, Kim Johnsson, Matt Carle


Two-Way Defenseman
Desc: Solid defensively, useful offensively. Can range from bottom pairing to top pairing. Also plays physically.
Examples: Nicklas Lidstrom, Dan Girardi, Adam Foote (younger), Tyler Myer


Enforcer
Desc: Not usually an exceptionally sound defenseman, can lay out great hits, fight, and provide intimidation. Usually have just about zero offensive upside.
Examples: Matt Carkner, Shane O'Brien, Sheldon Brookbank, John Scott

[drewst18]

Might be too late for this, but I think that we might be focused a little bit too much on the EHM system rather than the games that have expanded since then like OOTP and FM.

I think the only thing we should bring from EHM is really the rules, other that we should focus more on building like OOTP or at least FM.

I think we should do away with fixed PA and make it a floating thing that changes based on development in a certain system and how you develop a player (IE rushing him into NHL or keeping him in minors too long)

Other things I would like to add would be this fixed att system of 1-25. Dabo this could be a great system to allow for other att usage (none displayed, 1-5, 1-25, and 1-100) I think that is a must.

One other thing that I think is that we shouldn't be getting stars from countries like egypt for example if we don't have a hockey world set up there. Customization should be at a level that we can create a league anywhere in the world and that will allow players to come from there, but we don't see players from obscure nations, unless they were raised in a hockey loving country but born somewhere else.

[laskey 16]

Good ideas Drew Especially like the one about development influencing abilities more directly.

[Alessandro]

I suggest to create something that allows a certain percentage of players based off nationality. I mean, grinders or defensive forwards should be rare in Russia, which prefers danglers/playmakers, in Canada they should have a bigger percentage, and so on

[laskey 16]

Agreed. Different countries have different styles of hockey and players, would be good if that could be represented.

[empach]

Yeah I agree. I said something about this in the Player Attributes / Profile thread.

We could set up some league/region specific templates that reflect player tendencies from those leagues in the various countries. Then when the AI generates a new regen for that league/region it would be weighted to choose from the specific templates rather than the general ones. It's a neat idea.

[bruins72]

The way I was thinking about this template thing (and I shouldn't only think it - I should state it "out loud" so I can see if my assumptions are correct), was that we would create the "types" and those types would have certain attribute emphasized more than others. The others could be more randomized.

So, for example, you may have playmaker emphasize the following (this is by no means thorough - an example for discussion purposes):

Passing, Vision, Stickhandling, Anticipation

Those attributes would be given a range between (just pretending here) 10 and 25 (to include generational players).

However, attributes such as Shooting, Speed, Hitting, etc, would be even more random - say, between 1 and 25.

So the way you'd get a Gretzky or Lemieux would be to get a generation player in the Playmaking template with a lucky 25 for Shooting as well.

You could also get a great playmaker whose non-playmaking attributes would be extremely low - like a Nedved (though, with proper coaching, he was actually fairly responsible).

You could, of course, also have one who gets high attributes in playmaking along with high non-playmaking attributes making him, essentially, a 2-way player (Ron Francis, Dave Keon).

The idea here, I believe, is to create templates to base the players on but not to limit the game from creating the extremes within each template.

I like this idea a lot! These templates should just decide what the key attributes are. Everything else should be random. That way you can have an enforcer like Probert that could also score some goals. I really like how you work the generational player into it with the 21-25 attributes. That makes sense.

The one thing to consider is that a generational player isn't going to be "regenned" with a full 25 in passing. He's got the potential to develop his passing to 25. When he first appears in the DB he might have a 13 in passing as opposed to a 10 though. The fact that he's created using the playmaker template should influence his development and allow for that 21 or higher in passing when he reaches his peak.

I guess I'll pitch in my opinion of what are the main roles, a description of those roles, and examples.

I like your take on these positions, especially the dangler. That's how I always understood the term. Sergei Samsonov is a dangler.

My one suggestion to you and everyone else is to list each of the key attributes for this position. This should include physical, mental, and technical attributes... even hidden ones. Maybe even include shoot/pass preference?

I suggest to create something that allows a certain percentage of players based off nationality. I mean, grinders or defensive forwards should be rare in Russia, which prefers danglers/playmakers, in Canada they should have a bigger percentage, and so on

I like this idea a lot! You could make more rugged defensemen come from WHL territory but make it rare for a grinder to come from Russia. That makes a lot of sense.

I really think a lot of player regen should come from percentages. Use it for determining position. Use it for determining country/region origin. Use it for determining potential. Use it for determining attributes to an extent.

[empach]

I like this idea a lot! These templates should just decide what the key attributes are. Everything else should be random. That way you can have an enforcer like Probert that could also score some goals. I really like how you work the generational player into it with the 21-25 attributes. That makes sense.

Here's the way I've been thinking to do it:

Using the descriptions above we decide on all the important attributes and tendencies of a given player type. Where possible we could rank them 1-3 based on importance to that type. Then we set up the code to weight the important attributes.

For example, most playmakers are good passers, so we could design the game so that for a playmaker template 70% of the time it will pick a 'passing' rating in the range of 14-20. For the remaining 30% it would pick from 1-13. And we'd do that for all relevant attributes, including things like height.
All other attributes could be completely random.

The ranks could determine the size of the % meaning these would lesser tendencies of that player type and they are not as common.


With enforcers many are poor players outside of their fighting skill so we could account for that be setting the weighted attributes for most skills to 1-11, but leave the remaining % for players like Probert.

I think the trick here is that the template should probably weight a good player, so that you don't have a few random great attributes and everything else is poor. CA can probably help here.