REAL Total Control (Not Arcade)
[Update (1/23/24)] Towards the bottom of this post, you will see my original post that I posted a few months ago (it may be worthwhile to first start your reading down at my original post). Since...
Forum Discussion
All I am saying is that the margin for error is way to big for people who are good at the game and in the Division One clubs or Elite Ranks. Maybe this belongs in a different thread but still gonna post it here.
100 Assist.
50 Assist
10 Assist
Remember that yellow IS where I am aiming. So you are saying I could miss my player by as much as what is shown in order to still make a tape to tape pass to them? Is it so much to ask of good players to be actually good at hitting their targets? I am not saying bring it down to 0 here where even the slightest miss forces the responding player to have to skate towards the puck but is asking them to hit a target this wide (at 100) vs this wide (at 10) that bad if they are indeed this good at the game?
EA_Aljo
Community Manager
Community ManagerI don't know what the exact margin for error is. I'm sure someone can go into practice mode and try it out. I do know that I occasionally miss that window though and my passes don't go where I thought I was aiming. Even with 100% assistance, you can certainly miss your target if your aim is off.
As far as your suggestion goes though, again, thanks for the feedback.
- @EA_Aljo My pleasure but yeah that is what I am displaying here, the yellow is the direction I am aiming my joystick which indicates where my skater is "looking" and widens as it extends further out.. So with the 100 assist you can see just how much room for error there is. Probably the reason for it not going somewhere you intended is either A. you missed your aim. or B. there was a second guy in the area and in that situation my guess is it targets the guy closer to the center line.
I want to reiterate something I’ve mentioned earlier in this thread:
I would have no problem using a very involved/nuanced control layout like the one I proposed while at the same time other players use “Total Control” or any other layout in the same game.
It’s just a matter of how much control/freedom vs. how much cpu-assistance you want:
-if you want more control, more freedom, and more room for creativity, then take on a layout like the one I propose, but do so knowing it’ll be more difficult to master.
-if you want more cpu-assistance, something simpler to learn, and don’t mind sacrificing a little creative freedom, then use a layout like Total Control and just have fun.
This way, everyone can get into the game as a beginner and have a lot of fun playing against newbies and experts alike.If you’re a casual gamer, you don’t want to have to “train” to play a game. But as you get better and better, you can begin to add more and more nuanced control to your layout, providing you with the freedom to be more creative.
I think, over time, a lot of people would see the advantage of having more control. Especially people that play the game daily. I know geeks like myself don’t mind putting in a little extra practice to develop skills that give you more control.
There are a lot of us that want more control. And yes @EA_Aljo , for many it will be too frustrating to want to learn. But like golf and anything else worth spending time on, the challenge of mastering a skill set is most of the fun and more rewarding. So why not provide it as an option for people like us?
Also, similar (but different) to what @hiperay suggests about divisions, give leagues the option to limit which layouts can be used.
All I know is the saucer pass needs greatly buffed. It gets intercepted way too often and needs a speed increase on it when charged. It was great in NHL 23 and now it's picked off by everyone with low defensive stats even up close. It was once an important dman function but I guess with the zone pressure system they wanted to ruin that method too. But the saucer is a manual pass so it should be rewarded for proper usage and power charged on it.
@ssoliz91 wrote:I want to reiterate something I’ve mentioned earlier in this thread:
I would have no problem using a very involved/nuanced control layout like the one I proposed while at the same time other players use “Total Control” or any other layout in the same game.
It’s just a matter of how much control/freedom vs. how much cpu-assistance you want:
-if you want more control, more freedom, and more room for creativity, then take on a layout like the one I propose, but do so knowing it’ll be more difficult to master.
-if you want more cpu-assistance, something simpler to learn, and don’t mind sacrificing a little creative freedom, then use a layout like Total Control and just have fun.
This way, everyone can get into the game as a beginner and have a lot of fun playing against newbies and experts alike.If you’re a casual gamer, you don’t want to have to “train” to play a game. But as you get better and better, you can begin to add more and more nuanced control to your layout, providing you with the freedom to be more creative.
I think, over time, a lot of people would see the advantage of having more control. Especially people that play the game daily. I know geeks like myself don’t mind putting in a little extra practice to develop skills that give you more control.
There are a lot of us that want more control. And yes @EA_Aljo , for many it will be too frustrating to want to learn. But like golf and anything else worth spending time on, the challenge of mastering a skill set is most of the fun and more rewarding. So why not provide it as an option for people like us?
Also, similar (but different) to what @hiperay suggests about divisions, give leagues the option to limit which layouts can be used.
🤞 hope to see at least some of these control options in NHL 25.
Don't wish too hard, we know EA's track record for giving us what we want LOL
