Dabo is working on a project to create an unofficial successor to EHM 2007. Use this forum to discuss his project and any features you would like to see in either the initial version or in a future version.
B. Stinson wrote:It sounds like the best solution would be to have the average rating system be "Backroom Advice". Something like Football Manager's backroom advice meetings would be a good compromise.
As we see above, there's probably many teams who have an internal system for rating performances. However, it's definitely not realistic to have a public statistic telling you exactly how well any given player in the world is performing. I agree with dabo that it lets things get a bit lazy. I'll even admit that I'm extremely guilty - I don't even bother with 98% of the stats in the game. Just look at the average rating . However, I think a game should encourage more participation than that.
Looks like we are the only ones who see it this way. I am happy to leave it in since everyone seems to really want it but in the future I will most likely add the way Stinson writes as an option. The idea of my favourite swedish team having an average rating available for all players playing in for example czech republic does not sound verly likely at all. But for users who don't want to put in that much effort when playing I can see it being useful.
Another idea is some kind of fog of war here. Depending team's scouting in particular league/team players avg rating would be seen differently: invisible if scouting in area is limited/none - only vague written value for mediocre scouting - more specific numerical value for good extensive scouting on area.
How about in the players stats screen it shows an av. rating (1-5 or 1-10 doesnt matter), and this av. rating is the rating from your head coach (or have an option to pick a different staff member). When you scout players the av. rating should only be the av. rating your scout gives the player based on the amount of games he has watched. If you have not scouted a player, his av. rating would be invisable i guess.
The same principle would related to your affiliate teams as your head coach in the minors would give the average ratings to his players which would be visable by the user.
Maybe we could have a rough (not 100% accurate) av. rating for players in the users league, because IRL when the GM is watching his team play, he will notice players on the other team as well. (This is the same for your affilate leagues).
I think this system will really make having a good staff in place very important for your teams success.
Alessandro wrote:I'd keep them. Like they are now. They are a good indicator and I don't think they are unrealistic. Well, maybe they are a bit, but as other say, we can't watch whole games and so on and thus we need something to sum things up.
Let it stay!
I agree.
Keep the 0-10 rating, and put in an option so people can choose to play without it.
Personally I like them and use them a lot - I try never to sign anyone with a rating below 7.00 and tend to get rid of players in my team who average below 7.00.
B. Stinson wrote:It sounds like the best solution would be to have the average rating system be "Backroom Advice". Something like Football Manager's backroom advice meetings would be a good compromise.
As we see above, there's probably many teams who have an internal system for rating performances. However, it's definitely not realistic to have a public statistic telling you exactly how well any given player in the world is performing. I agree with dabo that it lets things get a bit lazy. I'll even admit that I'm extremely guilty - I don't even bother with 98% of the stats in the game. Just look at the average rating . However, I think a game should encourage more participation than that.
Looks like we are the only ones who see it this way. I am happy to leave it in since everyone seems to really want it but in the future I will most likely add the way Stinson writes as an option. The idea of my favourite swedish team having an average rating available for all players playing in for example czech republic does not sound verly likely at all. But for users who don't want to put in that much effort when playing I can see it being useful.
Another idea is some kind of fog of war here. Depending team's scouting in particular league/team players avg rating would be seen differently: invisible if scouting in area is limited/none - only vague written value for mediocre scouting - more specific numerical value for good extensive scouting on area.
my thoughts exactly!
javs wrote:
How about in the players stats screen it shows an av. rating (1-5 or 1-10 doesnt matter), and this av. rating is the rating from your head coach (or have an option to pick a different staff member).
i love that idea for your roster players (and affiliate's head coaches opioun for your AHL team). No-one knows the players better than the head coach...and if he doesn't, then he's probably not getting the most out of his team and they are probably losing so he's fired. I think this is a fantastic idea. Having a drop down list to see what your assistant coaches think too would be good but i wouldn't know about going further then that (maybe your assistant gm too)
I'm fine with an average rating system that indicates how a player is performing in the tactic he currently plays in. I think the real problem is
1. EHM2007 has insufficient difference in player performance based on how they are used.
2. Ratings are very offensively oriented so it's easy to pick up goalscorers and playmakers based on them.
If you design a system where players can be performing badly due to being assigned roles they aren't well suited to by a mediocre AI coach then this problem goes away even with the rating system in place. I think it's also useful to have some rating system related to the awards, it's nice for the users to see how the AI thinks each player is doing since otherwise some of the end of season rewards end up being complete gibberish.
Rating was never important for me in EHM, but I would like more advanced statistics like Corsi, zone starts, qual comp etc and all those goodies from behindthenet.ca. That would help with player evaluation if the game engine will be realistic enough. Also would be nice to see all stats (as relevant) per 60 mins to adjust for TOI, and also for even strengh only etc. And some frequent line mates statistics would be nice too:)
Tasku wrote:I think the rating system is good because, unlike real GM's or Coaches, we can't see the whole game, we don't see how they do in practice, or how the lines gel together. The only thing we have is numbers: The Ratings.
You could tone it down a bit, like giving a rating from 1-5 and have averages without the decimal points, so that you can't see that Player A has rating 3.43 and Player B has 3.46 -- thus Player B is better. Something like that, maybe? Have them both show as AVR of 3, no decimals. "Both are doing OK".
Going off this, I think the rating system should only be available for games you can see, like NHL, or CHL games should all be visible as they are mostly all televised, most of Russia too, with each country being able to see others by default but others being harder regardless, even the CHL cant see BCHL games 24/7
to get ratings on games you cant see, send a scout, and every time they watch a game, they give the player a rating.
this might be too complex, but it would be a good 50/50 point
. However, I think a game should encourage more participation than that.
