EA Forums - Banner

RW Serving Penalties in EASHL

I'm sure it has been brought up before, but why does that right wing serve penalties that they did not commit? Last night there were two instances of this.

1. In a 5v5 game with bot goalies, the opposing team's goalie took a penalty and the opposing team's right wing was sent to the penalty box to serve it. This one makes some sense since in real hockey a skater usually serves the penalty for their goalie.
2. In a 4v4 game with a bot D and G, I went in for an aggressive late hit in the dying seconds of a game. The hit initiated a fight and I'm pretty sure the hit was a major penalty. Our right wing ended up in the penalty box with me. Granted, this was with maybe 20 seconds left in the game and a 5 goal cushion, so not that big of a deal.

Had the second instance been midway through the 2nd period or in a close game, this becomes problematic. With a bot available, why does a human player suffer for another human player's action? Why can't the bot or any of the players on the bench serve the other penalties?

Replies

  • RW should only serve a goalie penalty if there are no CPU players on the team, otherwise a CPU player should take it.
  • ChemWarfare94
    102 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    RW should only serve a goalie penalty if there are no CPU players on the team, otherwise a CPU player should take it.

    Feels a little unfair to the RW. Maybe make it random? Still unfortunate though.
  • RW should only serve a goalie penalty if there are no CPU players on the team, otherwise a CPU player should take it.

    Feels a little unfair to the RW. Maybe make it random? Still unfortunate though.

    I would be OK with that, I just said RW because it's been that way forever. But the main point is CPU's should serve penalties over human players :)
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?

    Offensive zone attacking formation. Bring one of the forwards into a shooting position instead of bringing the defender down. It was in older games.
  • jmwalsh8888
    1184 posts Member
    Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?

    Offensive zone attacking formation. Bring one of the forwards into a shooting position instead of bringing the defender down. It was in older games.

    ? are you saying you would put a fwd back at a defensemen spot and move a defensemen up on a fwd spot for a faceoff formation?

    I've played thousands of games a year every year for over 25 years and don't remember ever seeing this.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?

    Offensive zone attacking formation. Bring one of the forwards into a shooting position instead of bringing the defender down. It was in older games.

    ? are you saying you would put a fwd back at a defensemen spot and move a defensemen up on a fwd spot for a faceoff formation?

    I've played thousands of games a year every year for over 25 years and don't remember ever seeing this.

    No. Bring one of the forwards to the top of the circle.
  • Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?

    Offensive zone attacking formation. Bring one of the forwards into a shooting position instead of bringing the defender down. It was in older games.

    ? are you saying you would put a fwd back at a defensemen spot and move a defensemen up on a fwd spot for a faceoff formation?

    I've played thousands of games a year every year for over 25 years and don't remember ever seeing this.

    No. Bring one of the forwards to the top of the circle.

    In the old game (Face-off to the goalie's left) the LD would switch spots with the RW, except the RW would be in close at the top of the circle.

    I always thought this was odd and never saw it in the NHL, maybe that's why they don't have it anymore.
  • jmwalsh8888
    1184 posts Member
    Because that's the rule in actual hockey.

    The rule is it has to be someone on the ice to serve the goalie's penalty, not necessarily the RW.

    The RW gets the short end of the stick on more than just serving penalties. They take over for center if the center takes a penalty. They have to play D if either dman takes a penalty.
    For clubs, I think the party leader should be able to decide which forward replaces the center and/or dman.

    OR pay the RW more.

    Might be a good idea. I do think the center should be the only one who can change the face-off formation.

    Speaking of face-off formations, those need some attention.

    What would you do with them?

    Offensive zone attacking formation. Bring one of the forwards into a shooting position instead of bringing the defender down. It was in older games.

    ? are you saying you would put a fwd back at a defensemen spot and move a defensemen up on a fwd spot for a faceoff formation?

    I've played thousands of games a year every year for over 25 years and don't remember ever seeing this.

    No. Bring one of the forwards to the top of the circle.

    In the old game (Face-off to the goalie's left) the LD would switch spots with the RW, except the RW would be in close at the top of the circle.

    I always thought this was odd and never saw it in the NHL, maybe that's why they don't have it anymore.

    Yeah that would never happen in a real game. Well never say never. Dumb crap happens sometimes but I've never seen that.

    I also don't remember every seeing that in game. Interesting
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!