The Idea of a "Soft Cap" on Attributes

[batdad]

Not seeing that in my games unwoz. It is possible, but not seeing it yet.

Making up numbers over 100% makes zero sense. You cannot mathematically go over 100% so making someone 110% good at something makes absolutely zero sense. PERIOD. Those of you who think it does need to give your head a shake and play EA Sports hockey or some video game that has flaming pucks when some supercharged dude shoots it.

or go back to school and learn math.

Sure there are some issues in the game with this, and it has been said what 25 times in this thread alone...>RIZ IS WORKING ON IT. THE GAME IS IN DEVELOPMENT>


/close this thread please.

[umwoz]

I have no problem if you choose to close it. It's a suggested solution to a problem that has it's root in the current set of attributes.

I hate to compare the two but I look at FHM as an example for this single issue(and no others, because FHM has even more work to do than this game)... Splitting of Anticipation into Off and Def Read abilities, adding in Shot Blocking and Screening as individual attributes because Positioning and Off Puck simply don't encompass these things due to the vast range of on ice abilities they are trying to cover.(although FHM also uses positioning and "getting open").

I would simply like to see a bit more differentiation, as in this game, Offensive Defensemen seem too much like worse or better versions of eachother instead of stylistically different players.(for example)

[batdad]

That is an issue for the developer to work on in the confines of the absolute attributes. It is pure fallacy to assume that changing a scale of numbers to add something "special" will fix any issues with the game. 20 is special...19 is special....and you know what...they can then work the system out to make sure it is at SI.

Adding other numbers does not change it. All it does is make people say well Ovechkin shot is a 21, well maybe Crosby is a 22.

Seriously...Ovechkin with a 20 shot is probably say 19.9 and the next person in line is say Weber with a 19.8 and so on and so forth. You do not need a freaking 21 to show who has the best shot. IT just changes the scale and makes it look ridiculous and non logical.

Ugh..no point...people who do not understsand stats and probability will never get it.

Adding in a 21 special shot or special skill will not solve any of the issues with the rating system in the game. The only thing that will is Riz going through and tightening it up so that the future does not see as our friend Peter would call it....200000 Carl Hagelin's.

You want more differentiation use the 100 scale already there for you in preferences.

[archibalduk]

A lot of these attributes act in tandem. For instance, if you find a 20 Aggression rating just isn't giving a high enough level of PIM for the player, lower his Temperament and it'll vastly increase his PIM averages. So there's no real need for a 21 or 22 Aggression; just stick his Temperament down instead. I once tried setting players' Temperaments as the inverse value of their Aggressions - e.g. I'd give a 2 Temperament to a player with 19 Aggression, 3 to and 18, etc. I found the PIM averages for players sky-rocketed way above anything remotely realistic.

The same goes with other things such as goal/assists scoring. If a player isn't scoring enough with a 20 Wrist shot, try upping things like his Consistency or Stickhandling. Again, we vastly reduced goalscoring in EHM by keeping forwards' Consistencies below 11 (whereas goalies and d-men used the full 1 - 20 range).

IMO it's far too early to start judging how to rate players in EHM:EA. Really what we need to do is get the CAs and Player Roles done (CAs should be set in the exact same manner as EHM 2007 because if the players are behaving differently in game it's clearly an EA issue that needs addressing). Once we have these key points set, we can better evaluate player's ratings (currently almost all players in the DB do not have Roles set).

[batdad]

Ah..archi. Always so much clearer and better at explaining things. Thanks.

[umwoz]

That is an issue for the developer to work on in the confines of the absolute attributes. It is pure fallacy to assume that changing a scale of numbers to add something "special" will fix any issues with the game. 20 is special...19 is special....and you know what...they can then work the system out to make sure it is at SI.

Adding other numbers does not change it. All it does is make people say well Ovechkin shot is a 21, well maybe Crosby is a 22.

Seriously...Ovechkin with a 20 shot is probably say 19.9 and the next person in line is say Weber with a 19.8 and so on and so forth. You do not need a freaking 21 to show who has the best shot. IT just changes the scale and makes it look ridiculous and non logical.

Ugh..no point...people who do not understsand stats and probability will never get it.

Adding in a 21 special shot or special skill will not solve any of the issues with the rating system in the game. The only thing that will is Riz going through and tightening it up so that the future does not see as our friend Peter would call it....200000 Carl Hagelin's.

You want more differentiation use the 100 scale already there for you in preferences.

I fully understand that the soft cap may not be the solution, but was simply brainstorming for the sake of discussion. I actually like bouncing ideas off you guys because it lets me see the varying opinions of the community. Varying from your "groundedness"(no harm meant there, and I'm sure you won't take it that way) to nino's vast experience in db editing and everything in between.

Actually it would be interesting to be able to edit in the 0-100 scale and have it scaled back to the 0-20 that I prefer in game.

I really oughtta broaden my horizons a bit outside of Java/Python and try a little more tinkering myself for fun.

[archibalduk]

I really oughtta broaden my horizons a bit outside of Java/Python and try a little more tinkering myself for fun.

Give me a shout if you ever choose to pursue this. I have plenty of C++ code I can share with you (I taught myself C++ simply to edit EHM).

[umwoz]

I really oughtta broaden my horizons a bit outside of Java/Python and try a little more tinkering myself for fun.

Give me a shout if you ever choose to pursue this. I have plenty of C++ code I can share with you (I taught myself C++ simply to edit EHM).

Thanks! I'm almost certain it will be a part of my curriculum either this summer or the following fall. When that time comes I'm sure you'll hear from me.