Discuss all aspects of editing the data and databases in EHM here. Have a question about the EHM Editor, EHM Assistant, editing the .cfg files, hex editing the .dat or .db files? Want to tweak the EHM exe file to change league rules/structure, start date etc? This is the place!
Forum rules
This is the forum to discuss all aspects of editing the EHM data and tweaking the game.
Have a bug or feature request for the EHM Editor? Post them in the EHM Editor thread. Please start a new thread or post in another thread if you have a question about how to use the EHM Editor.
Given the large number of questions on similar topics, we ask that you start a new thread for a new question unless you can locate a similar question in an existing thread. This will hopefully ensure that similar questions do not get buried in large threads.
archibalduk wrote:I was wondering what would happen if players' physical stats were reduced/boosted relative to weight. I.e. we increase the physical stats of the lighter players and decrease those of the heavier players.
What would your aim be with this?
To compensate for the fact that the game is slanted in favour of the heavier players. Perhaps by reducing the physical stats of the heavier players, it might tone down their performance.
Just an idea - I'm not saying it's a good one though!!!
Having thought about it I can see where you're coming from. It seems like balance (reasonably) is a key stat to getting more hits, although Goligoski is sixth in hits with balance of 14 so there are some exceptions... The problem would be working out the scale for how to change each player.
bobmcgoo wrote:Having thought about it I can see where you're coming from. It seems like balance (reasonably) is a key stat to getting more hits, although Goligoski is sixth in hits with balance of 14 so there are some exceptions... The problem would be working out the scale for how to change each player.
I could probably modify the Attribute Editor to apply a sliding scale of changes to physical attributes according to weight. Perhaps by setting a custom maximum and minimum threshold.
E.g. Let's say you set 50kg and the minimum and 100kg as the maximum thresholds (okay, not realistic weights but these are nice round numbers for this example). So a player of 50kg weight could receive a 50% boost to his physical stats and a player of 100kg would receive a 50% reduction. A player exactly in the middle of the two thresholds (i.e. 75.5kg) would receive a 0% boost/reduction. Players below 50kg and above 100kg would not receive a boost.
Fredlig wrote:two seasons in the game some players turn beastly, often Crosby and Malkin got 5-6 "99" attributes like Malkin have 99 Wristshot, Slapshot and Stickhandling. Dont know if something could fix this, also many players often turn into a 99acc/99pace players after 1-2 seasons, just a small thing its not like the game turns unplayable.
I think here we should do something with the realism patch. There is a value in the editor, "training" if I am not mistaken, which regulates how well the players practice. Most NHL teams do have 20 here, so of course they perform like they are on steroids and get so high, so fast. Maybe if we batch-edit this aspect players might progress a little slower. I'll copy this discussion in the realism patch.
the logic is sound but it will ruin the attributes pages of the heaviest players. i think fundamentally the game is structured so that hits have too great an effect on average ratings. so really, whoever gets the hits is still going to benefit too much. this is something i've noticed while testing: if a player grows .slightly. heavier, he automatically wins almost all - if not all - of his hits, as far as i can tell, and his average rating can jump up to one or two points higher. it may be possible to give a small guy a chance of hitting a big guy but the amount of fine tuning to your formula to get it exactly right would be too much work, even though i think it could work. so i will stick with my randomising method... it's very easy to ignore the hitting statistic column anyway.
Alessandro wrote:...
this is something i'd happily look into. just wondering where you got your "20" in NHL teams' training though? my database says 18 or 17 for most. i'd be worried that reducing training attribute will mess up prospect development in the future...
updating everything else: the weight adjustment patch seems to work okay except it throws stats slightly out. goalie sv% is a tiny bit low, but i'd happily play with it. a player no longer plays well, with more hits and more points, just because he's heavier. just fine-tuning at the moment. next i'd like to look at trying to reduce the number of star players going to free agency at the end of the year, as well as Fredlig's idea. for the free agency thing i have nothing else to go on other than increasing player loyalty, so if anyone else has other ideas that would be great =)
bobmcgoo wrote: next i'd like to look at trying to reduce the number of star players going to free agency at the end of the year, as well as Fredlig's idea. for the free agency thing i have nothing else to go on other than increasing player loyalty, so if anyone else has other ideas that would be great =)
Other factors in addition to player Loyalty could be the player's Favourite Clubs, Favourite Staff, Reputation (so the team values the player as they should), Ambition (if player Ambition is high and the team is lousy, I suspect the player's more likely to leave)....and increasing Chairman/President/GM Patience may help too.....for Europeans/Russians that I want to keep in Europe/Russia I'm editing Loyalty to 20 and Adaptability to 1.......I've done all these things with the 1974 db (and at least one tester reported less FA movement)
bobmcgoo wrote:
Alessandro wrote:
There is a value in the editor, "training" if I am not mistaken, which regulates how well the players practice. Most NHL teams do have 20 here, so of course they perform like they are on steroids and get so high, so fast. Maybe if we batch-edit this aspect players might progress a little slower
bobmcgoo wrote:
this is something i'd happily look into. just wondering where you got your "20" in NHL teams' training though? my database says 18 or 17 for most. i'd be worried that reducing training attribute will mess up prospect development in the future...
I too don't have the NHL as all 20s for Training - but I find this a very interesting idea!
If one wanted to test this and didn't want to start from scratch, I posted CA progression testing results from three seperate tests (http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... 110&t=8146) - someone could adjust the Training and run some further tests and compare (I'm sorry but I'm to busy working on the 1974 db to do this)
this is something i'd happily look into. just wondering where you got your "20" in NHL teams' training though? my database says 18 or 17 for most. i'd be worried that reducing training attribute will mess up prospect development in the future...
I thought NHL had all 20s, didn't check before saying so. I think you should try bumping down by 3 points all the training values.
Alessandro wrote:I think you should try bumping down by 3 points all the training values.
For all teams in all leagues? Just wondering...
I just took a quick look at the Manimal rosters and the Training (Practice? Development?) Attribute, noticed all NHL teams are between 17 and 20 except Winnipeg at 8.......also noticed a wide range in Major Junior - some WHL teams have a Practice Attribute as low as 9 while others have a Practice Attribute as high as 18, while OHL teams seem to all fall between 12 and 16, and QMJHL teams fall between 12 and 18.....
The training value is about their facilities. How good they are. I have never given them much thought. I know that in game, you can ask your board to improve training facilities if they are bad.
Alessandro wrote:I think you should try bumping down by 3 points all the training values.
For all teams in all leagues? Just wondering...
I just took a quick look at the Manimal rosters and the Training (Practice? Development?) Attribute, noticed all NHL teams are between 17 and 20 except Winnipeg at 8.......also noticed a wide range in Major Junior - some WHL teams have a Practice Attribute as low as 9 while others have a Practice Attribute as high as 18, while OHL teams seem to all fall between 12 and 16, and QMJHL teams fall between 12 and 18.....
Yes I mean for all teams in all leagues. Just like you did for the players. Just to have a look and see what happens
just so you guys know, i don't think there's going to be any further updates for this; the weights thing works but scoring is messed up in that the top players are lucky to hit 100 points now even though teams are scoring the right number of goals, so it's not perfect (having said that the game now works a lot like the current NHL season, with only a few players getting to 90). i did make one slight improvement in that instead of increasing offensive role to 20, it's now an increase of 4, with a decrease of 4 to defensive role too. this should work better in that the game doesn't think everyone is a great offensive player. i'm playing a game with this weight adjusted database now but i think unless someone is desperate to see the whole heavy guy/light guy issue fixed, keep using the old csv editing file =)
I started my first real game of EHM yesterday for the first time in something like a year (I'm using the v4.1b rosters with the updated Player Info and your Realism Patch). Just to say that I'm really enjoying the game with your patch - the score lines really do feel much tighter. There are far fewer over the top score lines (in fact, I haven't spotted any yet).
I'll find some time to upload the updated Attribute Editor at some point. Although your patch hasn't changed, I think it is worth using the updated Editor because the csv spreadsheet is better laid out.
bobmcgoo wrote:just so you guys know, i don't think there's going to be any further updates for this; the weights thing works but scoring is messed up in that the top players are lucky to hit 100 points now even though teams are scoring the right number of goals, so it's not perfect (having said that the game now works a lot like the current NHL season, with only a few players getting to 90). i did make one slight improvement in that instead of increasing offensive role to 20, it's now an increase of 4, with a decrease of 4 to defensive role too. this should work better in that the game doesn't think everyone is a great offensive player. i'm playing a game with this weight adjusted database now but i think unless someone is desperate to see the whole heavy guy/light guy issue fixed, keep using the old csv editing file =)
How well did it work? I have been trying to get around the weight affecting players ability problem for a while but can't think of any way around it other than to mass edit everybodys weights which I really can't be bothered doing.
paul4587 wrote:How well did it work? I have been trying to get around the weight affecting players ability problem for a while but can't think of any way around it other than to mass edit everybodys weights which I really can't be bothered doing.
that's exactly what i did, using Archi's tool written specifically for the job. i'm happy with it, it randomises who gets hits so a player is no longer guaranteed to play well just because they're heavier. before the weight editing patch i drafted Taylor Pyatt very late in a fantasy draft and he scored 65 points for me on the second line, even though my top scorer only had about 75. his average rating was the best for any skater on my team, 8.80 or something. with the weight edits Pyatt is a 25 point guy, which is where his recent history says he should be, average rating just under 7. on the other hand it does require you to pay attention to players' weights because if one guy gets heavier or lighter they will suddenly play a lot better or worse; you'll need to use the saved game editor to change them if you want to keep everything equal, although very few players will actually change weights after they enter the NHL. also for some reason i can't explain teams goals for averages and goalie performance are correct, but individual players score too few points. maybe one gets to 100, 3-4 in the 90s and about 10 in the 80s. it works a lot like this season's and last season's NHL scoring race, but both are very low scoring years. i still easily prefer it to my old patch though.
if you want i can upload the database to mediafire where you can download it from?
Keith Tkachunk, Dustin Bigfyuglyin Vladomir Kruton Kyle Unwellwood and Alexander Iate2000deepfriedchickensyesrerday are the exceptions then? Their weights always change.
paul4587 wrote:How well did it work? I have been trying to get around the weight affecting players ability problem for a while but can't think of any way around it other than to mass edit everybodys weights which I really can't be bothered doing.
that's exactly what i did, using Archi's tool written specifically for the job. i'm happy with it, it randomises who gets hits so a player is no longer guaranteed to play well just because they're heavier. before the weight editing patch i drafted Taylor Pyatt very late in a fantasy draft and he scored 65 points for me on the second line, even though my top scorer only had about 75. his average rating was the best for any skater on my team, 8.80 or something. with the weight edits Pyatt is a 25 point guy, which is where his recent history says he should be, average rating just under 7. on the other hand it does require you to pay attention to players' weights because if one guy gets heavier or lighter they will suddenly play a lot better or worse; you'll need to use the saved game editor to change them if you want to keep everything equal, although very few players will actually change weights after they enter the NHL. also for some reason i can't explain teams goals for averages and goalie performance are correct, but individual players score too few points. maybe one gets to 100, 3-4 in the 90s and about 10 in the 80s. it works a lot like this season's and last season's NHL scoring race, but both are very low scoring years. i still easily prefer it to my old patch though.
if you want i can upload the database to mediafire where you can download it from?
Yeah, that would be awesome, thanks. Also re players weights changing, it only happens until the age of 22. After that, there shouldn't be any additional growth in either height or weight.
paul4587 wrote:Also re players weights changing, it only happens until the age of 22
I did quite a bit of testing (http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... 110&t=8146) and Height/Weight gain basically occurs at game start-up and that's it....whether 12 years old, or 16 years old, or 20 years old, they gain when you first start your game and then pretty much never again
got something against the heavier gentleman, batdad?
here's the link to the weights file, i already patched it with the realism edits and Archi's player info generator: http://www.mediafire.com/?ie5attw4vmwl77v
i checked a sim and three years after i started it there were about two or three pages of players who'd grown bigger and a page of players who'd shrunk, probably about 50 players, so they wouldn't take long to edit back. plus most of them were career AHLers, only spotted Evander Kane and Dylan McIlrath who might make something of themselves. so really you could get away with not editing for the first few years. the trouble comes when regens become common because i don't think they grow up to weigh the same as their original player. but at least for me this won't be a problem as OOTPHockey will be out before i get that far in this game
please make sure if you do run this database to use "full detail" for all leagues you want realism for; the patch doesn't work otherwise
paul4587 wrote:Also re players weights changing, it only happens until the age of 22
I did quite a bit of testing (http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... 110&t=8146) and Height/Weight gain basically occurs at game start-up and that's it....whether 12 years old, or 16 years old, or 20 years old, they gain when you first start your game and then pretty much never again
I did some testing by tracking the players I drafted. From the age of 18 until 22 players weight changed each year on their birthday. Some guys would be drafted at 6'1 175 and end up 6'1 205 by the age of 22. It's not just at game start up.
bobmcgoo wrote:
batdad wrote:...
got something against the heavier gentleman, batdad?
here's the link to the weights file, i already patched it with the realism edits and Archi's player info generator: http://www.mediafire.com/?ie5attw4vmwl77v
i checked a sim and three years after i started it there were about two or three pages of players who'd grown bigger and a page of players who'd shrunk, probably about 50 players, so they wouldn't take long to edit back. plus most of them were career AHLers, only spotted Evander Kane and Dylan McIlrath who might make something of themselves. so really you could get away with not editing for the first few years. the trouble comes when regens become common because i don't think they grow up to weigh the same as their original player. but at least for me this won't be a problem as OOTPHockey will be out before i get that far in this game
please make sure if you do run this database to use "full detail" for all leagues you want realism for; the patch doesn't work otherwise
paul4587 wrote:I did some testing by tracking the players I drafted. From the age of 18 until 22 players weight changed each year on their birthday. Some guys would be drafted at 6'1 175 and end up 6'1 205 by the age of 22. It's not just at game start up.
I didn't know weight changed on a players birthday...
bobmcgoo wrote:i checked a sim and three years after i started it there were about two or three pages of players who'd grown bigger and a page of players who'd shrunk, probably about 50 players
If bobmcgoo found only 100-150 players had weight increases after three years, then it doesn't seem to me that all players age 18-22 are gaining weight each year...
I've been trying to understand height/weight gain for awhile now (mostly so I can use the knowledge when creating young players for my 1974 db)......in my testing (about 100 players under age 22 - three seperate tests) only a couple/few times did a player gain weight after start-up, and noone ever gained weight year upon year.....I used the SavedGame Editor to check results, maybe it shows different then what shows in-game
I take it therefore you haven't bothered to look at the graphs posted by bobmcgoo earlier in this thread.
I really don't understand the purpose/intent of your post. Constructive criticism is absolutely fine and indeed very useful, but the way I read your post is that you're simply taking a swipe at bobmcgoo's good work???
feel i've gotta defend Archi's and my project here. i specifically said in the first post "3) The database I have at the moment has changed every player in the game, so while the NHL is now realistic I imagine that other leagues won't be." so how you got any impression that i just changed NHL players, i'm not sure. and then a few pages later, if you've have bothered to read first, you'd see Alessandro confirm that it does actually work for European leagues too.
the patch is approaching 400 downloads if you include the mediafire link too, and the only issue had was found to be with running the game on a low detail setting. so clearly something is working. i hate to praise my own project but the simple fact is it does the job it's intended to do. if it doesn't do what you intend it to do, don't use it - although i think it does do what you want, you just didn't read. but like Archi said, constructive criticism is fine. if anyone has any comments or suggestions for improvement i'd love to hear. did you ever start that new game Archi, anyone else? is it still working okay?
