EA Forums - Banner

Player classes eashl

Prev1345
strategg101
823 posts Member
edited November 2016
I wouldn't be against just 1 class. Everbody the same, but the ability to adjust just height and weight. That way there would be no dice rolls so to speak. Height and weight would have to play a factor on a few stats by say a percentage. smaller = more agility, less poise, better puck control. Bigger = less agility, more poise, good puck strength.
Post edited by strategg101 on

Replies

  • Why can we not just bring back the grind and customization? Do we really think getting rid of this HELPED bring in new players or keep the base strong or growing? I have to respectfully disagree with folks that believe this new cookie cutter system is better for the game's fan base.

    You can simply CAP STATS based on your selected height and weight.

    i.e. you cannot have 95 balance on a guy that is 5'8" 160 lbs. Cap that at 75.

    i.e. you cannot have 95 speed / acceleration on a guy that is 6'9" 250 lbs. Cap that at 75.

    same things for strength... puck control and so on.

    I dunno guys.... it seems to me that this base has shrunk, the desire to keep playing EASHL/club isn't there and I do firmly believe this is one of the reasons.... you took the "RPG" fun part out of it.
  • KoryDub wrote: »
    The way it is now is great, but the community is definitely missing attribute customization. Finding a common ground would be ideal. What do you all think that common ground could be?

    I really think we need to bring back the card system / grind, cap attributes based on height weight, bring back the skate blade types and impacts, same with the stick shaft / blades...

    There's my two cents. I also would like to hear some input from the community on this.
  • KoryDub wrote: »
    The way it is now is great, but the community is definitely missing attribute customization. Finding a common ground would be ideal. What do you all think that common ground could be?

    Would it be in the cards to do a FIFA-esque system?

    Basically you can choose a few traits to "customize" your play style and then depending on your game by game performance you get XP and slowly increase your attributes until, say, you hit 85 overall or something?
  • I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.
  • I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call Bobo.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.
  • I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Good point. How about the offline BAP system in NHL? It increases your overall based on performance for specific things?
  • The idea of adding hardware based on your personal overall performance (i.e if you're good at shot-blocking you can unlock certain kinds of shin pads that +1 that skill, good at snapping wristers you unlock certain tape that adds +1 to wsp..). Minor upgrades but even if the value of the unlockable stuff appears negligible (none of this +5/+7 stuff that was in previous versions) would still add a little something to the grind other than unlocking goal celebrations
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Worse are the lobbies that are just focused on accomplishing specific achievements. Have players going for header goals all game long and such.
    I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call ****.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.

    That doesn't make sense to me for online play. Losing my last 5 games against strong teams shouldn't make me less able to beat a weak team after that, and winning 5 blowouts against weak teams shouldn't help me win against a strong team that has been playing even matches against other strong teams. It's just too difficult to do it fairly in my opinion.

    Pretty soon, you'd have clubs playing tune-up games against a club that is deliberately throwing the game, so that the team can have boosted stats for an important game after that. It's something that even if everyone played fair and didn't abuse the system, it would still create imbalances between otherwise even teams. Whether it's my last 5 games, or my last 5,000 games, they shouldn't have an impact on how likely I am to win my next game.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Worse are the lobbies that are just focused on accomplishing specific achievements. Have players going for header goals all game long and such.
    I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call ****.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.

    That doesn't make sense to me for online play. Losing my last 5 games against strong teams shouldn't make me less able to beat a weak team after that, and winning 5 blowouts against weak teams shouldn't help me win against a strong team that has been playing even matches against other strong teams. It's just too difficult to do it fairly in my opinion.

    Pretty soon, you'd have clubs playing tune-up games against a club that is deliberately throwing the game, so that the team can have boosted stats for an important game after that. It's something that even if everyone played fair and didn't abuse the system, it would still create imbalances between otherwise even teams. Whether it's my last 5 games, or my last 5,000 games, they shouldn't have an impact on how likely I am to win my next game.

    That too is a good point.

    There has to be a way to bring this back. Frankly, the "upgrade your team" isn't quite enough.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Worse are the lobbies that are just focused on accomplishing specific achievements. Have players going for header goals all game long and such.
    I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call ****.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.

    That doesn't make sense to me for online play. Losing my last 5 games against strong teams shouldn't make me less able to beat a weak team after that, and winning 5 blowouts against weak teams shouldn't help me win against a strong team that has been playing even matches against other strong teams. It's just too difficult to do it fairly in my opinion.

    Pretty soon, you'd have clubs playing tune-up games against a club that is deliberately throwing the game, so that the team can have boosted stats for an important game after that. It's something that even if everyone played fair and didn't abuse the system, it would still create imbalances between otherwise even teams. Whether it's my last 5 games, or my last 5,000 games, they shouldn't have an impact on how likely I am to win my next game.

    That too is a good point.

    There has to be a way to bring this back. Frankly, the "upgrade your team" isn't quite enough.

    I do think there needs to be some sort of middle ground to give people more control over their attributes, but I'm not sure that progression needs to be present.

    One idea that I had posted about in the old forum was moving to using sliders for EASHL player attributes instead of values for each specific attribute. Think of it like having an awareness slider where you could choose between defensive and offensive awareness, or middle of the road for both. You could probably find a good match for most attributes (passing/deking, shot power/accuracy, balance/agility, speed/acceleration, stick check/hitting, endurance/strength, aggressiveness/discipline, hand-eye/puck control, and just make faceoffs, fighting, shot blocking, and durability even across the board). Making a player much larger or smaller than average would just give you a smaller range of customization.

    The point would be that you can't have a player great in everything, and that specializing in any one attribute means needing to give up something else. High speed players can get breakaways by using that to their advantage, but it takes them longer to reach that speed, so defenders should be able to watch out for them going for stretch passes. Maybe they could even start players with no adjustments possible, but after playing a bunch of games, they can move them more and more.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Worse are the lobbies that are just focused on accomplishing specific achievements. Have players going for header goals all game long and such.
    I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call ****.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.

    That doesn't make sense to me for online play. Losing my last 5 games against strong teams shouldn't make me less able to beat a weak team after that, and winning 5 blowouts against weak teams shouldn't help me win against a strong team that has been playing even matches against other strong teams. It's just too difficult to do it fairly in my opinion.

    Pretty soon, you'd have clubs playing tune-up games against a club that is deliberately throwing the game, so that the team can have boosted stats for an important game after that. It's something that even if everyone played fair and didn't abuse the system, it would still create imbalances between otherwise even teams. Whether it's my last 5 games, or my last 5,000 games, they shouldn't have an impact on how likely I am to win my next game.

    That too is a good point.

    There has to be a way to bring this back. Frankly, the "upgrade your team" isn't quite enough.

    I do think there needs to be some sort of middle ground to give people more control over their attributes, but I'm not sure that progression needs to be present.

    One idea that I had posted about in the old forum was moving to using sliders for EASHL player attributes instead of values for each specific attribute. Think of it like having an awareness slider where you could choose between defensive and offensive awareness, or middle of the road for both. You could probably find a good match for most attributes (passing/deking, shot power/accuracy, balance/agility, speed/acceleration, stick check/hitting, endurance/strength, aggressiveness/discipline, hand-eye/puck control, and just make faceoffs, fighting, shot blocking, and durability even across the board). Making a player much larger or smaller than average would just give you a smaller range of customization.

    The point would be that you can't have a player great in everything, and that specializing in any one attribute means needing to give up something else. High speed players can get breakaways by using that to their advantage, but it takes them longer to reach that speed, so defenders should be able to watch out for them going for stretch passes. Maybe they could even start players with no adjustments possible, but after playing a bunch of games, they can move them more and more.

    So you are saying that you can basically pick and choose which skills you prioritize rather than just having a set class?
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    I think the fifa system is arbitrary and forces you to do things over and over again just to upkeep your attributes. And again, that system introduces a plan where people who play 1000 games in 7 days are so much further ahead of those who dont.

    Worse are the lobbies that are just focused on accomplishing specific achievements. Have players going for header goals all game long and such.
    I would also be ok with just implementing the OFFLINE Be a Pro system into EASHL...

    you do "X" well, stats for "X" go up.

    you suck at "Y", stats for "Y" decline.

    I forgot to mention that, good call ****.

    That is the easiest way to do things. Whatever you are good at, you get better at, whatever you struggle with, you aren't quite as good.

    That doesn't make sense to me for online play. Losing my last 5 games against strong teams shouldn't make me less able to beat a weak team after that, and winning 5 blowouts against weak teams shouldn't help me win against a strong team that has been playing even matches against other strong teams. It's just too difficult to do it fairly in my opinion.

    Pretty soon, you'd have clubs playing tune-up games against a club that is deliberately throwing the game, so that the team can have boosted stats for an important game after that. It's something that even if everyone played fair and didn't abuse the system, it would still create imbalances between otherwise even teams. Whether it's my last 5 games, or my last 5,000 games, they shouldn't have an impact on how likely I am to win my next game.

    That too is a good point.

    There has to be a way to bring this back. Frankly, the "upgrade your team" isn't quite enough.

    I do think there needs to be some sort of middle ground to give people more control over their attributes, but I'm not sure that progression needs to be present.

    One idea that I had posted about in the old forum was moving to using sliders for EASHL player attributes instead of values for each specific attribute. Think of it like having an awareness slider where you could choose between defensive and offensive awareness, or middle of the road for both. You could probably find a good match for most attributes (passing/deking, shot power/accuracy, balance/agility, speed/acceleration, stick check/hitting, endurance/strength, aggressiveness/discipline, hand-eye/puck control, and just make faceoffs, fighting, shot blocking, and durability even across the board). Making a player much larger or smaller than average would just give you a smaller range of customization.

    The point would be that you can't have a player great in everything, and that specializing in any one attribute means needing to give up something else. High speed players can get breakaways by using that to their advantage, but it takes them longer to reach that speed, so defenders should be able to watch out for them going for stretch passes. Maybe they could even start players with no adjustments possible, but after playing a bunch of games, they can move them more and more.

    So you are saying that you can basically pick and choose which skills you prioritize rather than just having a set class?

    Exactly. Everyone gets to move every slider as they want. If certain combinations are broken for some reason, EA can just change it so that you can't have max deking, strength, and balance or something like that. Maxing out an attribute should mean that you're giving up quite a bit though. If you're at the max balance for example, your agility should be quite terrible.
  • Exactly. Everyone gets to move every slider as they want. If certain combinations are broken for some reason, EA can just change it so that you can't have max deking, strength, and balance or something like that. Maxing out an attribute should mean that you're giving up quite a bit though. If you're at the max balance for example, your agility should be quite terrible.[/quote]

    This is a pretty good idea. It allows people to customize their playstyle, doesn't bring back "progression" and doesn't bring back people buying all their boosts/equipment on day 1.

    I don't know about you but my friends and I used to play this game a whole lot. Anymore the 5 or 6 of us play once a month for nostalgic reasons. The game is straight not as fun anymore in regards to EASHL. There needs to be more than "score 150 powerplay goals" and get goal effects.
  • Have a scale of 1-10 for each attribute. Give everyone 30 points to put where they want with obviously 10 points in one being the maximum.

    You could put 10 points into one category but that only leaves you with 20 for the remaining 5 but that will leave you weak in those 5. You could put 5 in each catergory for an overall balanced player. You can put more points into the attributes obviously depending on your style of play or your weaknesses that you want to compensate for.

    With only 30 points, you won't be able to make your player overly strong in most of your categories like the previous system. For this purpose I'll consider "strong" 8 points in one catergory.

    Some examples:

    Shooting 10 5 3 6 8
    Skating 8 5 3 6 8
    Passing 6 5 4 7 8
    Hands 6 5 3 2 2
    Defence 0 5 8 7 2
    Physical 0 5 10 7 2

    That is just 5 examples out of a possible 180 combinations giving us a lot more variations on the current preset builds.

    As for height and weight I think the CAP attributes system like BoboFloggins suggested would work well. I would like to have the ability to adjust to my preference though. In the real NHL there are players that are small like Brendan Gallagher but play a feisty physical game and then there are others that are big like Brock Nelson that play a Charmin soft game. So just because a player is a certain size doesn't mean he has to play a certain way and have his attributions accordingly.

    Or just go back to the previous system and give everyone the same/max amount of points to allocate into whatever attributes as they wish. HA!

    Your idea is good in theory but the reason this got removed was because the hardcore players would find ways to abuse the attributes system and find ways to be able to exploit the games algo. Which would result in 5'7 danglers who you couldnt hit, and score like crazy.

    which resulted in alot of frustrated people
    You must unlearn what you have learned!
  • COGSx86 wrote: »
    Have a scale of 1-10 for each attribute. Give everyone 30 points to put where they want with obviously 10 points in one being the maximum.

    You could put 10 points into one category but that only leaves you with 20 for the remaining 5 but that will leave you weak in those 5. You could put 5 in each catergory for an overall balanced player. You can put more points into the attributes obviously depending on your style of play or your weaknesses that you want to compensate for.

    With only 30 points, you won't be able to make your player overly strong in most of your categories like the previous system. For this purpose I'll consider "strong" 8 points in one catergory.

    Some examples:

    Shooting 10 5 3 6 8
    Skating 8 5 3 6 8
    Passing 6 5 4 7 8
    Hands 6 5 3 2 2
    Defence 0 5 8 7 2
    Physical 0 5 10 7 2

    That is just 5 examples out of a possible 180 combinations giving us a lot more variations on the current preset builds.

    As for height and weight I think the CAP attributes system like BoboFloggins suggested would work well. I would like to have the ability to adjust to my preference though. In the real NHL there are players that are small like Brendan Gallagher but play a feisty physical game and then there are others that are big like Brock Nelson that play a Charmin soft game. So just because a player is a certain size doesn't mean he has to play a certain way and have his attributions accordingly.

    Or just go back to the previous system and give everyone the same/max amount of points to allocate into whatever attributes as they wish. HA!

    Your idea is good in theory but the reason this got removed was because the hardcore players would find ways to abuse the attributes system and find ways to be able to exploit the games algo. Which would result in 5'7 danglers who you couldnt hit, and score like crazy.

    which resulted in alot of frustrated people

    I believe the idea I spoke about up top, to me, rectifies that.

    Just cap attributes based on height/weight.

    Sorry, if a 6'4" 220 lb guy hits your 5'7 dangler (dont care what build) the 5'7" guy is going to take the brunt of it - 99.9% of the time. Physics...

    Just like 6'4" guys should be more sluggish than a 5'7 dangler.
  • COGSx86 wrote: »
    Have a scale of 1-10 for each attribute. Give everyone 30 points to put where they want with obviously 10 points in one being the maximum.

    You could put 10 points into one category but that only leaves you with 20 for the remaining 5 but that will leave you weak in those 5. You could put 5 in each catergory for an overall balanced player. You can put more points into the attributes obviously depending on your style of play or your weaknesses that you want to compensate for.

    With only 30 points, you won't be able to make your player overly strong in most of your categories like the previous system. For this purpose I'll consider "strong" 8 points in one catergory.

    Some examples:

    Shooting 10 5 3 6 8
    Skating 8 5 3 6 8
    Passing 6 5 4 7 8
    Hands 6 5 3 2 2
    Defence 0 5 8 7 2
    Physical 0 5 10 7 2

    That is just 5 examples out of a possible 180 combinations giving us a lot more variations on the current preset builds.

    As for height and weight I think the CAP attributes system like BoboFloggins suggested would work well. I would like to have the ability to adjust to my preference though. In the real NHL there are players that are small like Brendan Gallagher but play a feisty physical game and then there are others that are big like Brock Nelson that play a Charmin soft game. So just because a player is a certain size doesn't mean he has to play a certain way and have his attributions accordingly.

    Or just go back to the previous system and give everyone the same/max amount of points to allocate into whatever attributes as they wish. HA!

    Your idea is good in theory but the reason this got removed was because the hardcore players would find ways to abuse the attributes system and find ways to be able to exploit the games algo. Which would result in 5'7 danglers who you couldnt hit, and score like crazy.

    which resulted in alot of frustrated people

    Yes but with the old system they were able to be strong in a lot more categories. With my system they would be extremely weak in the others. Also considering the height and weight suggestion/idea of BoboFloggins those 5'7 danglers wouldn't be as effective. With only 30 points to distribute among 6 categories it wouldn't be possible to have such a player.

    Using my system try to build that player then.

    Shooting
    Skating
    Passing
    Hands
    Defence
    Physical



    Shooting 10
    Skating 10
    Passing 0
    Hands 0
    Defence 0
    Physical 10

    Go ahead and try taking me off the puck. I don't need to pass, my deking just needs to be good enough to hold it to the outside so people can't hit me, and who needs to play defense? I'll also be able to drop most players even if I'm just 6'1 or something.
  • Ea, there are some good opinions here.

    Id bet that if you guys could make something happen along the lines of player builds/customization you could bring EASHL back to what it used to be.....one of the best team online modes in history.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.