FIGHTING NEEDS TO BE REBUILT!!

@Jbats41 

I have yet to see someone spam fight on a breakaway.

There is not a good place for injuries in things like EASHL and for that, I applaud the changes they made to Injuries in 24. Two min is enough time to feel the effects of your mistake and then get right back into the game. Sure there is a place for hits to injure a player on the ice like when someone has their head down and is skating full speed into a brick wall, but the problem is that these injuries happen from just zero speed a guy just hitting you against the boards. On top of this, hits have a large grace period that even after the puck has been sent off your stick, I've seen as high as over a second getting blasted into later, injured and no penalty was called. I did everything I was supposed to but got killed without repercussions. The grace period for being hit needs to be severely lowered if you want to punish players for being hit, which I am fine if you want to go this route.

You would also need a way to lower the chances of that hit injuring you with something like the brace feature that was in last years game but did nothing unless you had the puck in the form of the reverse hit. If I was able to react by bracing for that defender coming at me super late to neutralize their hit and maybe just knock me off balance, than it could be more fair to have injuries be 5 min and really punish your poor decision making. But right now, in its current state that stuff to protect you when getting attacked late doesn't exist and so having a short injury timer is the right strategy.

@Jbats41 

Sure. I can see how it can be abused. We'll keep an eye out for other reports. Thank you.

---

@Jbats41 wrote:
@EA_AljoThe main issue that I see with forced fights, especially 1v1, is that the big hit you reference usually turns into a turnover and often times is a breakaway or an odd man rush... the other player spams fight to kill the rush, 

---

100%. I have done this myself: If my player gets crushed, injured & the fight prompt pops up - I'm taking that fight as soon as I see my opponent getting a resulting breakaway or odd-man rush. 

If you brought in line changes/multiple builds to eashl I think you open up a ton of possibilities for reworking the fighting/instigating system and actually having more of a place for enforcers/tough guy builds. 

---

@BabyPuncher525 wrote:

If you brought in line changes/multiple builds to eashl I think you open up a ton of possibilities for reworking the fighting/instigating system and actually having more of a place for enforcers/tough guy builds. 

---

I think we can rework the fighting/instigating without line changes. I just don't think line changes are realistic for WoC. It would require more humans or an additional build for each line. Which just seems overly complicated. 

@EA_Aljo 

---

I'd love to see less encouragement for hitting all around. Which would result in fewer injured players and thus, fewer fights. Thanks so much for all the input.

---

Respectfully, that's an awful take.

@PackBeak 

I should elaborate. What I'd like to see less of is the focus purely on hitting. I'm all for hitting when appropriate. Creating a club full of huge players with truculence who's only purpose is to destroy everything that moves is just annoying to play against. Winning against them doesn't even really feel satisfying. I'd rather play against teams that want a good game of hockey. Currently, there is very little punishment for playing as a goon. Penalties don't do much to deter that behavior.

---

@EA_Aljo wrote:

---

@BabyPuncher525 wrote:

If you brought in line changes/multiple builds to eashl I think you open up a ton of possibilities for reworking the fighting/instigating system and actually having more of a place for enforcers/tough guy builds. 

---

I think we can rework the fighting/instigating without line changes. I just don't think line changes are realistic for WoC. It would require more humans or an additional build for each line. Which just seems overly complicated. 

---

I don't think it needs to be.

We all have that list of builds we choose from pre-game. It would be nice if we were able to skate to the bench and "line change" with one of those builds. 

@EA_Aljo 

Fair. I think that it's most apparent in Ones. Enforcers can just defend all game, and then take out the goal leader to force a free goal and overtime if they need to.

For Club, it could be annoying to get matched with a team that uses all goons. Same could be said for people who take 5'7 160lb speedsters who just cherrypick all game.

@KidShowtime1867 

How much does that really add to the game though? I like the added realism of it, but it just seems unnecessary. Especially with the shortened periods we have. It would also make injuries almost pointless since you could just switch to a different player while they recover on the bench.

---

@EA_Aljo wrote:

@KidShowtime1867 

How much does that really add to the game though? I like the added realism of it, but it just seems unnecessary. Especially with the shortened periods we have. It would also make injuries almost pointless since you could just switch to a different player while they recover on the bench.

---

Changing to a new build would be non-forced ie: it's not as if you're changing lines because you're at the end of a shift and fatigued. It would be purely another chance for the user to pick a different build if they choose to.

You could disable the ability to change builds during injury. 

I just like the idea of being able to pick a new build in the event that your team needs a shake-up during the game. Things aren't flowing with a TWD, so I move to an OFD. Down a goal with 2 mins left - swap my Enforcer for a sniper. All of these changes being done on the fly or in-between periods would mean there's no impact to the flow of the game either.

All depends how multiple builds/line changes would be implemented by EA. Tons of possibilities for new ideas. In my mind I'm thinking of it having an impact pretty much on everything from injuries, stamina to the whole fighting/instigating. Maybe injuries should last for the game and durability actually have a place in eashl? Line changes would be strategic or based off running low on stamina with that particular build. Someone keeps running your smaller scoring builds with a truculence pwf? Bring out the enforcer and make them think twice the next time they lay a big hit. Take the 2 min instigating if you feel it necessary at times.

---

@PackBeak wrote:

@EA_Aljo 

Fair. I think that it's most apparent in Ones. Enforcers can just defend all game, and then take out the goal leader to force a free goal and overtime if they need to.

For Club, it could be annoying to get matched with a team that uses all goons. Same could be said for people who take 5'7 160lb speedsters who just cherrypick all game.

---

I don't mind the speedy cherry pickers. They're pretty satisfying to shut down. I play D and when I notice that's what they're doing, I'll hang back and cover them. It's a pretty easy turnover in most cases. You can just wait for the pass and get a well-timed poke on it to break up the play.

---

@KidShowtime1867 wrote:

Changing to a new build would be non-forced ie: it's not as if you're changing lines because you're at the end of a shift and fatigued. It would be purely another chance for the user to pick a different build if they choose to.

You could disable the ability to change builds during injury. 

I just like the idea of being able to pick a new build in the event that your team needs a shake-up during the game. Things aren't flowing with a TWD, so I move to an OFD. Down a goal with 2 mins left - swap my Enforcer for a sniper. All of these changes being done on the fly or in-between periods would mean there's no impact to the flow of the game either.

---

Something about this just doesn't sit right with me. It feels like you're jumping into another player's body in a sense. I think part of the skill in this game is being able to change up how you play to meet the needs of each situation. If games were longer, I wouldn't mind a couple lines of human controlled players so you could swap with a teammate. I just don't like filling a team with different builds where everyone controls multiple players.

---

@BabyPuncher525 wrote:

All depends how multiple builds/line changes would be implemented by EA. Tons of possibilities for new ideas. In my mind I'm thinking of it having an impact pretty much on everything from injuries, stamina to the whole fighting/instigating. Maybe injuries should last for the game and durability actually have a place in eashl? Line changes would be strategic or based off running low on stamina with that particular build. Someone keeps running your smaller scoring builds with a truculence pwf? Bring out the enforcer and make them think twice the next time they lay a big hit. Take the 2 min instigating if you feel it necessary at times.

---

I'm sure there's potential here to add something worthwhile to the game. I just wouldn't want to make it easy to essentially avoid an injury, penalty or fatigue. As far as your example with smaller builds goes, I just think that's the risk you take for having that build and part of the skill in playing them is knowing how to avoid getting hit or moving the puck when know a hit is coming. I think an enforcer will think twice about hitting when they realize they're going up against a slippery player that isn't so easy to hit.

I'm not saying everything you both suggested isn't worth exploring. I'm just having a harder time with seeing how much more fun that's going to make the game. Then again, fun is obviously subjective, but are there enough interested in this to make it worth the huge amount of work to make it happen?

---

@KlariskraysNHL wrote:
@EA_Aljo Oh no they would want the scaled type players of a 1st liner in attributes then others decrease as you go down to 4th liner. The pace of the game slows down immensely with the need of goalies to cover almost everything. Ragging the puck would become more of a thing. We all dislike playing goon squads because those games can literally take an hour to complete when games should only be taking 20-25mins.

---

I like the idea of lines having a lower cap on attributes for lines 2, 3 and 4 so you don't just jump into another meta build or something. And what would stop someone from creating the same build on each line anyway? I definitely don't want to see the pace of the game slowed down though. I think the length and pace of games, when played as intended, is pretty much perfect.

---

@EA_Aljo wrote:

---

@PackBeak wrote:

@EA_Aljo 

Fair. I think that it's most apparent in Ones. Enforcers can just defend all game, and then take out the goal leader to force a free goal and overtime if they need to.

For Club, it could be annoying to get matched with a team that uses all goons. Same could be said for people who take 5'7 160lb speedsters who just cherrypick all game.

---

I don't mind the speedy cherry pickers. They're pretty satisfying to shut down. I play D and when I notice that's what they're doing, I'll hang back and cover them. It's a pretty easy turnover in most cases. You can just wait for the pass and get a well-timed poke on it to break up the play.

---

---

@KlariskraysNHL wrote:
@EA_AljoOh no they would want the scaled type players of a 1st liner in attributes then others decrease as you go down to 4th liner. The pace of the game slows down immensely with the need of goalies to cover almost everything. Ragging the puck would become more of a thing. We all dislike playing goon squads because those games can literally take an hour to complete when games should only be taking 20-25mins.

---

I like the idea of lines having a lower cap on attributes for lines 2, 3 and 4 so you don't just jump into another meta build or something. And what would stop someone from creating the same build on each line anyway? I definitely don't want to see the pace of the game slowed down though. I think the length and pace of games, when played as intended, is pretty much perfect.

---

I played D in EASHL, too. I was the same way. Club 3's was another story. Gameplay is slightly different.

On your other point, maybe having different coaches change overall for lines.. kind of how line chemistry used to work.

One coach could be: +1 line one, +0 lines two and three, -1 line four.

Another could be: +2 line one, +0 line two, -1 lines three and four.

Another could be: 0 all. (Roll 4)

@BabyPuncher525 

This is probably the best idea for how to incorporate line changes in EASHL that I have come across (besides the simplicity of having actual players on the bench, but thats no fun).

That being said, I am in the camp of people you referenced at the end who likely wouldn't be thrilled.  Its a decent sized shakeup of the formula and with the list of issues already on tap with the game I am not sure it would be a net positive.

---

@EA_Aljo wrote:

@KidShowtime1867 

How much does that really add to the game though? I like the added realism of it, but it just seems unnecessary. Especially with the shortened periods we have. It would also make injuries almost pointless since you could just switch to a different player while they recover on the bench.

---

I think line changes would absolutely change the way the game is played in multiple aspects. My idea of line changes in its simplest design, is two circles at each door of the bench big enough for one person that refills your stamina back to full when you come to a full stop. No other methods, except maybe x-factor triggers like a born leader, or a stoppage of play etc., will you get your stamina back making it so it only depletes as you use it throughout play. 

What this does is open up more of the ice, allowing for more opportunities to out play each other. As a Defenseman, I never have to leave the penalty box side of the ice and can shadow my winger the whole time. The penalty box side is supposed to be more dangerous because of how far it is to skate across back into position from the bench which doesn't translate in this game. The 5man NZ trap meta exists because of the lack of line changing. Everyone skates back on their side of the ice to play their role. No switching sides whatsoever causes zero confusion and zero opportunities for the attackers to capitalize on that confusion.

This would also allow another small skill increase to players for "changing" at the right time vs a bad time. Teams playing it safe to get the puck in the ozone so their defense can go refill. Most people do not try these dump and chase methods because they just go back and reset the play entirely while their teammates get their stamina back to full. 

 You can't try any 1on1 moves because their is always a full or even half stamina guy behind you skating back at full speed as they know they can just coast for a bit afterwards and get back 25% of it quickly. On top of this, every 1v1 move slows your forward momentum making it even more difficult to perform anything without someone on top of you by the time you are out of that animation. 

The highest scoring period in hockey is usually the second because in the second, the bench is on the other teams side of the ice which causes issues for line changing (3rd because of EN goals). Again there is no translation to this in the game and I think line changing would help benefit this.

In relation to the injuries, you could make it so your player is actually limping or moving really slowly to get to the bench when he is injured and then when he has reached the bench, he could have his stamina return to full but have that small reduction in stats that we currently have in game. So now you have an advantage while he "goes for a change" and then a small advantage in stats while he is recovering from the injury itself.

---

@hiperay wrote:

---

@EA_Aljo wrote:

@KidShowtime1867 

How much does that really add to the game though? I like the added realism of it, but it just seems unnecessary. Especially with the shortened periods we have. It would also make injuries almost pointless since you could just switch to a different player while they recover on the bench.

---

I think line changes would absolutely change the way the game is played in multiple aspects. My idea of line changes in its simplest design, is two circles at each door of the bench big enough for one person that refills your stamina back to full when you come to a full stop. No other methods, except maybe x-factor triggers like a born leader, or a stoppage of play etc., will you get your stamina back making it so it only depletes as you use it throughout play. 

What this does is open up more of the ice, allowing for more opportunities to out play each other. As a Defenseman, I never have to leave the penalty box side of the ice and can shadow my winger the whole time. The penalty box side is supposed to be more dangerous because of how far it is to skate across back into position from the bench which doesn't translate in this game. The 5man NZ trap meta exists because of the lack of line changing. Everyone skates back on their side of the ice to play their role. No switching sides whatsoever causes zero confusion and zero opportunities for the attackers to capitalize on that confusion.

This would also allow another small skill increase to players for "changing" at the right time vs a bad time. Teams playing it safe to get the puck in the ozone so their defense can go refill. Most people do not try these dump and chase methods because they just go back and reset the play entirely while their teammates get their stamina back to full. 

 You can't try any 1on1 moves because their is always a full or even half stamina guy behind you skating back at full speed as they know they can just coast for a bit afterwards and get back 25% of it quickly. On top of this, every 1v1 move slows your forward momentum making it even more difficult to perform anything without someone on top of you by the time you are out of that animation. 

The highest scoring period in hockey is usually the second because in the second, the bench is on the other teams side of the ice which causes issues for line changing (3rd because of EN goals). Again there is no translation to this in the game and I think line changing would help benefit this.

 

In relation to the injuries, you could make it so your player is actually limping or moving really slowly to get to the bench when he is injured and then when he has reached the bench, he could have his stamina return to full but have that small reduction in stats that we currently have in game. So now you have an advantage while he "goes for a change" and then a small advantage in stats while he is recovering from the injury itself.

 

 

---

I have nothing to add but just wanted to say I think all of these ideas are fantastic.