EA Forums - Banner

GM Connected

gg1091496
0 posts Member
edited March 2017
is anyone down for GM connected to return but not be as broken as it was before because it was a really fun game mode that was taken out and it would be awesome if they would put it back in NHL 18.
Post edited by gg1091496 on

Replies

  • It was a great idea but not very well executed. Problem was they havent made any improvements to it in future iterations.

    I already messaged them with some ideas for GMC or whatever they want to call it. The mode was great to play in a competitive organized league. I wouldn`t mind if they keep it simple for 18 and improve it each year. Real improvements though. The game mode should be strictly 1vs1 at the beginning, we already have EASHL for more.

    1) Faster menu and advances, nothing was more painful then trying to look for player details and it took you 5 minutes to do it. Advances to next rotation were very slow, it would take 2 hours to sim whole season.

    2) Sliders. Adjustable both before and after creation of the league.

    3) Co commissioners. Sometimes running a league with 30 people in it can become overwhelming, let commissioner appoint couple of people who will help with running the league. They would have all the power of commissioner except they couldn`t kick him or promote other people so we avoid someone taking over the league over night.

    4) Player progression needs to change completely. No more guessing which player will jump and which one will stay the same overall even though they have the same potential. Give us player training, doesnt need to be a real training in the beginning just a sim kind of training like in Be a Pro now, so we can select players we want to develop and put that XP where we want. Physical attributes should cost a lot more so we avoid players with 99 speed and 99 strength. Also attributes should cost more as player gets older. Amount of XP you can get from training and games should depend on players potential and potential could change based on players performance. End of season awards should give XP too and they would be the main factor for changing players potential.

    5) Team relocation. This one is optional, if its in the game great if its not wouldnt be a problem. One of those things that should be in improvements for future games.

    These are just a couple of things that would make this mode a really good mode in my opinion.

  • Milanpop87 wrote: »
    It was a great idea but not very well executed. Problem was they havent made any improvements to it in future iterations.

    I already messaged them with some ideas for GMC or whatever they want to call it. The mode was great to play in a competitive organized league. I wouldn`t mind if they keep it simple for 18 and improve it each year. Real improvements though. The game mode should be strictly 1vs1 at the beginning, we already have EASHL for more.

    1) Faster menu and advances, nothing was more painful then trying to look for player details and it took you 5 minutes to do it. Advances to next rotation were very slow, it would take 2 hours to sim whole season.

    2) Sliders. Adjustable both before and after creation of the league.

    3) Co commissioners. Sometimes running a league with 30 people in it can become overwhelming, let commissioner appoint couple of people who will help with running the league. They would have all the power of commissioner except they couldn`t kick him or promote other people so we avoid someone taking over the league over night.

    4) Player progression needs to change completely. No more guessing which player will jump and which one will stay the same overall even though they have the same potential. Give us player training, doesnt need to be a real training in the beginning just a sim kind of training like in Be a Pro now, so we can select players we want to develop and put that XP where we want. Physical attributes should cost a lot more so we avoid players with 99 speed and 99 strength. Also attributes should cost more as player gets older. Amount of XP you can get from training and games should depend on players potential and potential could change based on players performance. End of season awards should give XP too and they would be the main factor for changing players potential.

    5) Team relocation. This one is optional, if its in the game great if its not wouldnt be a problem. One of those things that should be in improvements for future games.

    These are just a couple of things that would make this mode a really good mode in my opinion.

    I also think it should be back, and I would definitely agree with 1 and 3. You could adjust sliders last time, but you couldn't make "universal" sliders. If you took it off a standard it would use whatever the host had as their default in each game. A universal slider would be great, as long as it was public so all members could see it (though not change it, of course).

    I only slightly agree with 4. I think more transparency is necessary in how players develop. For example, why would Matt Duchene (med, elite) NEVER EVER EVER develop, but other (med, elite) players would? I had a guy score 200 points in a season with Duchene when he was still only 23 or 24 years old - no ratings change.
    I think the old system was partially based on minutes played, but idk for sure. Transparency is necessary. I would disagree with the role-play aspect of it. Fine for BaP (sort of), but not for GM Connected. Should have to play players and have them do well (or at least get a bunch of minutes) to progress, not just magically grant them stats.

    Related to progression, one thing that needed fixing is a player shouldn't get worse just because he's one line below what his "role" is. So if I'm Pittsburgh and have Crosby and Malkin, I shouldn't get penalized with Malkin's regression because his role is "1st line" and he's playing on the second line. I think that should only happen if the guy is 2 or more lines below his role - so, for example, a 1st liner would only regress on a 3rd or 4th line, and a 2nd liner would only regress on the 4th line.

    On the relocation, I think it's best suited for offline only. It's really more of a feature for the "setting prices" and "owner goals" part of Franchise mode, and I think it would be better to keep the setting prices stuff unique to Franchise mode. I'd go either way on it as long as it was a toggleable option when making the league. Because, imo, the real problem is when a guy takes a team and relocates, makes new jerseys, all that stuff, and leaves your league. Who is going to want his custom team? No one. The feature will likely hurt leagues in the long run.


    But yes, GM Connected needs to come back. Pleaseeeeee.
  • I only slightly agree with 4. I think more transparency is necessary in how players develop. For example, why would Matt Duchene (med, elite) NEVER EVER EVER develop, but other (med, elite) players would? I had a guy score 200 points in a season with Duchene when he was still only 23 or 24 years old - no ratings change.
    I think the old system was partially based on minutes played, but idk for sure. Transparency is necessary. I would disagree with the role-play aspect of it. Fine for BaP (sort of), but not for GM Connected. Should have to play players and have them do well (or at least get a bunch of minutes) to progress, not just magically grant them stats.

    Related to progression, one thing that needed fixing is a player shouldn't get worse just because he's one line below what his "role" is. So if I'm Pittsburgh and have Crosby and Malkin, I shouldn't get penalized with Malkin's regression because his role is "1st line" and he's playing on the second line. I think that should only happen if the guy is 2 or more lines below his role - so, for example, a 1st liner would only regress on a 3rd or 4th line, and a 2nd liner would only regress on the 4th line.

    Not sure if you understood me. Players wouldn`t be given XP if they don`t play. For example, you have a training and you choose shooting practice. The player with better potential would earn more XP, not significantly more but over the course of one season it would translate in couple of attribute points. Also if a player scores a goal or assist during the game he gets XP. Players could get set of goals for the games and if they complete them they get XP. Season goals should also be a thing which gives you XP. Not sure if you played Madden 17 but something like that. This system would give bad players a chance to develop players with much more success then a model where only player stats at the end of the season determine his progress while good players would still have advantage. This would also prevent having one really bad team which no one wants to play with due to bad roster.
    On the relocation, I think it's best suited for offline only. It's really more of a feature for the "setting prices" and "owner goals" part of Franchise mode, and I think it would be better to keep the setting prices stuff unique to Franchise mode. I'd go either way on it as long as it was a toggleable option when making the league. Because, imo, the real problem is when a guy takes a team and relocates, makes new jerseys, all that stuff, and leaves your league. Who is going to want his custom team? No one. The feature will likely hurt leagues in the long run.

    Yeah filling in a relocated team could be tough but if its a team like Carolina or Arizona which got relocated that might be a plus for someone. Also commish could have an option to revert the team to the original one which would prevent all problems basically. Setting prices wouldn`t be in this mode, this would be strictly GM mode with option to relocate. 10-15 cities with 2-3 options for team names should do the trick.
  • JS1735
    16 posts Member
    Milanpop87 wrote: »
    4) Player progression needs to change completely. No more guessing which player will jump and which one will stay the same overall even though they have the same potential. Give us player training, doesnt need to be a real training in the beginning just a sim kind of training like in Be a Pro now, so we can select players we want to develop and put that XP where we want. Physical attributes should cost a lot more so we avoid players with 99 speed and 99 strength. Also attributes should cost more as player gets older. Amount of XP you can get from training and games should depend on players potential and potential could change based on players performance. End of season awards should give XP too and they would be the main factor for changing players potential.

    From what I've seen in NHL 17's franchise mode, development is based on 3 factors. Natural growth (your potential and age), Statistical growth (your performance relative to your overall), and Morale growth. It's not a bad system, but I do agree that they need to be more transparent with how this works. The only way I found this was through the "Progress Report" menu.

    But touching on OP's comments, bring back GM Connected. +100,000,000
  • GMC was the best mode in the series. Too bad it didn't make more money for EA... How about we pay a $5 micro transaction per season of GMC. That would get them working on it again.
  • RSall14
    613 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    GMC was the best mode in the series. Too bad it didn't make more money for EA... How about we pay a $5 micro transaction per season of GMC. That would get them working on it again.

    Are you kidding me? You're way too desperate. I want GMC back just as much as anyone but paying $5 a season is a joke. We shouldn't have to pay for a game mode that should have already been in the game.
  • mddoug
    10 posts Member
    gm connected is a must for NHL 18, we are all getting fed up of waiting for the mode to return. Sort it out EA
  • RSall14 wrote: »
    GMC was the best mode in the series. Too bad it didn't make more money for EA... How about we pay a $5 micro transaction per season of GMC. That would get them working on it again.

    Are you kidding me? You're way too desperate. I want GMC back just as much as anyone but paying $5 a season is a joke. We shouldn't have to pay for a game mode that should have already been in the game.

    Like we don't already pay for HUT.
  • It better be in 18. There is nothing to play besides EASHL
  • My NHL experience hasnt been the same since i left PS3 i was part of a great GMC league that started the 1st year it came out and had a core group of 22 GM's by the 2nd game.
    EA said it wasnt a popular game mode and yes i agree that it wasnt a popular game mode but that falls directly onto EA themselves (they will never admit this though) they tried to make the mode too big and tie it into EASHL with being able to have more users on the ice then just 1v1 that alone ruined the mode as they wasted too much development time with a feature no 1 wanted.

    They also need to have an option for shorter seasons to keep the interest up, not everyone like to grind thru a full 82 game season alot of people like the development part of a league and getting to use new drafted players. I was part of a league that played 1 season simmed 1 season for player development and making draft picks actually matter.

    The player development needed work as well though for the most part it was good.

    Another thing the mode needed was a dedicated off game website to access your league to do all the little things like trades, editing lines, contracts and season progression. Another good feature would be an in game or website option where at a certain time on a certain day that is when the season advances.

    Also any game where someone DISC or flat out quit should go to a review board (aka the commish) so resolve those games either awarding a win/lose or allowing the game to be replayed if a DISC happened.

    I agree the leagues needed help with a co-commish added to a league. There is alot of stuff that needs to be done to make a league run smoothly that 1 person is just not capable of doing at all times.
  • The way I look at it... no game mode starts out perfect. Every year they add on make it better but if the modes not in the game it will never get any better. At the very least EA should put it back in the game even if it is bear bones version and work on it. The one thing I don't want to see is EA try to merge it with EASHL.it won't be the same and will take years to perfect start small...GMC and work towards EASHLGMC
  • There is no need to connect EASHL and GMC. It should be two different game modes. Just keep GMC 1vs1 and see if there is any good reason to consider more players.
  • Also need to make it so if you back out against AI opponent the remainder of the game gets simmed.
  • No GM Connected until they actually overhaul Franchise mode. Once they fix that, then add an online mode.
  • Milanpop87 wrote: »
    It was a great idea but not very well executed. Problem was they havent made any improvements to it in future iterations.

    I already messaged them with some ideas for GMC or whatever they want to call it. The mode was great to play in a competitive organized league. I wouldn`t mind if they keep it simple for 18 and improve it each year. Real improvements though. The game mode should be strictly 1vs1 at the beginning, we already have EASHL for more.

    1) Faster menu and advances, nothing was more painful then trying to look for player details and it took you 5 minutes to do it. Advances to next rotation were very slow, it would take 2 hours to sim whole season.

    2) Sliders. Adjustable both before and after creation of the league.

    3) Co commissioners. Sometimes running a league with 30 people in it can become overwhelming, let commissioner appoint couple of people who will help with running the league. They would have all the power of commissioner except they couldn`t kick him or promote other people so we avoid someone taking over the league over night.

    4) Player progression needs to change completely. No more guessing which player will jump and which one will stay the same overall even though they have the same potential. Give us player training, doesnt need to be a real training in the beginning just a sim kind of training like in Be a Pro now, so we can select players we want to develop and put that XP where we want. Physical attributes should cost a lot more so we avoid players with 99 speed and 99 strength. Also attributes should cost more as player gets older. Amount of XP you can get from training and games should depend on players potential and potential could change based on players performance. End of season awards should give XP too and they would be the main factor for changing players potential.

    5) Team relocation. This one is optional, if its in the game great if its not wouldnt be a problem. One of those things that should be in improvements for future games.

    These are just a couple of things that would make this mode a really good mode in my opinion.

    I also think it should be back, and I would definitely agree with 1 and 3. You could adjust sliders last time, but you couldn't make "universal" sliders. If you took it off a standard it would use whatever the host had as their default in each game. A universal slider would be great, as long as it was public so all members could see it (though not change it, of course).

    I only slightly agree with 4. I think more transparency is necessary in how players develop. For example, why would Matt Duchene (med, elite) NEVER EVER EVER develop, but other (med, elite) players would? I had a guy score 200 points in a season with Duchene when he was still only 23 or 24 years old - no ratings change.
    I think the old system was partially based on minutes played, but idk for sure. Transparency is necessary. I would disagree with the role-play aspect of it. Fine for BaP (sort of), but not for GM Connected. Should have to play players and have them do well (or at least get a bunch of minutes) to progress, not just magically grant them stats.

    Related to progression, one thing that needed fixing is a player shouldn't get worse just because he's one line below what his "role" is. So if I'm Pittsburgh and have Crosby and Malkin, I shouldn't get penalized with Malkin's regression because his role is "1st line" and he's playing on the second line. I think that should only happen if the guy is 2 or more lines below his role - so, for example, a 1st liner would only regress on a 3rd or 4th line, and a 2nd liner would only regress on the 4th line.

    On the relocation, I think it's best suited for offline only. It's really more of a feature for the "setting prices" and "owner goals" part of Franchise mode, and I think it would be better to keep the setting prices stuff unique to Franchise mode. I'd go either way on it as long as it was a toggleable option when making the league. Because, imo, the real problem is when a guy takes a team and relocates, makes new jerseys, all that stuff, and leaves your league. Who is going to want his custom team? No one. The feature will likely hurt leagues in the long run.


    But yes, GM Connected needs to come back. Pleaseeeeee.


    https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/WeWantClassicRosters?src=hash

    Check out #WeWantClassicRosters on Facebook and Twitter
  • scottiesk wrote: »
    My NHL experience hasnt been the same since i left PS3 i was part of a great GMC league that started the 1st year it came out and had a core group of 22 GM's by the 2nd game.
    EA said it wasnt a popular game mode and yes i agree that it wasnt a popular game mode but that falls directly onto EA themselves (they will never admit this though) they tried to make the mode too big and tie it into EASHL with being able to have more users on the ice then just 1v1 that alone ruined the mode as they wasted too much development time with a feature no 1 wanted.

    They also need to have an option for shorter seasons to keep the interest up, not everyone like to grind thru a full 82 game season alot of people like the development part of a league and getting to use new drafted players. I was part of a league that played 1 season simmed 1 season for player development and making draft picks actually matter.

    The player development needed work as well though for the most part it was good.

    Another thing the mode needed was a dedicated off game website to access your league to do all the little things like trades, editing lines, contracts and season progression. Another good feature would be an in game or website option where at a certain time on a certain day that is when the season advances.

    Also any game where someone DISC or flat out quit should go to a review board (aka the commish) so resolve those games either awarding a win/lose or allowing the game to be replayed if a DISC happened.

    I agree the leagues needed help with a co-commish added to a league. There is alot of stuff that needs to be done to make a league run smoothly that 1 person is just not capable of doing at all times.


    https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/WeWantClassicRosters?src=hash

    Check out #WeWantClassicRosters on Facebook and Twitter
  • RSall14 wrote: »
    GMC was the best mode in the series. Too bad it didn't make more money for EA... How about we pay a $5 micro transaction per season of GMC. That would get them working on it again.

    Are you kidding me? You're way too desperate. I want GMC back just as much as anyone but paying $5 a season is a joke. We shouldn't have to pay for a game mode that should have already been in the game.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/WeWantClassicRosters?src=hash

    Check out #WeWantClassicRosters on Facebook and Twitter
  • Milanpop87 wrote: »
    I only slightly agree with 4. I think more transparency is necessary in how players develop. For example, why would Matt Duchene (med, elite) NEVER EVER EVER develop, but other (med, elite) players would? I had a guy score 200 points in a season with Duchene when he was still only 23 or 24 years old - no ratings change.
    I think the old system was partially based on minutes played, but idk for sure. Transparency is necessary. I would disagree with the role-play aspect of it. Fine for BaP (sort of), but not for GM Connected. Should have to play players and have them do well (or at least get a bunch of minutes) to progress, not just magically grant them stats.

    Related to progression, one thing that needed fixing is a player shouldn't get worse just because he's one line below what his "role" is. So if I'm Pittsburgh and have Crosby and Malkin, I shouldn't get penalized with Malkin's regression because his role is "1st line" and he's playing on the second line. I think that should only happen if the guy is 2 or more lines below his role - so, for example, a 1st liner would only regress on a 3rd or 4th line, and a 2nd liner would only regress on the 4th line.

    Not sure if you understood me. Players wouldn`t be given XP if they don`t play. For example, you have a training and you choose shooting practice. The player with better potential would earn more XP, not significantly more but over the course of one season it would translate in couple of attribute points. Also if a player scores a goal or assist during the game he gets XP. Players could get set of goals for the games and if they complete them they get XP. Season goals should also be a thing which gives you XP. Not sure if you played Madden 17 but something like that. This system would give bad players a chance to develop players with much more success then a model where only player stats at the end of the season determine his progress while good players would still have advantage. This would also prevent having one really bad team which no one wants to play with due to bad roster.
    On the relocation, I think it's best suited for offline only. It's really more of a feature for the "setting prices" and "owner goals" part of Franchise mode, and I think it would be better to keep the setting prices stuff unique to Franchise mode. I'd go either way on it as long as it was a toggleable option when making the league. Because, imo, the real problem is when a guy takes a team and relocates, makes new jerseys, all that stuff, and leaves your league. Who is going to want his custom team? No one. The feature will likely hurt leagues in the long run.

    Yeah filling in a relocated team could be tough but if its a team like Carolina or Arizona which got relocated that might be a plus for someone. Also commish could have an option to revert the team to the original one which would prevent all problems basically. Setting prices wouldn`t be in this mode, this would be strictly GM mode with option to relocate. 10-15 cities with 2-3 options for team names should do the trick.
    .
    https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/WeWantClassicRosters?src=hash

    Check out #WeWantClassicRosters on Facebook and Twitter

  • Milanpop87 wrote: »
    It was a great idea but not very well executed. Problem was they havent made any improvements to it in future iterations.

    I already messaged them with some ideas for GMC or whatever they want to call it. The mode was great to play in a competitive organized league. I wouldn`t mind if they keep it simple for 18 and improve it each year. Real improvements though. The game mode should be strictly 1vs1 at the beginning, we already have EASHL for more.

    1) Faster menu and advances, nothing was more painful then trying to look for player details and it took you 5 minutes to do it. Advances to next rotation were very slow, it would take 2 hours to sim whole season.

    2) Sliders. Adjustable both before and after creation of the league.

    3) Co commissioners. Sometimes running a league with 30 people in it can become overwhelming, let commissioner appoint couple of people who will help with running the league. They would have all the power of commissioner except they couldn`t kick him or promote other people so we avoid someone taking over the league over night.

    4) Player progression needs to change completely. No more guessing which player will jump and which one will stay the same overall even though they have the same potential. Give us player training, doesnt need to be a real training in the beginning just a sim kind of training like in Be a Pro now, so we can select players we want to develop and put that XP where we want. Physical attributes should cost a lot more so we avoid players with 99 speed and 99 strength. Also attributes should cost more as player gets older. Amount of XP you can get from training and games should depend on players potential and potential could change based on players performance. End of season awards should give XP too and they would be the main factor for changing players potential.

    5) Team relocation. This one is optional, if its in the game great if its not wouldnt be a problem. One of those things that should be in improvements for future games.

    These are just a couple of things that would make this mode a really good mode in my opinion.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/WeWantClassicRosters?src=hash

    Check out #WeWantClassicRosters on Facebook and Twitter

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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