EA Forums - Banner

Checking in

Replies

  • To jump in.. That video of mine is a "well known" bug. Were my defender 'cuts through' my goalies stick, and by that gets immune against the puck. (If I remember correct)

    I had tough another video(I posted it here somwere in the djungel) were the puck goes through my skates.

    So it can defenetly happen, all though I dont think its so common, but ofc that shouldnt have to happen.

    What I dont like is how forced alot of plays feel, if same team goes over and over again with the same play, but the speed gets faster and faster, sooner or later your defenders won't catch up, and the cross crease will probebly happen.

    And - When - this happen, you feel pretty helpless, you know what's about to happen, but you cant prevent it from happen.

    But I do aggree, 'people' tend to forget(don't know?) how(to) play defense, and for that deserves to get a goal against them. But there's obvious some cross creases out there that probebly shouldnt have happen.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »
    @KidShowtime1867 this is one of the more extreme examples of the kind of stuff that I am talking about. (Courtesy of @Sega82mega )

    I care not to argue whether this is good defense or not, but the fact this puck made it RIGHT onto the recipients tape at all is the sort of nonsense I am referring to. I am not for conspiracy theories but it's almost like there is a "pass gets through at all costs" programming logic at work here.



    I think NHLDev has mentioned this a bunch of times.. but the puck can appear to go through a jersey when the intention is for the puck to flow off the jersey.

    The jersey doesn't have animations to indicate the puck is making its way under the fabric, so it appears to go 'through'.

    It's just a graphical glitch.

    The point the game engine is trying to make in this scenario is, 'the puck went under the defender's arms and chest and landed in a spot to take a shot'.

  • IceLion68
    1254 posts Member
    edited January 6
    IceLion68 wrote: »
    @KidShowtime1867 this is one of the more extreme examples of the kind of stuff that I am talking about. (Courtesy of @Sega82mega )

    I care not to argue whether this is good defense or not, but the fact this puck made it RIGHT onto the recipients tape at all is the sort of nonsense I am referring to. I am not for conspiracy theories but it's almost like there is a "pass gets through at all costs" programming logic at work here.



    I think NHLDev has mentioned this a bunch of times.. but the puck can appear to go through a jersey when the intention is for the puck to flow off the jersey.

    The jersey doesn't have animations to indicate the puck is making its way under the fabric, so it appears to go 'through'.

    It's just a graphical glitch.

    The point the game engine is trying to make in this scenario is, 'the puck went under the defender's arms and chest and landed in a spot to take a shot'.

    OK... but seriously. Should that pass really be going through? That's ridiculous. At the very least the pass direction/speed should have changed significantly. Since we are talking about the "right way to do things", the passer should really have to sauce it in that situation to be as successful as they were.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1672 posts Member
    edited January 6
    IceLion68 wrote: »
    IceLion68 wrote: »
    @KidShowtime1867 this is one of the more extreme examples of the kind of stuff that I am talking about. (Courtesy of @Sega82mega )

    I care not to argue whether this is good defense or not, but the fact this puck made it RIGHT onto the recipients tape at all is the sort of nonsense I am referring to. I am not for conspiracy theories but it's almost like there is a "pass gets through at all costs" programming logic at work here.



    I think NHLDev has mentioned this a bunch of times.. but the puck can appear to go through a jersey when the intention is for the puck to flow off the jersey.

    The jersey doesn't have animations to indicate the puck is making its way under the fabric, so it appears to go 'through'.

    It's just a graphical glitch.

    The point the game engine is trying to make in this scenario is, 'the puck went under the defender's arms and chest and landed in a spot to take a shot'.

    OK... but seriously. Should that pass really be going through? That's ridiculous. At the very least the pass direction/speed should have changed significantly. Since we are talking about the "right way to do things", the passer should really have to sauce it in that situation to be as successful as they were.

    I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.


  • I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.

    Can you please stick to one argument at a time?

    There should be a price to be paid sure, but its not for the puck to ignore physics and reward an attacker for forcing a pass that should not get through plain and simple. When this happens in real life (and it does), no attacker with any skill tries to pass it through/under the sliding defender. Yet you can easily do so in this game.

    Maybe this will convince you?

    (Courtesy @TTZ_Dipsy)

    Regardless whether this play is bad defense or not, this just should not happen. Once again an example of the fake "skill gap" between offense and defense.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1672 posts Member
    edited January 6
    IceLion68 wrote: »

    I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.

    Can you please stick to one argument at a time?

    There should be a price to be paid sure, but its not for the puck to ignore physics and reward an attacker for forcing a pass that should not get through plain and simple. When this happens in real life (and it does), no attacker with any skill tries to pass it through/under the sliding defender. Yet you can easily do so in this game.

    Maybe this will convince you?

    (Courtesy @TTZ_Dipsy)

    Regardless whether this play is bad defense or not, this just should not happen. Once again an example of the fake "skill gap" between offense and defense.

    This is the same exact situation - puck went under the player's geography.

    Also - this is threes. This should in no way whatsoever be used as an example.

    This isn't a 'skill gap'.

    It's just a poor defensive play and the puck went under the defenders arms.

  • IceLion68
    1254 posts Member
    edited January 6
    This is the same exact situation - puck went under the player's geography.

    Also - this is threes. This should in no way whatsoever be used as an example.

    This isn't a 'skill gap'.

    It's just a poor defensive play and the puck went under the defenders arms.

    OK, it's a poor defensive play, but again, not because it's easy for a player to simply force a pass under/through the sliding player. It's a poor defensive play because it commits the defender and leaves him ineffective to do anything else. I am conceding this is bad D and ALSO that those passes should not go through. These are not mutually exclusive things.

    It's a poor defensive play and gives the attacker options: he could chip a pass over him, toe drag around him, wait him out on the slide, etc. What he cannot do (or *shouldnt* be able to do with any regularity), is force a pass THROUGH the defender like this. I mean you can keep making the argument that by some miracle each time this happens the puck is actually sliding under their armpit but is that really what should be happening as consistently as it seems to? Again, with zero change in velocity or direction. Are we also to believe that the players glove is not on the ice here and that's why it slipped under it? Cause I don't.

    It's just symptomatic of the "all decisions/calculations favor offense" mentality that seems to plague this game.

    BTW this is also a product of "when nothing else works". Because the effectiveness of sticks and bodies in lanes when upright also seems to be dodgier than usual this year.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.

    Can you please stick to one argument at a time?

    There should be a price to be paid sure, but its not for the puck to ignore physics and reward an attacker for forcing a pass that should not get through plain and simple. When this happens in real life (and it does), no attacker with any skill tries to pass it through/under the sliding defender. Yet you can easily do so in this game.

    Maybe this will convince you?

    (Courtesy @TTZ_Dipsy)

    Regardless whether this play is bad defense or not, this just should not happen. Once again an example of the fake "skill gap" between offense and defense.

    This is the same exact situation - puck went under the player's geography.

    Also - this is threes. This should in no way whatsoever be used as an example.

    This isn't a 'skill gap'.

    It's just a poor defensive play and the puck went under the defenders arms.

    - Users are able to execute no-look, behind the back passes with 100% accuracy.

    The system isn't broken - just gotta play better defense :)
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.

    Can you please stick to one argument at a time?

    There should be a price to be paid sure, but its not for the puck to ignore physics and reward an attacker for forcing a pass that should not get through plain and simple. When this happens in real life (and it does), no attacker with any skill tries to pass it through/under the sliding defender. Yet you can easily do so in this game.

    Maybe this will convince you?

    (Courtesy @TTZ_Dipsy)

    Regardless whether this play is bad defense or not, this just should not happen. Once again an example of the fake "skill gap" between offense and defense.

    This is the same exact situation - puck went under the player's geography.

    Also - this is threes. This should in no way whatsoever be used as an example.

    This isn't a 'skill gap'.

    It's just a poor defensive play and the puck went under the defenders arms.

    - Users are able to execute no-look, behind the back passes with 100% accuracy.

    The system isn't broken - just gotta play better defense :)

    -chuckles-
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • I wish the “auto-saucer” would kick-in with high rated passers when people just desperately lay down rather than having it kick in on a pass in the middle of the ice that didn’t even need it. It’s a desperation play that should work at times but should also have a counter. There’s not a great counter for it right now. And I agree that these flat passes shouldn’t be going through when we take into account how many ludicrous things the offense can do. They still have zero accountability to their game, much like human goalies now. Defense is the only position in the game that actually needs to do everything perfect to have success, so I’d say the “balance” is more off than ever before.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1672 posts Member
    edited January 6
    IceLion68 wrote: »

    I would argue that the defender should pay the price for desperately lying down after failing to defend the rush that contributed to the 2-on-1.

    It's also telling that we're not even discussing the fact that a player lying down - very obviously obstructing the goalie's ability to move - doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the tendy.

    Less skilled players are getting away with this tactic, but there isn't a peep about it from the 'community'.

    Honestly - that is more of an issue to me than a puck going under a player's arm and jersey - especially when it's a simple graphical limitation that simply makes it appear to be going 'through' a jersey when it's not going through the player geography at all.

    Can you please stick to one argument at a time?

    There should be a price to be paid sure, but its not for the puck to ignore physics and reward an attacker for forcing a pass that should not get through plain and simple. When this happens in real life (and it does), no attacker with any skill tries to pass it through/under the sliding defender. Yet you can easily do so in this game.

    Maybe this will convince you?

    (Courtesy @TTZ_Dipsy)

    Regardless whether this play is bad defense or not, this just should not happen. Once again an example of the fake "skill gap" between offense and defense.

    This is the same exact situation - puck went under the player's geography.

    Also - this is threes. This should in no way whatsoever be used as an example.

    This isn't a 'skill gap'.

    It's just a poor defensive play and the puck went under the defenders arms.

    - Users are able to execute no-look, behind the back passes with 100% accuracy.

    The system isn't broken - just gotta play better defense :)

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)
  • IceLion68
    1254 posts Member
    edited January 6

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?
    Indeed... I'll wait...
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?

    Me saying that someone made a defensive lapse contributing to a cross crease is not “dumping” on anyone.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?

    Me saying that someone made a defensive lapse contributing to a cross crease is not “dumping” on anyone.

    But maybe we could agree on a middle ground that this pass probably shouldn’t get through despite it being a desperation play by a defender. Not too many of these passes would go through the way it did IRL. Maybe the simple fix is an “auto-sauced” pass to make the animation better/prettier? I think that’s what they’re taking exception with. Nobody states this is a stellar play by the defender, but I also couldn’t tell you this was okay animation wise either, ya know?
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?

    Me saying that someone made a defensive lapse contributing to a cross crease is not “dumping” on anyone.

    But maybe we could agree on a middle ground that this pass probably shouldn’t get through despite it being a desperation play by a defender. Not too many of these passes would go through the way it did IRL. Maybe the simple fix is an “auto-sauced” pass to make the animation better/prettier? I think that’s what they’re taking exception with. Nobody states this is a stellar play by the defender, but I also couldn’t tell you this was okay animation wise either, ya know?


    Auto sauce when a player lays down would be huge. I agree 100%
  • IceLion68 wrote: »

    Gotta love when people ignore actual issues just to appear funny.

    Ah so when you complain they are "actual issues". When other people have complaints we should just play better defense. Got it.

    At least I can admit I'm at fault for my defensive lapses and don't just berate developers and forum members for not agreeing with me :)

    Yes you just berate other people for what YOU interpret as THEIR defensive lapses, while refusing to acknowledge that perhaps some of the issue is actually the game. But I guess you are the self appointed authority on what are actual issues.

    I have to say it's getting a bit tedious arguing with you that these are are actual issues when it is pretty obvious to literally everyone else here that it is so.

    This is my argument against him. He can show the games deficiencies but when someone shows the exact same ones it is their fault. Literally bringing nothing of substance to the table other than antagonization.


    I’ve posted hundreds of gifs showing all kinds of issues including my own lapses

    Which is awesome! I support that. Then why dump on other people doing the same thing?

    Me saying that someone made a defensive lapse contributing to a cross crease is not “dumping” on anyone.

    "Play better defense" with a cute little smiley face? Come on bro. You showing videos of bad/weak game mechanics saying "this isn't right" but then someone shows the same thing and you tell them they need to get better? Seemingly enjoying starting fights in an online message forum?

    I have to ask, what are your credentials? What gives you the right to tell other people they are so bad at this game? Can I see your record and stats? I am extremely curious.
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!