EA Forums - Banner

NHL 20 CHEL NOTES - Deep dive


Follow Gurn Sumal, game modes producer for NHL 20 on his deep dive, check it out & discuss it here.

An Update on Gameplay Feedback + Action Plan

Replies

  • jiajji
    318 posts Member
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game.

    I have no idea how you can claim 6s is more like "real hockey," then.

    i can't tell if you are trying to troll me or being serious. but you realize one has nothing to do with the other. you realize how many things affect scoring in a VIDEO GAME? If an elite VS player played you he would probably put up 20 goals. I absolutely guarantee you the top vs/hut players in the world are scoring just as much if not more in these modes than in EASHL. Also I was talking about older games.

    vs/hut is not real hockey because you have 10/12 skaters as programmed robots in a game that is more dynamic, changing on the fly, than any other sporting video game. They are so easy to exploit and learn exactly what they are going to do at any given time that the only answer EA has is to basically give them super abilities that then lead to skill zoning. so that gets taken away and now they are basically just pylons more often than not. so then you have to play the game of chasing the puck by constantly switching.

    5 human skaters that a) have good hockey iq and b) understand how to play this game can create a more authenticate hockey experience. i never said it was real hockey. god far from it. but that's based on limitations of the game and it's playerbase.

    scoring is down because defense is much better now than it used to be at end of previous gen console play. i personally find defense super easy and fwd the real challenge. prev gen it was other way around.

    You know the human can switch players right? And the AI changes its behavior based on what the human does?

    And you complain about the AI having "super abilities," but EA has disabled all AI actions in NHL 19. They won't poke, lift, or hit. It's obvious you've never played versus this year.

    Lastly, idk why you're talking about realism or "real hockey" when you think Wayne Gretzky's ppg rate is "not much" and you believe good players should score at more than double Gretzky's rate.

    1v1 is the furthest you can get from hockey. The reason you've got a problem with raggers is the delay in taking control of your bot. Its facing 1 direction or preforming an animation, you take control & input completely different commands. Obviously the person keeping control of one player is going to retain the initiative.
  • WainGretSki
    2619 posts Member
    edited January 9
    Take for example the Sniper class. He should be able to have good speed bursts and excellent shooting. Those are his strengths, yet having very similar speed across the board hampers this option. It affects forwards and it affects D because the Snipers are easier to keep in check. Sniper cannot exploit his speed or burst. His speed should help him blaze past a defender to negate any physical play options unless the D man is really well prepared and capable to have proper gap but given enough space, he should be able to eventually distance the D man with top speed.

    Why should the best shooters also be the fastest guys on the ice?

    I find it ridiculous that the fastest and most offensive forward classes are one in the same, while you have to decide if you want a fast defenseman or one that can play defense.

    I play defense as 5'7" 169lbs Sniper anytime I want to be more than net collapser.


    I think Sniper should be more like Yakupov / Laine, with their minimum height up at 5'11. Add another Speedster class that can be 5'7". Playing EASHL 6s with 3-4 humans a side, almost every forward takes sniper.

    Based on the archetypes that we currently have (without adding or creating more) then the Sniper's only strength is accuracy. He can't be very physical or grind out battles along the boards. Speed should be one of his strengths because how else would he find open ice? He'can't can't dangle his way around players, he has no mass to bully his way though, etc...

    One thing for sure, we don't need Ovechkin snipers in EASHL that will smack everybody around like enforcers and snipe corners nd have insane slapshots.

    I do not see very many snipers to be honest. And if you want my opinion, when it comes to club games the times I do see snipers is because they are waiting for those extremely tight angled short side snipes that human goalies have no control over.

    In any case, if hits were jacked up a bit like they were in the beta, the sniper class will have a very hard time to compete due to his smaller mass and lack of skills other than sniping.
  • Kriptical476
    377 posts Member
    edited January 9
    NHLDev wrote: »
    you do realize in real hockey "stick lifts" don't really ever result in a penalty. the right and wrong time to stick lift should just result in missed stick lifts. also fix the animation, it's so far from reality it might as well be a golf swing. stick lifts don't come more than a couple feet off the ice, hence why they don't lead to penalties. when you "miss" a stick lift you are basically standing straight up swinging the stick and the opponents face.

    stick checking is in a pretty good place right now. get stick lifts to same level. stick checking penalties still aren't anywhere near realistic but it's a good compromise.

    btw i can't believe you are rolling back to beta as it was. worst idea ever. there's been so many improvements that no one is complaining about. namely the terrible poke check in beta release. any benefits in the beta version will be overshadowed by some of the horrible issues it had... again.

    Stick lifts only come up half the distance if met with the resistance of the puck carriers stick. To lift a players stick you need some force and are optimistic you are going to be getting stick on stick but when you don't and you only get air, that is when it comes way up as there wasn't the resistance of the other players stick you were expecting and that is how/why players get people in the teeth and get high sticking calls with missed stick lifts. Penalties don't get posted all over youtube but you can look up Ho-Sang on Giroux, Bollig on Cogliano, Grant against McKinnon or Kane against Crosby as some examples that I found with a quick search as some examples.

    The real issues with stick lifts are that they should have less assistance like the change we made to pokes so that when you try to lift and the stick moves in that time, you miss to space rather than getting assistance towards the stick and thus sometime get a penalty rather than just miss as well as we should not count stick on body contact during the first few frames of the blend in window as well as not count the legs. We have those and a couple other things noted for when we get to actually look back at the code for stick lifts to improve the logic rather than just tune around what we have.

    And I don't disagree that we are in a way better spot overall from the Beta tuning but many of your peers don't agree and doing another fine tuning was never going to get us past the recollections of the glory days of the Beta, so when it was proposed to do the rollback with feedback opportunities, I understood the goals even though I feel I can take the feedback we have and fine tune from where we are at.

    So with this, I think we can use the rollback and more feedback as a positive towards justifying what we do for the next official tuner and we will learn things seeing the Beta tuning played now that players are more experienced with the product and are settled into more accurate ranks to their skill level where they are playing other players around their relative skill more often which wouldn't have been the case during the Beta and at launch on as consistent of a basis as what we will see now.


    whoah..whoah..whoah.. Mr @NHLDev .. Sir!

    A stick lift should never go above the bottom hand. Contrary to its name, a stick lift is actually employing the actions of a lever.. not that of a shovel.. Just think about it, there is no way you could stick lift quick enough, let alone with enough strength if you were relying on that many muscle groups to execute a lift, remember a digging motion is legs, back, shoulder, arms..in order..not only would this take forever, but it would be exhausting. Now think of the lever. Faster, efficient, concise and still enough power to get the job done. Hand go up, hand go down. Most importantly its a controlled action which is less relevant to your balance and current state. Simply put, you can be scrambling and falling, twisted up, skating, turning, stopping, all which executing the lever motion. Try that with a Dig. This is the sort of thing which gets introduced around age 5-7 and with proficiency expected at least by 10yrs old, and this is why stick lifts need some attention.. Honestly, given what I see in game I wonder if the logic around stick lifts was predicated on ...lets say a cloudy viewpoint.. of the physics and actions involved.

    To wit! looked up the videos:


    There is no excuse for this, ho sang straight goon'd him. If this were the 90's, pre cameras everywhere, this guy would have gotten beat down in the parking lot afterwards. Brutal and cheap. Maybe, maybe he thought that he was going to catch more shoulder but really no excuse.


    again, this wasn't an accident. You saw how far their sticks were right? no way. I mean if you want to give us a modifier for when were really frustrated and felt the need to cheap shot someone sure, but don't design the tool around this sort of thing.


    this one I'm a bit conflicted. I don't think he was making the effort to stick lift at all. Again, another one which wasn't a miss. However, I think he was just trying to stick the blade of his stick under the guys arm, maybe between the shoulder pads hurt him, but nothing like missing it all, and getting the eye/face. This is another, don't base mechanics off of players being dirty. btw: Don't let the focus of his eyes fool you, when you play your peripheral vision becomes very well honed and develop skill. To the degree that I can't think of a good metaphor to convey just how proficient it becomes.


    Now this is legit and should happen in game. He was going for disruption of the play, not gooning, the locations of the players, puck and the lateral motion required, leading to breaking through his initial strike zone then traveling up the stick eventually finding Crosbys face is a good example of how the defender trying to react quickly enough got behind resulting in stuff going sideways. If the D had ..dunno..6inches more on crosby he might have had em. Also, you can see the lever action made by the D very well at around 35sec. You'll notice the D rotated his top hand closer to Crosby right before implementing the Lever. This may be part of what's misleading about stick lifts. Pay attention, they are two separate motions strung together quickly, not one action.

    Guess that's enough for now :)

    Post edited by Kriptical476 on
    All Comments pertain to 6v6 drop in unless otherwise stated..
  • jiajji wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Those guys played vs the best in the world, you realize how many people are aweful at this game?

    Have Orr play the majority of his games vs beer league competition and what do you think his stats would look like?

    Is your point that the best LG forwards are like Gretzky and the best LG defensemen are like beer leaguers? Because if that's your point, then you're making my case that defense needs more tools.
  • jiajji wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game.

    I have no idea how you can claim 6s is more like "real hockey," then.

    i can't tell if you are trying to troll me or being serious. but you realize one has nothing to do with the other. you realize how many things affect scoring in a VIDEO GAME? If an elite VS player played you he would probably put up 20 goals. I absolutely guarantee you the top vs/hut players in the world are scoring just as much if not more in these modes than in EASHL. Also I was talking about older games.

    vs/hut is not real hockey because you have 10/12 skaters as programmed robots in a game that is more dynamic, changing on the fly, than any other sporting video game. They are so easy to exploit and learn exactly what they are going to do at any given time that the only answer EA has is to basically give them super abilities that then lead to skill zoning. so that gets taken away and now they are basically just pylons more often than not. so then you have to play the game of chasing the puck by constantly switching.

    5 human skaters that a) have good hockey iq and b) understand how to play this game can create a more authenticate hockey experience. i never said it was real hockey. god far from it. but that's based on limitations of the game and it's playerbase.

    scoring is down because defense is much better now than it used to be at end of previous gen console play. i personally find defense super easy and fwd the real challenge. prev gen it was other way around.

    You know the human can switch players right? And the AI changes its behavior based on what the human does?

    And you complain about the AI having "super abilities," but EA has disabled all AI actions in NHL 19. They won't poke, lift, or hit. It's obvious you've never played versus this year.

    Lastly, idk why you're talking about realism or "real hockey" when you think Wayne Gretzky's ppg rate is "not much" and you believe good players should score at more than double Gretzky's rate.

    1v1 is the furthest you can get from hockey. The reason you've got a problem with raggers is the delay in taking control of your bot. Its facing 1 direction or preforming an animation, you take control & input completely different commands. Obviously the person keeping control of one player is going to retain the initiative.

    No, it isn't. I assume you don't play versus either or you'd know a delay in switching players isn't the cause of ragging.
  • VeNOM2099
    2414 posts Member
    edited January 9
    jiajji wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Those guys played vs the best in the world, you realize how many people are aweful at this game?

    Have Orr play the majority of his games vs beer league competition and what do you think his stats would look like?

    Is your point that the best LG forwards are like Gretzky and the best LG defensemen are like beer leaguers? Because if that's your point, then you're making my case that defense needs more tools.

    No they don't. Defensemen need better, more consistent tools, yes. The argument that the best NHL players numbers are low because "they played against the best" is a disingenuous one at best, so I agree with you that he's wrong on that. LG players, especially at the higher tiers, could be considered as the best competitive 6s club players around. So when two LG NHL clubs meet, it's many times a case of "the best against the best". Yet how many times will you end up with scores like 7-2, 8-4 or 12-1?

    Outside of "elite" LG clubs though, you'd be hard pressed to find many people that truly understand what defense is. Most times people think defense is chasing the guy with the puck all over the ice, mashing poke-check, stick lift and trying to land a huge hit, whether you play HUT, VS or Drop-ins. Even in LG, if you play at the lower tiers, many people play defense with a "puck is #1" mentality. Meaning that they play to intercept the pass or block the shot rather than play the position or take away the open man.

    No one knows how to play without the puck. Some may find that boring, but that's what 99.9% of Defense should be.

    The problem is, this game rewards dumb offense too often. You can be in position, you can be taking away the open man with the better scoring chance, but then a simple shot from the blue line or the high slot gets through, even with a d-man in his face. Even with the goalie challenging and in prefect position. And that's why stats are often bloated in this game. I believe the last time @NHLDev said something to the effect of 5.00+ GPG per team on average. That's insanely high considering the average goals per game is more around 2.3-2.5 goals per team.

    But worse than the goals average, the shot % is even higher and more ridiculous!! It's not unusual to see teams end up with 6 or 7 goals to 14 shots or less. That's an astounding 43%-50% scoring ratio. When the NHL average is more like 10%-15% per game.
    Post edited by VeNOM2099 on
  • Bmh245
    859 posts Member
    you do realize in real hockey "stick lifts" don't really ever result in a penalty.

    Right. Stick lifts never result in high sticking calls.



    https://www.nbcsports.com/video/patrick-kane-gets-costly-high-sticking-penalty

  • Bmh245 wrote: »
    you do realize in real hockey "stick lifts" don't really ever result in a penalty.

    Right. Stick lifts never result in high sticking calls.



    https://www.nbcsports.com/video/patrick-kane-gets-costly-high-sticking-penalty

    See my post above..
    All Comments pertain to 6v6 drop in unless otherwise stated..
  • Bmh245
    859 posts Member
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    That's why stats are often bloated in this game. I believe the last time @NHLDev said something to the effect of 5.00+ GPG per team on average. That's insanely high considering the average goals per game is more around 2.3-2.5 goals per team.

    But worse than the goals average, the shot % is even higher and more ridiculous!! It's not unusual to see teams end up with 6 or 7 goals to 14 shots or less. That's an astounding 43%-50% scoring ratio. When the NHL average is more like 10%-15% per game.

    As you know, I think the goalie coding in this game is not good. But I'm sure Ben meant that the average GPG for both teams combined is 5.00+. I haven't looked deeply into the numbers this year, but in past years, at least in 1v1 modes, average GPG for good teams were between 5.5-6 goals a game, which is pretty close to the NHL average.

    And save percentages, again in 1v1 modes, are almost always between 83-86% (and that, unfortunately, is regardless of who your goalie is). That's well below the NHL average of roughly 91%, but given the shorter playtime (and therefore lower shot totals), it's reasonable.

  • TheNitwitable7
    68 posts Member
    edited January 9
    jiajji wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game.

    I have no idea how you can claim 6s is more like "real hockey," then.

    i can't tell if you are trying to troll me or being serious. but you realize one has nothing to do with the other. you realize how many things affect scoring in a VIDEO GAME? If an elite VS player played you he would probably put up 20 goals. I absolutely guarantee you the top vs/hut players in the world are scoring just as much if not more in these modes than in EASHL. Also I was talking about older games.

    vs/hut is not real hockey because you have 10/12 skaters as programmed robots in a game that is more dynamic, changing on the fly, than any other sporting video game. They are so easy to exploit and learn exactly what they are going to do at any given time that the only answer EA has is to basically give them super abilities that then lead to skill zoning. so that gets taken away and now they are basically just pylons more often than not. so then you have to play the game of chasing the puck by constantly switching.

    5 human skaters that a) have good hockey iq and b) understand how to play this game can create a more authenticate hockey experience. i never said it was real hockey. god far from it. but that's based on limitations of the game and it's playerbase.

    scoring is down because defense is much better now than it used to be at end of previous gen console play. i personally find defense super easy and fwd the real challenge. prev gen it was other way around.

    You know the human can switch players right? And the AI changes its behavior based on what the human does?

    And you complain about the AI having "super abilities," but EA has disabled all AI actions in NHL 19. They won't poke, lift, or hit. It's obvious you've never played versus this year.

    Lastly, idk why you're talking about realism or "real hockey" when you think Wayne Gretzky's ppg rate is "not much" and you believe good players should score at more than double Gretzky's rate.

    1v1 is the furthest you can get from hockey. The reason you've got a problem with raggers is the delay in taking control of your bot. Its facing 1 direction or preforming an animation, you take control & input completely different commands. Obviously the person keeping control of one player is going to retain the initiative.

    No, it isn't. I assume you don't play versus either or you'd know a delay in switching players isn't the cause of ragging.

    I really don't understand how one cannot look at the game in its current state and not think that offense is overpowered. The hitting overall during the Beta was improved, and it largely stopped the ragging mess that the game has turned back into. I'm excited to try it again here in a few days.
  • I'm pumped for the beta to return. I want to see beautiful passing plays, every goal should be different. I want to see team work return, that's what hockey is all about.

    I will never understand players who want this game dumbed down so that the way to win games is puck ragging and the same 2-3 "money goals", that is not hockey.

    NHL 19 will instantly be a better game when we see great puck movement, team work, good defense and great passing plays. I would for once like to be watching a replay and think, dang that was a nice goal. You watch replays now and you are constantly seeing the same short side goal or breakaway move for the 10,000,000th time in the last 5 years and you just roll your eyes.

    Beta tuner can't come soon enough, excited to some good goals again.
  • I think we are more than ready for the roll back based on where some of these discussions are heading. Let's do this ! The sooner, the sooner we will have constructive talks again, and sooner we'll get another tuner.
  • NHLDev
    1298 posts NHL Developer
    edited January 9
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    That's why stats are often bloated in this game. I believe the last time @NHLDev said something to the effect of 5.00+ GPG per team on average. That's insanely high considering the average goals per game is more around 2.3-2.5 goals per team.

    But worse than the goals average, the shot % is even higher and more ridiculous!! It's not unusual to see teams end up with 6 or 7 goals to 14 shots or less. That's an astounding 43%-50% scoring ratio. When the NHL average is more like 10%-15% per game.

    As you know, I think the goalie coding in this game is not good. But I'm sure Ben meant that the average GPG for both teams combined is 5.00+. I haven't looked deeply into the numbers this year, but in past years, at least in 1v1 modes, average GPG for good teams were between 5.5-6 goals a game, which is pretty close to the NHL average.

    And save percentages, again in 1v1 modes, are almost always between 83-86% (and that, unfortunately, is regardless of who your goalie is). That's well below the NHL average of roughly 91%, but given the shorter playtime (and therefore lower shot totals), it's reasonable.
    Not sure where Venom had me quoted that teams are scoring 5 goals each.

    In general we see about 5-6 goals per game total between both teams in Online VS. Personally my goals for is around 3.5 and my goals against is closer to 1.2 or so.

    With the way a lot of players play our game, combined with higher shot accuracy, pass accuracy and puck possession on the top
    end than what would be fulll sim, shooters shot percentages can be higher, especially when teams are playing great defense.

    As defenses play better and force weaker shots on net like those we see more in the NHL, we already see goalies with higher save percentages but to really get there we would have longer period and lower shot accuracy and lower puck control.

    All part of balancing a game with shorter periods. But balance between offense and defense is separate from realistic stats as well. As long as it’s possible to shut down teams with the tools given, which it has been proven that it is, the game is still balanced even if when you get a good chance, your shot accuracy may be slightly higher than it should be (i.e shooting into the goalies chest less with a settled shot from a good player or accuracy of wheel house one timers compared to what we see in the NHL)
  • VeNOM2099
    2414 posts Member
    edited January 10
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    That's why stats are often bloated in this game. I believe the last time @NHLDev said something to the effect of 5.00+ GPG per team on average. That's insanely high considering the average goals per game is more around 2.3-2.5 goals per team.

    But worse than the goals average, the shot % is even higher and more ridiculous!! It's not unusual to see teams end up with 6 or 7 goals to 14 shots or less. That's an astounding 43%-50% scoring ratio. When the NHL average is more like 10%-15% per game.

    As you know, I think the goalie coding in this game is not good. But I'm sure Ben meant that the average GPG for both teams combined is 5.00+. I haven't looked deeply into the numbers this year, but in past years, at least in 1v1 modes, average GPG for good teams were between 5.5-6 goals a game, which is pretty close to the NHL average.

    And save percentages, again in 1v1 modes, are almost always between 83-86% (and that, unfortunately, is regardless of who your goalie is). That's well below the NHL average of roughly 91%, but given the shorter playtime (and therefore lower shot totals), it's reasonable.

    Granted, I was going from (hazy) memory. I believe the discussion in question with Ben was on the old forums. After coming back home I checked some old notes I kept to make a video analysis of the goaltending in NHL 17, and it turns out the discussion was more about the average Drop-in/Club Goalie GAA. In high end teams, it was closer to in between high 2s and mid 3s, while low end teams goalie GAA was around 4.00 to 5.00, which Ben said he thought was a bit high. Especially considering goalies in lower end teams saw a lot more quality shots than higher end goalies. Funnily enough, SV% for most goalies would average between low/mid 700s to mid 800s.

    I remember at the time, I had tried extrapolation how many goals teams would be scoring per game to get stats like that and I came up with a rough estimate of between 4-5 goals per team, per game, with around 12-17 shots per team, per game.

    Again, this is from hazy memory. But I'm not too far off what I had calculated. Is it much different now in NHL 19? Maybe it was during the first few weeks. Even by the time I stopped playing in November, I was around .820 SV% and 3.50 GAA. My record was over 100 wins, about 60 losses and 20 OTLs... Oh, and something like 15 or 16 shutouts. I could boot up again and check, but then I would want to play... :/

    But given all that, IS it reasonable to expect those stats to be so off kilter? Considering games are 80% shorter than a real NHL game, I don't think it's reasonable.
    NHLDev wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    That's why stats are often bloated in this game. I believe the last time @NHLDev said something to the effect of 5.00+ GPG per team on average. That's insanely high considering the average goals per game is more around 2.3-2.5 goals per team.

    But worse than the goals average, the shot % is even higher and more ridiculous!! It's not unusual to see teams end up with 6 or 7 goals to 14 shots or less. That's an astounding 43%-50% scoring ratio. When the NHL average is more like 10%-15% per game.

    As you know, I think the goalie coding in this game is not good. But I'm sure Ben meant that the average GPG for both teams combined is 5.00+. I haven't looked deeply into the numbers this year, but in past years, at least in 1v1 modes, average GPG for good teams were between 5.5-6 goals a game, which is pretty close to the NHL average.

    And save percentages, again in 1v1 modes, are almost always between 83-86% (and that, unfortunately, is regardless of who your goalie is). That's well below the NHL average of roughly 91%, but given the shorter playtime (and therefore lower shot totals), it's reasonable.

    Not sure where Venom had me quoted that teams are scoring 5 goals each.

    In general we see about 5-6 goals per game total between both teams in Online VS. Personally my goals for is around 3.5 and my goals against is closer to 1.2 or so.

    With the way a lot of players play our game, combined with higher shot accuracy, pass accuracy and puck possession on the top
    end than what would be fulll sim, shooters shot percentages can be higher, especially when teams are playing great defense.

    As defenses play better and force weaker shots on net like those we see more in the NHL, we already see goalies with higher save percentages but to really get there we would have longer period and lower shot accuracy and lower puck control.

    All part of balancing a game with shorter periods. But balance between offense and defense is separate from realistic stats as well. As long as it’s possible to shut down teams with the tools given, which it has been proven that it is, the game is still balanced even if when you get a good chance, your shot accuracy may be slightly higher than it should be (i.e shooting into the goalies chest less with a settled shot from a good player or accuracy of wheel house one timers compared to what we see in the NHL)

    As I explained to @Bmh245 above, it was an old discussion we had had on the old forums about Drop-in goalies stats and averages. You hadn't given me hard numbers (understandably) so I had to do some... creative calculating in order to make a point in the video I wanted to make. Sadly I never got around to make it, so it's a moot point.

    That said, Goals for and goals against are always pretty closely related in teams. A quick look on NHL.com at team stats, the best team (Tampa Bay Lightning) has 4.12 GF with 2.88 GA. The worst team (Ottawa Senators... :( ) has 3.16 GF and 4.00 GA. So roughly there's a point for and a point against difference between the best teams and the worst teams.

    Let's compare it to the best LG NHL teams. The Colorado Avalanche had 3.23 GF (they only played 81 games) with 2.11 GA. Pretty realistic. Let's look at the worst team, the Florida Panthers. They had 1.71 GF and 3.61 GA... Ouch! But we see a differential of 1.5 goals for and against between the best and the worst teams. That's an almost 50% increase from the real NHL.

    I would understand a 10% or even (at worst) 25%. But 50%?? That's a bit much. Especially considering that in the NHL, they play full 20 minute periods while in game, we play 4 minute periods. Which doesn't account for how NHL teams shoot on average about 31 shots per game for about 3.5 goals for on average. While in LG, there aren't any Shots taken stats, but a quick look at most games and you'll find most teams have between 12 to 18 shots per game for nearly the same amount of goals.

    Sure, goals SCORED might be slightly lower than your average NHL team, but scoring percentage (by comparison) is way higher.

    If what you say is true and the top LG teams are complaining that scoring is down because "the defense is too good", then scoring percentage should also be way down. But it's not. While it may be true that goal totals have gone down slightly, shot totals have slightly decreased as well. Making scoring percentage much higher than it used to be.

    Because as "good" as defense is in NHL 19, scoring is much too easy now. I don't necessarily blame the updates for that, but I do think it had a part in compounding the problem everyone feels with the current tuning: offense has become braindead. As good as defense has gotten, it still takes a lot of skill to defend well. While scoring you just cross the blue line, wiggle a bit, hold the puck out for a millisecond (exaggerated) to "settle into your shot" and snipe it short side while the goalie is covering his angles and the d-man is in your face.
  • 2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Wayne Gretzky wasn't playing on the ice entire game either.

    No dog in this fight, but it's not exactly a direct comparison.
  • ExSnake01
    444 posts Member
    edited January 10
    jiajji wrote: »
    Bmh245 wrote: »
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game.

    I have no idea how you can claim 6s is more like "real hockey," then.

    i can't tell if you are trying to troll me or being serious. but you realize one has nothing to do with the other. you realize how many things affect scoring in a VIDEO GAME? If an elite VS player played you he would probably put up 20 goals. I absolutely guarantee you the top vs/hut players in the world are scoring just as much if not more in these modes than in EASHL. Also I was talking about older games.

    vs/hut is not real hockey because you have 10/12 skaters as programmed robots in a game that is more dynamic, changing on the fly, than any other sporting video game. They are so easy to exploit and learn exactly what they are going to do at any given time that the only answer EA has is to basically give them super abilities that then lead to skill zoning. so that gets taken away and now they are basically just pylons more often than not. so then you have to play the game of chasing the puck by constantly switching.

    5 human skaters that a) have good hockey iq and b) understand how to play this game can create a more authenticate hockey experience. i never said it was real hockey. god far from it. but that's based on limitations of the game and it's playerbase.

    scoring is down because defense is much better now than it used to be at end of previous gen console play. i personally find defense super easy and fwd the real challenge. prev gen it was other way around.

    You know the human can switch players right? And the AI changes its behavior based on what the human does?

    And you complain about the AI having "super abilities," but EA has disabled all AI actions in NHL 19. They won't poke, lift, or hit. It's obvious you've never played versus this year.

    Lastly, idk why you're talking about realism or "real hockey" when you think Wayne Gretzky's ppg rate is "not much" and you believe good players should score at more than double Gretzky's rate.

    1v1 is the furthest you can get from hockey. The reason you've got a problem with raggers is the delay in taking control of your bot. Its facing 1 direction or preforming an animation, you take control & input completely different commands. Obviously the person keeping control of one player is going to retain the initiative.

    Are you kidding me? It's actually the opposite. I stopped watching those top 6's teams playing because how badly they misrepresent hockey.

    What does puck ragging have to do with delay input? Someone experiences delay input so they start ragging the puck? No, they rag the puck because the game has been tuned for all offense and made playing defense very difficult.

    Put the puck on your backhand and go in circles to avoid most hits or wait till they trip you to get the power play. I know because I do this myself.
  • 2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Wayne Gretzky wasn't playing on the ice entire game either.

    No dog in this fight, but it's not exactly a direct comparison.

    That's true. Wayne Gretzky's TOI was probably around 22 minutes per game

    http://www.sciencewitness.com/the-wayne-gretzky-analysis/

    Compared to the 12 minutes TOI we get. So we're on the ice about half as much as Gretsky and scoring more ppg than he did. Which makes the game even more absurd actually.
  • 2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Wayne Gretzky wasn't playing on the ice entire game either.

    No dog in this fight, but it's not exactly a direct comparison.

    That's true. Wayne Gretzky's TOI was probably around 22 minutes per game

    http://www.sciencewitness.com/the-wayne-gretzky-analysis/

    Compared to the 12 minutes TOI we get. So we're on the ice about half as much as Gretsky and scoring more ppg than he did. Which makes the game even more absurd actually.

    this is a terrible argument. if you look at it as were only playing 12 minutes per game, 95% of the games would finish 1-0 and most would need OT to find a winner.

    The real question is, how many goals a game could Wayne Gretzky score if he were on the ice for 60 minutes a game against the same dmen on the other side?
  • GOW_LIKE_A_BOSS
    533 posts Member
    edited January 10
    2pts a game is not much. If defense wasnt so easy top players would be averaging 4 a game. There are no line changes top offensive players were likely be involved in 85% of the scoring on a high powered offense scoring 5 goals a game back in the day.

    Current gen defense is much easier so scoring is down. NHL 19, even with it's flaws, is even stronger defense and I'm sure scoring is the lowest it's ever been

    So, you think offense should be scoring four points per game for more realistic hockey? I think I see why you think defense is overpowered.

    You mentioned there are no line changes, which is true, so that would inflate stats. But the periods are only 20% as long as an actual hockey, which would deflate their stats. It breaks out about even. Plus, you say top offense of players would be involved in 85% of the scoring chances. That opinion once again shows that you are looking for a more unrealistic hockey game with lots of dangles and one man shows.

    It does not sound like you are looking for realistic team hockey based on the stats you think are realistic and the dominance by individual players you expect.

    if16nej628br.jpg

    That screenshot is the all-time leaders in points per game. Even Wayne Gretzky didn't score two points per game, and you are advocating the top LG players should score at a rate more twice as high as Wayne Gretzky for a realistic hockey game.

    I think it says a lot about how unrealistic a game you want when you belive scoring at a higher rate than Wayne Gretzky is "not much."

    Wayne Gretzky wasn't playing on the ice entire game either.

    No dog in this fight, but it's not exactly a direct comparison.

    That's true. Wayne Gretzky's TOI was probably around 22 minutes per game

    http://www.sciencewitness.com/the-wayne-gretzky-analysis/

    Compared to the 12 minutes TOI we get. So we're on the ice about half as much as Gretsky and scoring more ppg than he did. Which makes the game even more absurd actually.

    this is a terrible argument. if you look at it as were only playing 12 minutes per game, 95% of the games would finish 1-0 and most would need OT to find a winner.

    The real question is, how many goals a game could Wayne Gretzky score if he were on the ice for 60 minutes a game against the same dmen on the other side?

    We are actually discussing that top LG forwards should not be scoring at a better rate than the greatest scorer of all time at 2 ppg. And they certainly shouldn't be scoring 4 ppg as some people believe.

    There is a wide skill differential throughout this game. But when you pit the best vs the best, the games' players should have lower ppg rates than Gretsky, not more or double.

    I think you are on a different page. I am talking about ppg - which is a stat arrived at by averaging. If the game is tuned perfectly, the ppg of top LG players should resemble the ppg of top NHL players. Currently, top LG players have ppg more than double your current top NHLer. In fact, their ppg are better than the greatest NHL scorer of all time.

    This disparity represents a problem with the lack of strength of defending. We are using ppg of top LGers to show us if the current tuning is balanced to real life - and it is not. The point of only looking at top LGers is to remove the variable of player skill. Presumably all top LGers are good, and presumably they are playing against good defense. So if tuning is perfect, LG ppg game rates should mirror the NHL.
  • LeFury_27 wrote: »
    I'm pumped for the beta to return. I want to see beautiful passing plays, every goal should be different. I want to see team work return, that's what hockey is all about.

    I will never understand players who want this game dumbed down so that the way to win games is puck ragging and the same 2-3 "money goals", that is not hockey.

    NHL 19 will instantly be a better game when we see great puck movement, team work, good defense and great passing plays. I would for once like to be watching a replay and think, dang that was a nice goal. You watch replays now and you are constantly seeing the same short side goal or breakaway move for the 10,000,000th time in the last 5 years and you just roll your eyes.

    Beta tuner can't come soon enough, excited to some good goals again.
    I agree man. The goalies being good was an interesting challenge, and it prevented much of the cheese goals, which I hadn't really experienced before.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!