EHM The Blue Line

Junior players are not UFA...you always retain their rights until

1. They are too old to play in the league..
2. You trade em
3. You release them.

So players who are on the roster of the Sea Dogs or are unsigned prospects are eligible to be signed for year 1, and are eligible to be resigned if needed after year 1.

You just cannot sign anyone before year one that the Sea Dogs do not have the rights to. And you can only sign two players after the 2006-07 season ends that the Sea Dogs do not have the rights to.

ahh okay thanks. have to get started on this one when i get home

5.6.1 You cannot sign any free agents in your first season. The earliest date in the game in which you can attempt to sign a free agent is 1 July 2007. This also covers your own UFAs, which you may not attempt to resign until 1 July 2007. You may, however, attempt to resign your RFAs at any point during the year.

I know this doesn't apply to the QMJHL challenge, but does this mean in an NHL challenge, that we cannot sign potential UFAs to extensions before their current contract expires (i.e. we have to let them test free agency)?

No...potential UFA's for end of 2006-07 in whatever database are guys under contract. You can resign them You just cnanot sign guys who are not under contract to your team at the start of the game.

.In EHM there are guys at the start of the game, in TBL 1.0, 1.4, 1.5, etc that had people like Forsberg, Selanne, etc already listed as UFA's because they did not resign with Colorado, Anaheim and the like. There were quite a few, but not a ton if I recall correctly. But that is awhile ago now....Anyway we decided that since those guys were not playing for their old teams, and not under contract at the time we did the rules...they could not be signed into the team for the challenge right at the start of the game by a challenge participant.

And yeah, this meant some other teams often signed Selanne and Foppa and you lost out on them, even though eventually in real life they played for their old team. (Well...not Foppa I guess now that I think about it, but Teemu for sure)....

Teemu was actually the example I think of why we put in the rule. There were other players but they are not coming to mind. Some were EHM studs that are not in real life as good as in EHM, but cannot recall who.

Ouch!

I screwed up with the rules. I misunderstood that we are allowed to sign UFAs only during a period WITHIN the non-trade period

I waited and waited for Oct 1st, and then I signed my two UFAs. Now I just re-read the rules and noticed that we can only sign UFAs in July and August. As my auto-saves don't stretch back far enough I'll drop out of the challenge and test my own DB instead. Too bad I won't be able to defend my title, but Batdad would prolly have whooped my butt pretty good anyways.

That is too bad Lidas. Ouch. So just to clarify...guys-make sure you do sign UFA's only in the off season as put in the rules.

As for me beating you Lidas--I don't think so...my scoring is very low. But somehow I keep the puck outta my net.

Lidas wrote:Ouch!

I screwed up with the rules. I misunderstood that we are allowed to sign UFAs only during a period WITHIN the non-trade period

I waited and waited for Oct 1st, and then I signed my two UFAs. Now I just re-read the rules and noticed that we can only sign UFAs in July and August. As my auto-saves don't stretch back far enough I'll drop out of the challenge and test my own DB instead. Too bad I won't be able to defend my title, but Batdad would prolly have whooped my butt pretty good anyways.

Lidas, if you're still interested in playing the challenge, we could assess a penalty of some sort. It might hurt your chances in the current season but you could still do well in the long wrong. We had a few people get penalties in the last couple challenges for similar infractions.

Yeah B72 makes a good point. So if you still want to play on...we can do something. What I was thinking was 5 points for each player for year 1, and 3 points for year 2, 1 point for year 3. Reason for this would be that even though the kids might not be there for all 3 years (the UFAs) the development curve of your other guys would be assisted here and when they play they may be better.

Sound fair?

Under announcements in the challenge forum it says all challenges must use the default database. Under game setup it says TBL 1.5. We are using the 1.5 so a change to the announcement should be in place

Question about re-gens. Obviously since we're playing with the CHL, we'll have regens much earlier on. I am in season 3 and I noticed that one of my regens has already forged a love/hate relationship with one of my real players. In his bio it says "Jourdan's close friend is his team-mate, Thomas Vincour". Does anybody know if there is any on-ice performance increase by playing "favorite staff" players on the same line? I'm going to test it out, but figured someone with more experience may know.

Yet another question. My file got corrupted this morning (error 3.4 or something) which means I have to start the Challenge all over. Are the mods able to erase my stats on the Stat forum?

Your question about regens will probably get more of a response in the regens thread. There are some people that follow that thread that might not follow this one that could have some knowledge and experience on that subject. I'd ask over there if I were you.

As for your corrupt save... do you have any backups, even to go back a a little bit? You're almost through 3 seasons right now. The challenge is set to end December 15th. I don't know if you'd make it to the same point you're at now if you restarted.

stacker_s wrote:Question about re-gens. Obviously since we're playing with the CHL, we'll have regens much earlier on. I am in season 3 and I noticed that one of my regens has already forged a love/hate relationship with one of my real players. In his bio it says "Jourdan's close friend is his team-mate, Thomas Vincour". Does anybody know if there is any on-ice performance increase by playing "favorite staff" players on the same line? I'm going to test it out, but figured someone with more experience may know.

This is just a quess, but I believe that "Favourite Staff" matters only when player is gonna move into other team. If some team has player/non-player who the player likes, he more likely will go into that team.

Manimal wrote:Under announcements in the challenge forum it says all challenges must use the default database. Under game setup it says TBL 1.5. We are using the 1.5 so a change to the announcement should be in place

I've corrected the Announcements Box. Thanks for pointing that out, Manimal

Thanks for the input, A9L3E, I agree. I also assumed that if I ever traded Vincour, his new best friend would get widdled off and morale would drop.

Bruins72, I have no backup, sorry. I thought auto-saving it every two weeks would prevent this, but I guess it does not auto create a new file every save; it just overwrite the previous. So file corrupt = file corrupt = no more play. Lesson learned and I'll wait for Ch 12 now

Yeah, sadly it just overwrites the same file if you've got it auto-saving every two weeks. While I'm sure you would've liked to have continued, it's only a couple more weeks before this challenge is done.

In the future, restarts will only be allow if you haven't logged your final segment of stats for your first season. This does NOT mean that people should restart if they don't like how their game is going. It's just for situations like the one you had where your save has been corrupted. We highly recommend that everyone keep a backup save file after every season.

Are we going back to the NHL with challenge #12? Using the marvelous Lidas 1.1 database.
The Islanders would get my vote. They (and Potvin) suck!

We haven't made any decisions yet but it's looking like we'll have a vote between teams from the NHL and OHL.

It's been a couple of weeks. Any news on the new challenge?

Nothing to report yet. Everyone has been pretty busy with real life stuff lately. I'm sure we'll have some info coming though.

I like the idea of the Islanders. The thrashers could be interesting as well. I don't pay attention enough to the lightning in the database to know if they would be good. Colorado seems like they might be good with the almighty Andrew Raycroft and Peter Budaj.

Yeah, the Islanders have been bad long enough that no matter which DB we used, they'd be weak. I'm pretty certain that we'll be using the Lidas DB for the next challenge (after all the work he's put into it, we should use it!), so the weak teams may be a little different from the ones we've had in the past.

I have to vote for the Oilers, or perhaps the Wild or Columbus. But number one would have to be the Oilers.

tksolway wrote:I have to vote for the Oilers, or perhaps the Wild or Columbus. But number one would have to be the Oilers.

Yeah Oilers would be fun... Or L.A Kings, though maybe not as hard as they have a few good talents

They did the kings a while back if I'm not mistaken. The Wild, Bluejackets, and even the Oilers are a bit too good. Part of the challenge is picking a team that completely sucks so its harder to turn them around.