SturgySyF wrote: »
Please increase minimum players on team from 2 to 3 for CHEL 6v6.
Nothing is more frustrating in this mode than being forced to play a team with a bunch of CPU players because the other players quit. I would rather the game end than spend the time grinding it out vs. CPUs for fear of losing CR or DNF%. If I wanted to play vs. CPU there are plenty of other game modes available. I don’t think anyone plays drop 6s to play 2v2 anyway, so I don’t see how increasing the minimum would have any negative impact on lobbies. While more games would end early, most players would prefer that over CPUs. Plus with some shorter games there should be more players available to fill lobbies quicker and fuller?
Shanesaw_9 wrote: »
I bought the game this year, as I have done every year, but this time I just couldn't overlook how far off the attributes and ratings are for the entire league. I played a bit of eashl, but didn't even touch GM mode because what is the point of playing a simulator when the attributes are so whack it's not realistic at all.
I know EA will never ever get this right and in their defense it would be impossible to make everyone happy since people have different opinions. Here are some solutions:
1. Attribute Reference Scale
- Currently, the only reference we have for attributes is a comparison to how other players are rated. This is brutal since EA doesn't take the time to actually rate players realistically. Max Domi has an 88 DEF Awareness and Phillip Danault only has 87 DEF Awareness. Phillip Danault finished 7th in Selke voting and Max Domi is a very mediocre player defensively... EA does this with players all over the league to boost the overall of "star players" and it is unforgiveable, completely absurd and ridiculous. Offensive players don't all have to have high 80 attributes... and defensive or 3rd line checkers don't all have to have low 80's.. its brutal. Part of making a team is playing players in the proper roles, not just getting the highest rated players and doing best lines. I know EA puts a lot of effort into GM mode with the scouting and staff features, but not having realistic player ratings kills any attempt at a realistic simulator.
There needs to be an attribute reference Scale, example:
- 96+ = You're a freak
- 93 to 95 = Exceptional
- 90 to 92 = Elite
- 87 to 89 = Very Good
- 86 = Above Average
- 85 = Average
- 84 = Below Average
- 81 to 83 = Poor
- 75 to 80 = Weak
- 74 and Under = F
This would help standardize ratings. No more everybody has Poise of 75 but speed of 85+, how do you come up with these numbers? Ideally, a large percentage of NHL attributes should be between 84 and 86, and each category outside of average should represent a standard deviation. If I had this I could actually go through most of the rosters and edit things how I want them to be.
2. Roster Sharing
- Since EA cannot take the time to even put out ballpark attribute ratings, they should absolutely have to give the community the power to do it themselves. Roster sharing would also allow players to add all of the missing KHL and NCAA prospects easily.
3. I'll just stop at roster sharing because that is the easiest and most obvious fix. It is sad that there is definitely someone out there who would take the time to put out a realistic roster for everyone to download and use for free.. meanwhile EA doesn't have anyone competent enough to do this for their own game.
I still cannot play NHL 20 because of this and I won't be buying another NHL game until this is fixed. I usually just spend hours editing players, but i cant ignore how terrible the ratings are for players around the league knowing how far off the attributes are for my favorite team.
It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.