Discuss all aspects of editing the data and databases in EHM here. Have a question about the EHM Editor, EHM Assistant, editing the .cfg files, hex editing the .dat or .db files? Want to tweak the EHM exe file to change league rules/structure, start date etc? This is the place!
Forum rules
This is the forum to discuss all aspects of editing the EHM data and tweaking the game.
Have a bug or feature request for the EHM Editor? Post them in the EHM Editor thread. Please start a new thread or post in another thread if you have a question about how to use the EHM Editor.
Given the large number of questions on similar topics, we ask that you start a new thread for a new question unless you can locate a similar question in an existing thread. This will hopefully ensure that similar questions do not get buried in large threads.
The following data is compiled using TBL 8.2 at startup (using the EHM Assistant to export the data from a newly created game).
I'm looking at most Attributes now to try and provide more of a complete picture of the player & I'm looking at more refined CA levels too. Also, I'm ignoring the Faceoffs Attribute for now, allowing me to combine center/winger data for easier presentation
This information was initially posted in the Researchers Forum
I also commented in red font, and asked Riz to reply (when I was part of the researching team)
And here's my first compiled Player Role....
F_SNIPER
KEY
KEY
ESSENTIAL
ESSENTIAL
ESSENTIAL
ESSENTIAL
ESSENTIAL
NON-ESSENTIAL
SNIPER
#/CA average
Off Role
Def Role
Wristshot
Slapshot
Anticipation
Movement
Deflections
Deking
Stickhandling
Hitting
worldwide
1807/39.4
16.7
5.6
8.5
8.2
11.5
7.0
6.7
7.1
4.6
2.6
CA 40-69
427/52.3
16.4
5.7
10.1
9.7
11.9
8.3
8.0
8.5
5.5
3.0
CA 70-99
192/81.2
15.9
7.7
10.9
10
11.1
9.7
8.9
10.1
8.7
6.1
CA 100-139
91/113.7
15.4
9.0
12.5
11.0
11.1
11.6
9.7
12.2
12
8.6
CA 140-159
16/148.0
16.4
12.1
14.8
13.0
14.1
14.3
12.4
14.6
15.0
9.5
CA 160-179
6/164.7
17.7
12.3
17.3
14.8
15.3
15.0
13.2
15.0
15.8
10.8
CA 180-200
2/181.0
20.0
11.5
17.5
18.5
17.0
17.5
14.5
15.0
19.0
10.5
NON-ESSENTIAL
NON-ESSENTIAL
NON-ESSENTIAL
IRRELEVANT
REGULAR
REGULAR
REGULAR
REGULAR
REGULAR
REGULAR
SNIPER
#/CA average
Checking
Pokecheck
Positioning
Pass Tendency
WorkRate
Passing
Strength
Vision
Bravery
Decisions
worldwide
1807/39.4
2.6
2.5
2.6
9.4
8.7
2.8
7.3
10.2
8.5
4.3
CA 40-69
427/52.3
3.0
2.8
2.9
9.2
9.2
3.0
7.8
10.8
9.1
5.1
CA 70-99
192/81.2
5.9
5.7
5.8
9.7
10.3
6.5
9.3
10.5
9.8
8.3
CA 100-139
91/113.7
8.7
8.3
8.4
9.8
11.9
10.8
10.7
11.6
10.2
10.9
CA 140-159
16/148.0
12.3
12.3
11.1
10.3
14.6
14.1
11.9
14.6
9.9
14.0
CA 160-179
6/164.7
12.5
14.3
12.5
10.2
14.8
14.3
15.3
16.3
11.5
15.0
CA 180-200
2/181.0
14.0
15.5
11.5
9.5
17.0
15.5
12.5
18.0
14.0
15.0
SKATING
REGULAR
SKATING
SKATING
SKATING
SNIPER
#/CA average
Balance
Fighting
Acceleration
Agility
Speed
Stamina
Natural Fitness
Aggression
Dirtiness
Agitation
worldwide
1807/39.4
3.8
1.6
6.8
6.9
7.0
7.0
6.9
4.1
9.4
9.5
CA 40-69
427/52.3
4.4
1.3
7.6
7.9
8.3
8.3
8.2
4.4
9.4
9.3
CA 70-99
192/81.2
8.2
2.7
10.4
10.3
10.7
10.4
10.3
6.5
8.3
7.9
CA 100-139
91/113.7
11
4.8
13.2
12.5
13.2
12.0
11.9
8.5
7.4
7.6
CA 140-159
16/148.0
14
6.9
14.6
14.8
14.8
14.2
14.8
8.0
6.3
6.6
CA 160-179
6/164.7
15.2
10.8
14.5
14.2
14.7
15.3
15.7
10.0
8.8
7.7
CA 180-200
2/181.0
15.5
9.0
15.5
15.0
16.0
18.5
17.0
12.0
7.5
8.0
MENTAL
MENTAL
MENTAL
MENTAL
MENTAL
MENTAL
MENTAL
SNIPER
#/CA average
Consistency
Versatility
Determination
Adaptability
Ambition
Pressure
Professionalism
Sportsmanship
Temperament
worldwide
1807/39.4
9.9
7.8
11.9
11.6
12.2
11.4
11.5
12.7
14.9
CA 40-69
427/52.3
10
8.2
11.7
12.2
11.6
11.7
11.5
12.6
14.9
CA 70-99
192/81.2
10.1
9.2
12.3
11.9
12.0
11.2
11.5
12.1
14.3
CA 100-139
91/113.7
10.6
10.4
12.7
11.7
12.1
11.6
12.2
12.2
14.1
CA 140-159
16/148.0
13.1
11.3
15.5
13.5
14.4
13.4
13.4
13.8
14.9
CA 160-179
6/164.7
12.0
10.8
15.2
13.7
13.2
13.5
12.8
11.5
14.2
CA 180-200
2/181.0
15.5
12.0
18.5
15.5
17.5
15.5
14.5
16.5
15.0
Seems to me Pass Tendency should not be Irrelevant! The 07 Guide says "ratings of 10 or below means the player prefers to shoot" - so shouldn't snipers be in the 2-7 range and not averaging around and even above 10
Natural Fitness seems to low to me for those under a 140 CA
Maybe Hitting develops a bit to much.....Aggression seems maybe a bit high (most snipers aren't very aggressive are they?)
Pokecheck and Checking get to high IMO
Fighting shouldn't really develop at all for most snipers (and most should never fight)
Last edited by nino33 on Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
When looking at this data not much "jumps out" at me, but a few things make me wonder...
database issue....I think those players with a CA of 100+ have to low a Defensive Role to be a "defensive forward" and in particular those with of 140+ as I think any defensive forward should likely have a Defensive Role in the 15-17 range and an Offensive Role of 13+ would be very rare
database issue.....maybe it's players were given the wrong Player Role, but IMO Offensive Role is to high for most "defensive forwards" who have a CA of 140+ (a 15 for Offensive Role automatically makes a player an "offensive player" and except for the Pavel Datsyuk type there shouldn't be so many high Offensive Role defensive forwards (T.J. Oshie is the guy at 160 CA....IMO he can't have a Player Role of defensive forward and have a 17 Offensive Role, and he's not a Datsyuk type player)
Last edited by nino33 on Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
When compiling this data what "jumps out at me" is
It seems odd to me that Pokecheck is an Essential Attribute for a Playmaker, and Wristshot also (a playmaker/passer having a shooting Attribute as Essential).....Deking (Non-Essential doesn't make sense to me) and/or Stickhandling seem more in line with being important for a Playmaker IMO
As mentioned before, I'm not sure of the effectiveness of having Stamina and Natural Fitness seemingly connect to CA growth - in particular Natural Fitness seems "off" (players in the very large 70-140 CA range have a Natural Fitness average of under 12, which seems very low to me/I think they should likely average around 14, and this may be a leading cause of the concerns about players "not recovering Condition" (rather than it connecting so much to PP/ice time, practice schedules, etc)
I see a playmaker_finesse has Stickhandling instead of Pokecheck (and Deking instead of Deflections); IMO the difference between a "regular" playmaker and a "finesse" playmaker isn't likely to be significant, and having "Pokecheck" as being a significant differentiator is odd I think (people usually don't discuss how playmakers are at different levels in light of their pokechecking/defensive abilities).......the Bravery Attribute as Non-Essential for a playmaker_finesse makes total sense to me, and I think it'd be better for a playmaker too instead of Deking (and Deking could be at least Normal)
Last edited by nino33 on Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
IMO, outside of the LNAH, they essentially don't exist anymore
past versions of EHM always had Enforcers as defensive players, and they often played on the PK - this is completely wrong; I don't recall an Enforcer playing on the PK ever in my 40 years of watching hockey (and I can't think of one that was as defensively competent as an average defensive forward)
what Enforcers used to bring to the game, along with Fighting and their "presence" was big hits on the forecheck, but that type of hitting doesn't exist anymore either (and hasn't since probably the early 1990s - I see more players put themselves in a vulnerable/dangerous position in any single game now then I saw in the first 10-15 years of watching hockey as showing your number/back, and exposing yourself to the big hit from behind, was something players simply didn't do; suspensions are now handed out for what got players like Scott Stevens into the HOF HaHa.....it used to be the responsibility of the players not to put themselves into such positions)
LOTS jumped out at me while doing Enforcers...
the Fighting Attribute seems low for the 40-99 CA Range
Checking and WorkRate should be Regular at best IMO
Unless Bravery connects to fighting it too should be Regular at best (Enforcers don’t block shots, and this along with Checking being Essential creates IMO a defensive player who can fight, and not an Enforcer)
Vision and Flair should both be Irrelevant IMO (Enforcers have neither); Movement I think should be Irrelevant too (Enforcers are not good at finding open ice/getting open)
I think Passing IMO should be Essential, as it’s the one hockey skill that Enforcers use/need the most (the idea was always “move the puck” ASAP when an Enforcer got it)
I’d think Dirtiness and Agitation would be Essential too (and maybe they’ve been changed already, as their values seem like they’re Key or Essential already)
Both Sportsmanship and Temperament seem to high IMO (and maybe Temperament should be Irrelevant)
Last edited by nino33 on Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Why are there so many Power Forwards? 7,011 is WAY more than other positions (and IMO the Power Forward is seen less now in today's game than in the past)
I don't understand Deflections as a Key Attribute...but maybe there aren't any better choices (IMO the primary attributes of a Power Forward would be "driving the net" and "playing in the slot/putting in rebounds")
database issue.....I haven't looked at the actual players/names, but it seems to me on average Defensive Role is to high for the 140-179 CA range, especially the 140-159 range as the Off/Def Role total of 29 puts them in the superstar category
I was surprised to see Slapshot as an Essential Attribute (from Phil Esposito to Cam Neely/Tim Kerr/Mark Messier to Wendel Clark/Todd Bertuzzi/Keith Tkachuk to Milan Lucic and others, for none of them does a Slapshot come to my mind; Power Forwards usually "work" close to the net/in the slot)
Again Natural Fitness seems low (especially for the 70-139 CA range); Natural Fitness seems to be an issue/to low for most (all?) players
I would think both Aggression and Agitation would be more important (Essential?) for a Power Forward
Last edited by nino33 on Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Does the Off and Def roles change with the CA in game?
If it doesn't then the settings we use for a young player would become too low for the player in his prime
Manimal wrote:Does the Off and Def roles change with the CA in game?
If it doesn't then the settings we use for a young player would become too low for the player in his prime
AFAIK Offensive/Defensive Role never change
Previous testing has shown they never change; I'm working on compiling the data for the current Attribute Development testing now http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/po ... 0&p=215063 so we'll be able to reconfirm soon enough
You'll notice that with the data posted in this thread (and in the Defensemen thread too) there's no reference to age.
Each Attribute (including Off/Def Role) is looked at "by CA"
I think the idea of using the different CA ranges in the Player Roles & Attributes testing to assist researchers makes total sense, BUT things have to be looked at in light of the Attribute Development testing as well
Specifically what Attributes never change, what Attributes rarely change/only change a little bit when they do change, what Attributes change "normally" is critically important
Any Attribute that never changes would be set the same regardless of a player's age (like Offensive/Defensive Role).
Any Attribute that changes only a little when they do change would consider the player's age somewhat (and knowing when it changes is helpful too, so whether a value should be set as "permanent or not" would depend on the player's age & what the testing shows as to when the Attribute changes)
Any Attribute that develops "normally" would most definitely need to consider a player's age, and the consideration would be significant
nino33 wrote:Any Attribute that changes only a little when they do change would consider the player's age somewhat (and knowing when it changes is helpful too, so whether a value should be set as "permanent or not" would depend on the player's age & what the testing shows as to when the Attribute changes)
I don't recall ever compiling a chart or Attribute definitions list that completely covers things, so I don't think there's anything that I can quickly point to that answers at what age range to Attributes develop
But the testing I did last year http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... 4&start=25 does have links to the spreadsheets so one could look and determine this, the data is there (I was kinda hoping that others might download the spreadsheets and review/comment on them so our knowledge might increase as a result)
The data is not in plain spreadsheets, as (modified to include more) Attribute Tracker spreadsheets were used, so it's easy to click on the "comparison tab" and review the data. There's two spreadsheets for each 4 year time period (one for ingame Attributes and the other for hidden Attributes) & there's also two spreadsheets that cover the whole 12 year period showing only the values initially and what they were 12 years later
As noted in the Attribute Development thread "I used the TBL Rosters and looked at 16 goalies & 112 skaters (age 13-23 at start-up)" and "I looked at every Attribute and it's development on a year by year basis for all 128 players" so with a bit of review determining at what age Attributes develop is certainly possible I think
nino33 wrote:
F_SNIPER Seems to me Pass Tendency should not be Irrelevant! The 07 Guide says "ratings of 10 or below means the player prefers to shoot" - so shouldn't snipers be in the 2-7 range and not averaging around and even above 10
Natural Fitness seems to low to me for those under a 140 CA
Maybe Hitting develops a bit to much.....Aggression seems maybe a bit high (most snipers aren't very aggressive are they?)
Pokecheck and Checking get to high IMO
Fighting shouldn't really develop at all for most snipers (and most should never fight)
For 1.4 I've done some adjustments on the player role attribute links:
- Pass Tendency issues fixed (should now be correctly set for snipers)
- Aggression changed to non-essential for Snipers
- Fighting is a "technical skill" so it will always be higher on average for higher CA players. This is not directly linked to willingness to fight (Aggression comes into play).
riz_si wrote:- Fighting is a "technical skill" so it will always be higher on average for higher CA players. This is not directly linked to willingness to fight (Aggression comes into play).
Maybe it's not possible due to coding issues, but I think it would be really beneficial if Fighting was not tied to CA as described (at least for Snipers/Finesse players).....the vast majority (almost all/all?) of the top CA players not only don't fight they can't fight well, and should not have a high Fighting Attribute (can Snipers/Finesse players maybe have a "cap" so their Fighting Attribute never reaches double digits?)
nino33 wrote:When compiling this data what "jumps out at me" is
It seems odd to me that Pokecheck is an Essential Attribute for a Playmaker, and Wristshot also (a playmaker/passer having a shooting Attribute as Essential).....Deking (Non-Essential doesn't make sense to me) and/or Stickhandling seem more in line with being important for a Playmaker IMO
I see a playmaker_finesse has Stickhandling instead of Pokecheck (and Deking instead of Deflections); IMO the difference between a "regular" playmaker and a "finesse" playmaker isn't likely to be significant, and having "Pokecheck" as being a significant differentiator is odd I think (people usually don't discuss how playmakers are at different levels in light of their pokechecking/defensive abilities).......the Bravery Attribute as Non-Essential for a playmaker_finesse makes total sense to me, and I think it'd be better for a playmaker too instead of Deking (and Deking could be at least Normal)
Agreed on those. I've changed the Playmaker (C/W) role to have Deking and Stickhandling as essentials instead of Pokecheck and Wristshot. Also replaced Deking with Slapshot in the Non-Essentials for a playmaker (c/w).
nino33 wrote:
LOTS jumped out at me while doing Enforcers...
the Fighting Attribute seems low for the 40-99 CA Range
Checking and WorkRate should be Regular at best IMO
Unless Bravery connects to fighting it too should be Regular at best (Enforcers don’t block shots, and this along with Checking being Essential creates IMO a defensive player who can fight, and not an Enforcer)
Vision and Flair should both be Irrelevant IMO (Enforcers have neither); Movement I think should be Irrelevant too (Enforcers are not good at finding open ice/getting open)
I think Passing IMO should be Essential, as it’s the one hockey skill that Enforcers use/need the most (the idea was always “move the puck” ASAP when an Enforcer got it)
I’d think Dirtiness and Agitation would be Essential too (and maybe they’ve been changed already, as their values seem like they’re Key or Essential already)
Both Sportsmanship and Temperament seem to high IMO (and maybe Temperament should be Irrelevant)
I've removed Checking from the essentials on all Enforcer roles. Bravery is not just for blocking shots, also counts towards willingness to get physical which is something typically associated with enforcers.
Added Flair as Irrelevant for all enforcer roles, Vision was already a non-essential.
Added Dirtiness and Agition as Essentials for all enforcer roles.
The mental attributes like Sportsmanship and Temperament are not tied to CA or roles, so that is something to look at maybe in the future.
Last edited by riz_si on Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
nino33 wrote:
What stood out while compiling this data...
Why are there so many Power Forwards? 7,011 is WAY more than other positions (and IMO the Power Forward is seen less now in today's game than in the past)
I don't understand Deflections as a Key Attribute...but maybe there aren't any better choices (IMO the primary attributes of a Power Forward would be "driving the net" and "playing in the slot/putting in rebounds")
database issue.....I haven't looked at the actual players/names, but it seems to me on average Defensive Role is to high for the 140-179 CA range, especially the 140-159 range as the Off/Def Role total of 29 puts them in the superstar category
I was surprised to see Slapshot as an Essential Attribute (from Phil Esposito to Cam Neely/Tim Kerr/Mark Messier to Wendel Clark/Todd Bertuzzi/Keith Tkachuk to Milan Lucic and others, for none of them does a Slapshot come to my mind; Power Forwards usually "work" close to the net/in the slot)
Again Natural Fitness seems low (especially for the 70-139 CA range); Natural Fitness seems to be an issue/to low for most (all?) players
I would think both Aggression and Agitation would be more important (Essential?) for a Power Forward
I've adjusted the number of different roles generated for newgen/extra players to be more balanced in 1.4.
Deflections are primarily used in the slot and to make use of that skill the player needs to get into that area. So whilst there is no other specific attribute to mark this, deflections are set as a key for power forwards.
I've changed replaced Slapshot on Power Forwards with Aggression.
I've been doing final testing this week after the last few fixes based on bug reports, so hopefully not long to go now. Nothing immediate to fix on my list anymore so have created the new 2016 fictional database and have been doing final balancing of the 2d engine today. A bit more to do tomorrow but not much more. Then it depends on our production and PR on when we can get it out.
Manimal wrote:Does the Off and Def roles change with the CA in game?
If it doesn't then the settings we use for a young player would become too low for the player in his prime
AFAIK Offensive/Defensive Role never change
This is something that i would definitely want in a coming update. The possibility to have a more dynamic development curve on players. For example Kadri is a player which would be consider a finesse player when he was drafted, but now he have developed his game into a more aggressive shutdown C, still with skill though.
I don't have the time for doing a Nino-like testing but i get the feeling that the key attributes in a player role results in key attributes blows out of proportion a bit. Fx a couple of years in to the game (2018-2020) all the prospects from the 2016-2018 drafts have either very high speed and acceleration attributes, many with 20 acc and 20 spd and all other attributes in the 8-12s (finesse/off players). Either that format or for a def/physical role, that strength attribute develops almost immediately to 16+, and the acc and spd left undeveloped.
If you look at Football Manager it does have the possibilities to practice a player at a different role (Box to box midfielder fx) or at a single attribute, which gives you another dimension of player development, you can then develop your young players to fit the system you play. The feeling with EHM is that player development regarding which attribute that will increase, is written in stone.
It would be cool if you could make a player change his player role. Not saying it should be like a on/of switch were you could turn John Scott in to Johnny Gaudreau and vice versa, should instead depend on determination, professionalism, versatility and age.
