It’s most definitely a “personal preference’ type thing.Manimal wrote: nino33 wrote:
Overall I myself prefer the "historical" UUDB rosters over the Lidas/Manimal rosters.
Manimal wrote:
Just out of curiosity, may I ask why?
I’ve seen posts from people who emphasize how they don’t care about using “real players” but I’m pretty much the opposite. For me it’s not about trying to create an all-star team, but rather playing within a recognizable hockey world (I like the less player movement & build from the draft style of play like the Challenges promote)
I think a significant factor is I’m an older guy (I’ve been following hockey since BEFORE Gretzky) who hasn’t followed hockey in the last decade like I did when I was younger…so I can combine my enjoyment of EHM/hockey with my enjoyment of “discovering” all the real life players of recent years.
Another big factor is my work on the 1974 database; I found having rosters that started in 2006 with “known players” was far more useful to me when addressing the HUGE learning curve regarding creating a historical database (more useful for testing/learning purposes in regards to my creating a historical database)
And I only discovered EHM 18 months ago, and I have not actually PLAYED much EHM (and thus haven’t grown “bored” with the real life players). I spend pretty much all of my “EHM time” editing.
Regards