EHM The Blue Line

In upcoming x.1 Challenges people will have the additional ability to use D88's new ufake +NCAA database to have a fully unfaked NCAA on top of the initial unfaking measures.

The reason we require Challenge GMs to use only the original database or the Unfaking Database is so that everyone has the same players in the same locations with the same database statistics.

The question I want Challenge players to answer is would you want to start a x.1 Challenge with rosters as they were with all 2005-06 trades/retirements? We either have to require everyone to use those rosters or forbid everyone from doing so.

The reason we have the option is Devils88 has prepared a config file that will allow us to do just that (it is now available for download from the server).

Our next Challenge has already been voted to involve the Florida Panthers (though it won't begin for some time yet) so I want to know if people think we should require all participants to use this roster for Challenge use. We have to either require it or disallow it; for Challenge balance it can't be an individual option.

As tempted as I was to vote for the third option (I'm still in denial), I voted for YES. I think it would mix things up a little (e.g. the Bruins would go from decent(ish) to downright awful). Also, it means that we can use an update that doesn't alter any player attributes which can cause all sorts of unpleasantness down the line.

archibalduk wrote:I think it would mix things up a little (e.g. the Bruins would go from decent(ish) to downright awful). Also, it means that we can use an update that doesn't alter any player attributes which can cause all sorts of unpleasantness down the line.

Yep, I think it's a good idea

I actually laughed out loud (not just LOL'd) when I read option 3. Who else but a Bruins fan is going to be as affected by this? Not only that but there are enough Bruins fans here that it could be an issue.

I went with option 1. I've moved on. I accep the fact that the Bruins have traded away two of their best players. The one thing that concerns me is that the way the players were setup, some of the Bruins prospects were under-rated. Whenever I play the Bruins I have to trade away most of their prospects because they'll never develop into anything even though in real life more is expected of them.

The 2005-2006 didn't start after the trade deadline, did it?

bruins72 wrote:I actually laughed out loud (not just LOL'd) when I read option 3. Who else but a Bruins fan is going to be as affected by this? Not only that but there are enough Bruins fans here that it could be an issue.

Yeah, I was thinking about how people might react and I thought it may be an issue for our cadre of Bruins fans... figured I'd give the extra option. Believe me though as a Hawks fan I most definitely feel your pain.

Hey, maybe we should bump Florida down one more and make 4.1 the battle restore the Bruins to Glory; O'C has been canned and after seeing a particularly lucid post by you about the future of the team on the team's forum they decide to offer you the GMs job!

That's actually an interesting idea, Minty. There are plenty of Bruins fans in this forum and rebuilding them is quite a challenge. I think it would be harder to rebuild the Bruins than it was to make the Hurricanes successful.

Usually we wouldn't pick a team that a lot of users know a lot about and the pre-firesale Bruins were probably too powerful for a Challenge team but without Joe and Samsonov it certainly changes things...

It certainly does! For one thing, there are a lot of guys that you're stuck with for while because they've joined the team too recently. You'll have to wait a while before you can trade them away. You've also got a few guys that are making way too much money. You've got Murray, Leetch, and Zhamnov making $4M per season each. That's a good chunk of the team's budget right there. Overall, I think it would work as a challenge because we all haven't had the chance to really play with this roster like we did the pre-firesale one. Many of us probably played several careers using that old team. The same can't be said for the new one.

I've actually already start a game using the new post-trade Bruins. I'm just about done with the preseason. I've made a few deals and my team is looking interesting. One thing I'm already seeing is that a line of Sturm - Bergeron - Boyes isn't as good as it was in real life! Anyhow, if we do a challenge with this team, I'll start another game up.

inSTAALed wrote:The 2005-2006 didn't start after the trade deadline, did it?

It kinda did.

You know, I take it back. For some reason I'm still doing well with the Bruins even afer they dumped Joe and Sergei. I made a few deals for players and dumped other players for picks. Now after 18 games, I have the best record in the league and Glen Murray leads the league in goals (19) and points (34). I don't know if it's my tactics or if I just got lucky with the chemistry but whatever it is, it's working.

Speaking of Murray, somebody hates him. He's already had a few hat tricks, several 3 or 4 point nights, many 10 rating games, and he leads the league in points but he's only gotten the 1st star once. He's also been passed over for player of the week and player of the month repeatedly. I just don't understand it. In my last game (a 6-4 win over the Senators) he had 4 goals (2 on penalty shots because Chris Phillips hauled him down), was a +2, and had a 10 rating for the game but he didn't even get one of the stars of the game. Marius Czerkawski had 2 goals, a 0 +/-, and an 8 rating but he was awarded 1st star. It's like Czerkawski got the game winner. Murray got it. He was also much better than the 2nd and 3rd stars (both Senators, one with a goal and an assist and one with just a goal). It makes no sense to me.

Enough of my Murray rant. I just wanted to correct what I had been saying before. Even after losing 2 of their best players, the Bruins are still a relatively easy team to run.

Systemfel wrote:

inSTAALed wrote:The 2005-2006 didn't start after the trade deadline, did it?

It kinda did.

Wrong deadline, Systemfel

Hey, it's still a dealine.

Systemfel wrote:Hey, it's still a dealine.

An old one

Okay the next person who wants to join in on this round of Let's Be The Board's Biggest Smartass is getting banned; and no I'm not kidding. The config uses early moves to avoid problems; which is mentioned in every other thread about the config file. And as you two geniuses have pointed out no that's not an "accurate" date but then we already explained that didn't we? The in-game date isn't "accurate" either. D88 has pointed out other problems as well with trying it that way.

If it were possible to have a perfect real life transfer occur at the actual real life NHL deadline in the game then I'd just decide to have us use it or not. I wouldn't ask you chuckleheads what you'd prefer to do; which I didn't have to in the first place now did I? So the whole darn point of the poll is to find out how people wanted to deal with the issue not to see who can be the bigger smartass about it.

Just to throw my 2 cents in on the next challenge, I'd be willing to plays the B's on a trade deadline roster update if it meant we didn't have to play Flordia.

Well... this one seems to be pretty much a consensus so we'll lock this one and move on...