2.1 testing...

This temporary section in English only contains idea / feedback / suggestion / problem related to the simulation engine beta.
Post Reply
dechl
The Accomplished One / L'Accompli
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 12:31 pm

2.1 testing...

Post by dechl »

I am starting to REALLY hope that the 2.0.x engine will be around for a while to come :(

I've run about 30 test seasons with the 2.1 engine (simhl ratings, 30 nhl teams).

I want to run a run and gun type league (ala '80 Oilers).

I've got shots where I want them per game - goals is another story.

Yes, the 2.0.7 update has reduced 90+SC scoring a bit but it doesnt help. I've got scoring cranked back to 15 on the slider which gives every goalie at 2.5gaa or better and 930 save % or better and nobody scores except the 90+ SC guys and they are racking up points like crazy (Ovi 163G/344P as an example) and the leading score on the crap teams cap out at 50 points.....

With the 2.0 engine, the goal slider is linear and as you move it, team production seems to go up and down which is what I want in 2.1 the slider kills everyone except guys who can shoot (and their setup guys). As an example the Oilers have 8 players with 20 or more points (not goals, points) and the remaining 10 have less than 10 points.

Just running a normal NHL type league with out what I want to do with extra scoring, the 2.1 engine doesnt work... unless I manually start rerating players to reduce SC now to see if I can get that to work.... I think its much easier for me to go with the 2.0 engine.
bond007
The Passion One / Le Passionné
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 6:45 pm
Contact:

Re: 2.1 testing...

Post by bond007 »

I have similar problems. I had to set PA/SC ratings between 55 and 70 instead of 50 to 95.

But even with original ratings, there were some superstar, in good teams, who could not have good stats.
That was better than 2.0, but still not realistic to see players like Ovechkin, Henrik and Daniel Sedin,... not being able to finish in the top 30, while average players on crappy team could do it (Grabovski, Kunitz, Weiss... 3 players that are regularly in the top 20... and they are the best on their team, they don't get great stats because of someone else)


With ratings from 55 to 70, I had players like Ovechkin (playing with David Krejci and Shane Doan, having troubles to get 60 points per season while other players like Loui Eriksson who plays with Travis Zajac and Curtis Glencross, in one of the worst team of the league, and regularly gets over 85 points. Even If I set Ovechkin to 95PA/SC, 25 points over everybody, he's not good enough for the top 10.

I had a team with Marian Hossa and Jonathan toews who simply dominates the league every season and the 2 players are always in the top 5 (often the 2 best players)
Then I trade Hossa for Ovechkin. Ovechkin become the best player (130 points +) of the league while Hossa get 40-50 points per season, every season.
Of course chemistry is important, but I doubt it can have an impact of 150-200% on star player production.



I think 2.1 have problems similar to 2.0 because the probability to succeed when passing/shooting is only a part of the solution.
From what I understand, the formula was modified to fix that, but it doesn't totally fix it and the statistics are screwed up if we try to use more than 10-15 points in the ratings between the best and worst player.

It looks like another part of the problem is in the player's decision and/or the chemistry with the teammates.
Post Reply