EA Forums - Banner

Franchise Mode pointless to play

Prev1
So, with having unbearable lag online, offline has been the only way to get my hockey fix as painful as it's been to play against AI. The main reason I did it was to test if what actually happens over the course of a season has any effect on the outcome of your team/players.

So what I did was created the Vegas Franchise, and made the entire team just 50-55 overall, 18 year old players playing their first season in the league, all being ahl potential players. I played on all-star settings (3 minute periods) and played all 82 games as well as winning the cup in all 3 of the seasons i played.

Here's the top player for all 3 seasons, i had 4 other players with very similar stats with the same outcomes

Brayden Burke -
S1 - 55 overall, scores 113 points
S2 - 62 overall, scores 109 points
S3 - 64 overall, scores 121 points

At the season 4 start he is 68 overall... That's 343 points in 246 GP during regular season games, as well as 3 Stanley cups and tons of awards, yet because he has the "AHL potential" that ea gave him, what he actually does on the ice has zero impact on his development.

Same goes for the goalie as well. 3 seasons below a 1.2 GAA and above . 900%, leading the league by a mile in wins, as well as the 3 Stanley cups and he goes from a 52 overall to a 58 overall after 3 seasons.

The mode is a joke and absolutely pointless to play when the ONLY thing that matters is their potential rating given before they even play a single game in their nhl career. The sad part is there isn't even any rhyme or reason to when someone has an elite potential anyways, sometimes they can grow to 90+ and other times an elite potential will cap out at 86 overall.

Also i would like to mention the fact that with Burke scoring 113 points in season 1 while playing 1st line center, a player I had scratched the whole season had grown more in the player growth menu than Burke did without even playing a game (while having the same ahl potential rating).

Not only is the player development brutal, but so is the sim engine itself. All 3 seasons I played, had the penguins at the bottom 10 in the standings, as well as Vancouver Arizona and buffalo finishing the 1st season near the top of the league. Anyone who watched 2BC stream the other week saw him take the eastern all stars into a playoff sim and lose the 1st round 4 games to 1 against Minnesota. There's absolutely no consistency with the mode and it doesn't matter what kind of team you build or what happens on this ice with the players and their season stats.

Ea is under the impression that the only star players in the NHL were drafted with top 5 picks I guess...


Replies

  • The fact that it's predetermined by an "EA scout" is also worrisome.

    I wish EA would give us the ability to edit EVERYTHING during the season... attributes ... potentials... equipment ... create/edit prospects in offline modes like MLB the Show does. It is our game after all.
  • The fact that it's predetermined by an "EA scout" is also worrisome.

    I wish EA would give us the ability to edit EVERYTHING during the season... attributes ... potentials... equipment ... create/edit prospects in offline modes like MLB the Show does. It is our game after all.

    Ya it's just way to predetermined and everything is based around what ea says that player is going to be. Doesn't matter what that player does after he's drafted since he has been designated a certain potential.

    Look at someone like Panarin on Chicago, the guy was passed over in the draft and signed as a free agent. Comes into the league and kills it, now what did ea give his rating this year? A huge boost to nearly star player stats. But if my undrafted player in franchise mode in his rookie season absolutely crushes it, it's meaningless because it's predetermined what he is? I mean, if it's predetermined why even play. Absolutely no excuse for a player to have 3 seasons of superstar stats but be in the 60s overall and not even be considered a good ahl player.
  • The other part I find hilarious about it, is now you have a 50+ goal scorer in each of his first 3 seasons with all being over 100 points, and his trade value is equal to that of a 4th/5th round pick lol.
  • Perhaps terrible progression is a good thing. I mean if your guy was over 60 overall, you wouldn't have ice tilt making him a 50 goal scorer.
  • Perhaps terrible progression is a good thing. I mean if your guy was over 60 overall, you wouldn't have ice tilt making him a 50 goal scorer.

    Haha true enough. If he was 90 overall i would probably be lucky to get 30 with him
  • DeejNYLV
    317 posts Member
    So, with having unbearable lag online, offline has been the only way to get my hockey fix as painful as it's been to play against AI. The main reason I did it was to test if what actually happens over the course of a season has any effect on the outcome of your team/players.

    So what I did was created the Vegas Franchise, and made the entire team just 50-55 overall, 18 year old players playing their first season in the league, all being ahl potential players. I played on all-star settings (3 minute periods) and played all 82 games as well as winning the cup in all 3 of the seasons i played.

    Here's the top player for all 3 seasons, i had 4 other players with very similar stats with the same outcomes

    Brayden Burke -
    S1 - 55 overall, scores 113 points
    S2 - 62 overall, scores 109 points
    S3 - 64 overall, scores 121 points

    At the season 4 start he is 68 overall... That's 343 points in 246 GP during regular season games, as well as 3 Stanley cups and tons of awards, yet because he has the "AHL potential" that ea gave him, what he actually does on the ice has zero impact on his development.

    Same goes for the goalie as well. 3 seasons below a 1.2 GAA and above . 900%, leading the league by a mile in wins, as well as the 3 Stanley cups and he goes from a 52 overall to a 58 overall after 3 seasons.

    The mode is a joke and absolutely pointless to play when the ONLY thing that matters is their potential rating given before they even play a single game in their nhl career. The sad part is there isn't even any rhyme or reason to when someone has an elite potential anyways, sometimes they can grow to 90+ and other times an elite potential will cap out at 86 overall.

    Also i would like to mention the fact that with Burke scoring 113 points in season 1 while playing 1st line center, a player I had scratched the whole season had grown more in the player growth menu than Burke did without even playing a game (while having the same ahl potential rating).

    Not only is the player development brutal, but so is the sim engine itself. All 3 seasons I played, had the penguins at the bottom 10 in the standings, as well as Vancouver Arizona and buffalo finishing the 1st season near the top of the league. Anyone who watched 2BC stream the other week saw him take the eastern all stars into a playoff sim and lose the 1st round 4 games to 1 against Minnesota. There's absolutely no consistency with the mode and it doesn't matter what kind of team you build or what happens on this ice with the players and their season stats.

    Ea is under the impression that the only star players in the NHL were drafted with top 5 picks I guess...


    I have played out several franchise modes through the entire 25 seasons and on ice performance does affect growth and players can absolutely outshine their potential as I have had AHL top 6 forward potential players reach 88 ovr. On ice performance though is only a part of development. Your top player started at 55 and he is now a 68, that's 13 points of growth. Now, without the great on ice performance, he probably is a 59 or a 61. I'm sure there is a cap on how much the on ice performance can grow a player because otherwise people could just draft anyone, put the shooting sliders up in the 60s and the CPU goalie sliders down in the 60s and run up huge point totals to get a team full of 90+ ovr players.

    While scouting needs an overhaul, actual development is very good. Players grow according to ice time, role and within the parameters of potential. None of those things are guaranteed though, which is good. It would be a bad sim if you could simply don't same thing with every player and that would gaurantee they see growth. Sometimes, despite doing all the right things, a top 5 draft pick is a bust, both in real life and in a game. Just like sometimes, that Low Top 9 forward from the 5th round becomes a star. Some players respond better to playing above their suggested role, while some suffer from being called up too soon. I asked Ben about this and he told me that when a player gets called up can have a major impact on a players growth. So it's a cornucopia of things that make up player development. If your argument is "player development is broken because I ran up huge scores with ridiculous point totals and it didn't grow my player 35+ ovr points" then we have a different view of what makes good player development for the game. Which is cool, it's just different. I however, think player development is one of the things the game does very well.

    As far as the sim engine goes, it could definitely use some improvement, it's far from the broken mess you make it out to be. In the tons of seasons I have simulated I find in most of them, the good teams end up in or near the spot they should be.
  • DeejNYLV wrote: »
    So, with having unbearable lag online, offline has been the only way to get my hockey fix as painful as it's been to play against AI. The main reason I did it was to test if what actually happens over the course of a season has any effect on the outcome of your team/players.

    So what I did was created the Vegas Franchise, and made the entire team just 50-55 overall, 18 year old players playing their first season in the league, all being ahl potential players. I played on all-star settings (3 minute periods) and played all 82 games as well as winning the cup in all 3 of the seasons i played.

    Here's the top player for all 3 seasons, i had 4 other players with very similar stats with the same outcomes

    Brayden Burke -
    S1 - 55 overall, scores 113 points
    S2 - 62 overall, scores 109 points
    S3 - 64 overall, scores 121 points

    At the season 4 start he is 68 overall... That's 343 points in 246 GP during regular season games, as well as 3 Stanley cups and tons of awards, yet because he has the "AHL potential" that ea gave him, what he actually does on the ice has zero impact on his development.

    Same goes for the goalie as well. 3 seasons below a 1.2 GAA and above . 900%, leading the league by a mile in wins, as well as the 3 Stanley cups and he goes from a 52 overall to a 58 overall after 3 seasons.

    The mode is a joke and absolutely pointless to play when the ONLY thing that matters is their potential rating given before they even play a single game in their nhl career. The sad part is there isn't even any rhyme or reason to when someone has an elite potential anyways, sometimes they can grow to 90+ and other times an elite potential will cap out at 86 overall.

    Also i would like to mention the fact that with Burke scoring 113 points in season 1 while playing 1st line center, a player I had scratched the whole season had grown more in the player growth menu than Burke did without even playing a game (while having the same ahl potential rating).

    Not only is the player development brutal, but so is the sim engine itself. All 3 seasons I played, had the penguins at the bottom 10 in the standings, as well as Vancouver Arizona and buffalo finishing the 1st season near the top of the league. Anyone who watched 2BC stream the other week saw him take the eastern all stars into a playoff sim and lose the 1st round 4 games to 1 against Minnesota. There's absolutely no consistency with the mode and it doesn't matter what kind of team you build or what happens on this ice with the players and their season stats.

    Ea is under the impression that the only star players in the NHL were drafted with top 5 picks I guess...


    I have played out several franchise modes through the entire 25 seasons and on ice performance does affect growth and players can absolutely outshine their potential as I have had AHL top 6 forward potential players reach 88 ovr. On ice performance though is only a part of development. Your top player started at 55 and he is now a 68, that's 13 points of growth. Now, without the great on ice performance, he probably is a 59 or a 61. I'm sure there is a cap on how much the on ice performance can grow a player because otherwise people could just draft anyone, put the shooting sliders up in the 60s and the CPU goalie sliders down in the 60s and run up huge point totals to get a team full of 90+ ovr players.

    While scouting needs an overhaul, actual development is very good. Players grow according to ice time, role and within the parameters of potential. None of those things are guaranteed though, which is good. It would be a bad sim if you could simply don't same thing with every player and that would gaurantee they see growth. Sometimes, despite doing all the right things, a top 5 draft pick is a bust, both in real life and in a game. Just like sometimes, that Low Top 9 forward from the 5th round becomes a star. Some players respond better to playing above their suggested role, while some suffer from being called up too soon. I asked Ben about this and he told me that when a player gets called up can have a major impact on a players growth. So it's a cornucopia of things that make up player development. If your argument is "player development is broken because I ran up huge scores with ridiculous point totals and it didn't grow my player 35+ ovr points" then we have a different view of what makes good player development for the game. Which is cool, it's just different. I however, think player development is one of the things the game does very well.

    As far as the sim engine goes, it could definitely use some improvement, it's far from the broken mess you make it out to be. In the tons of seasons I have simulated I find in most of them, the good teams end up in or near the spot they should be.

    See I feel the complete opposite. Like I said with Panarin... The guy was undrafted, teams passed over him obviously because nobody saw the potential in him. Now Ea after his rookie season had him at what? An 87 or 88 overall? That's with 30 goals and 70 something points. So why in the real NHL does a player show up out of nowhere, have a great year, and in the next release has a player rating given by EA to show that. Whereas in their franchise mode, I can't take an undrafted player and do the same thing?

    You saying that you could just crank up all the sliders and have a great season with your whole team and rank them all up to high overalls is also not a very good argument. I mean, not only would you be forced to trade the majority away at contract time due to the cap and the salaries a team of 90 overall players would want, but who would play 82 game seasons with the sliders tuned making the game beyond easy, it wouldn't be any fun.

    You saying my a player with 3 100+ point NHL seasons getting a rating boost of 13 points but being a low enough overall to not even crack an ahl roster is ridiculous.

    Do you know why some players in real life drafted in the first round are sometimes a bust, and some players nobody expected to be a star that got drafted in late rounds, or went undrafted? It's because players get ranked by scouts based on their junior careers, at 17-18 years old, players are not on their prime and have not peaked. 100% of what makes a real nhl superstar is what they can do on the ice. Do you think nhl coaches or GMs are going to tell a 50 goal scorer "sorry when you were 18 years old the scouts told us you could only play in the ahl", No, 3 50 goal seasons would make a player a superstar and I guarantee EA would give that player a 90+ overall in the game.
  • Assisted_NHL
    114 posts Member
    edited June 2017
    The problem is, nobody in the actual NHL has that potential tag beside their name saying what they are capable of and what they are going to become, it's a gamble when drafting and you could be drafting a late round superstar and have no clue at the time, until that player begins his career. It's all based on what that player accomplishes on the ice.

    Ea put way too much emphasis on that all mighty potential rating that a player randomly gets assigned in franchise mode and that players career is defined by it.

    Here's an example, let's use the 2003 nhl draft for example. Joe Pavelski was drafted 163rd in the 6th round, in EAs franchise mode he would pretty much be useless and probably never crack the nhl roster. I could name a ton of them too
  • b24hhh
    19 posts Member
    The problem is that they can't make the AI play like NHL players. So simulating without watching the gameplay is more true to real NHL. That's why when I play BaGM I don't watch the actual gameplay and sim instead.
  • b24hhh wrote: »
    The problem is that they can't make the AI play like NHL players. So simulating without watching the gameplay is more true to real NHL. That's why when I play BaGM I don't watch the actual gameplay and sim instead.

    Ya normally I just sim as well but with the online delay I've just been actually playing the games.

    The problem is even the sim engine is flawed. Players go up and down in overalls without reason, as well as you could have a player that clearly has a far better year than his previous one, yet remains the same overall the next season or drops. I had one year where Malkin was 34 years old and was playing in the AHL, like really EA... youre telling me in 4 years we are going to see Malkin in the ahl?

    Not to mention, it's beyond unrealistic as far as trades go and how the computers build their teams a few years in. They don't look at what they need and make realistic trades or anything, by year 10 the rosters just look hilarious for some teams.

    It's such a shame, I love the idea of the mode and currently with the online connection issues it's the only mode that keeps me turning the game on here and there to play, but so many flaws with it that just makes me feel like I'm wasting my time
  • b24hhh
    19 posts Member
    The AI is worse with gameplay, but I agree that it's flawed anyway. EA seems to think that when a player reaches the age of 26, they don't grow anymore, and begin to decline instead. I think that is total ****. Players grow until they get the age of 30. That's because it's the prime of their body + brains. It's true that it's downhill on their body after 26, but they still grow their brains, and can do that until death.

    Players quit NHL, because younger players are fitting better under the teams cap limit. It's just that the other leagues that you have in NHL game can't get the former NHL players that are free agents, and EA has to accelerate the retirement of players to get rid of too many free agents, that won't fit under cap limit.

    Also, any European player won't be playing in AHL after they don't get an NHL contract, because they want to support the league in their home countries, or play in KHL to get the money they think they deserve.
  • b24hhh wrote: »
    The AI is worse with gameplay, but I agree that it's flawed anyway. EA seems to think that when a player reaches the age of 26, they don't grow anymore, and begin to decline instead. I think that is total ****. Players grow until they get the age of 30. That's because it's the prime of their body + brains. It's true that it's downhill on their body after 26, but they still grow their brains, and can do that until death.

    Players quit NHL, because younger players are fitting better under the teams cap limit. It's just that the other leagues that you have in NHL game can't get the former NHL players that are free agents, and EA has to accelerate the retirement of players to get rid of too many free agents, that won't fit under cap limit.

    Also, any European player won't be playing in AHL after they don't get an NHL contract, because they want to support the league in their home countries, or play in KHL to get the money they think they deserve.

    Ya that's another thing about the mode that drives me nuts, the whole 26 years old and done crap. Theres just so much scripted stuff in the mode that it makes it unenjoyable.
  • I saw Johnny sim that playoff series with the All Stars. And it was sad to see. Not only did they lose, but were getting smashed. Conceding 7 goals in one of the games.
    If they got beat 1-0 and had 60 shots, you could say Dubnyk beat them, ok fine. But 4 easy wins. Jesus.
    I have to say, I find it frustrating with the 'potential' rating giving players a ceiling.
    For instance, earlier on the season, before any updates, I started a GM with Carolina and moved them to Quebec. Was looking forward to Seb Aho becoming a top player...only to find him with TOP 6 AHL.
    Tried everything. Couldn't even get him to a 70 overall.

    The answer simply is...go through and edit all the players potentials that you feel are incorrect. Sad but true.
  • Ever tried playing a season with a 55-60 rated goalie? Jesus Christ, you won't win much. But I was tanking so it was part of the plan.
  • DeejNYLV
    317 posts Member
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    So, with having unbearable lag online, offline has been the only way to get my hockey fix as painful as it's been to play against AI. The main reason I did it was to test if what actually happens over the course of a season has any effect on the outcome of your team/players.

    So what I did was created the Vegas Franchise, and made the entire team just 50-55 overall, 18 year old players playing their first season in the league, all being ahl potential players. I played on all-star settings (3 minute periods) and played all 82 games as well as winning the cup in all 3 of the seasons i played.

    Here's the top player for all 3 seasons, i had 4 other players with very similar stats with the same outcomes

    Brayden Burke -
    S1 - 55 overall, scores 113 points
    S2 - 62 overall, scores 109 points
    S3 - 64 overall, scores 121 points

    At the season 4 start he is 68 overall... That's 343 points in 246 GP during regular season games, as well as 3 Stanley cups and tons of awards, yet because he has the "AHL potential" that ea gave him, what he actually does on the ice has zero impact on his development.

    Same goes for the goalie as well. 3 seasons below a 1.2 GAA and above . 900%, leading the league by a mile in wins, as well as the 3 Stanley cups and he goes from a 52 overall to a 58 overall after 3 seasons.

    The mode is a joke and absolutely pointless to play when the ONLY thing that matters is their potential rating given before they even play a single game in their nhl career. The sad part is there isn't even any rhyme or reason to when someone has an elite potential anyways, sometimes they can grow to 90+ and other times an elite potential will cap out at 86 overall.

    Also i would like to mention the fact that with Burke scoring 113 points in season 1 while playing 1st line center, a player I had scratched the whole season had grown more in the player growth menu than Burke did without even playing a game (while having the same ahl potential rating).

    Not only is the player development brutal, but so is the sim engine itself. All 3 seasons I played, had the penguins at the bottom 10 in the standings, as well as Vancouver Arizona and buffalo finishing the 1st season near the top of the league. Anyone who watched 2BC stream the other week saw him take the eastern all stars into a playoff sim and lose the 1st round 4 games to 1 against Minnesota. There's absolutely no consistency with the mode and it doesn't matter what kind of team you build or what happens on this ice with the players and their season stats.

    Ea is under the impression that the only star players in the NHL were drafted with top 5 picks I guess...


    I have played out several franchise modes through the entire 25 seasons and on ice performance does affect growth and players can absolutely outshine their potential as I have had AHL top 6 forward potential players reach 88 ovr. On ice performance though is only a part of development. Your top player started at 55 and he is now a 68, that's 13 points of growth. Now, without the great on ice performance, he probably is a 59 or a 61. I'm sure there is a cap on how much the on ice performance can grow a player because otherwise people could just draft anyone, put the shooting sliders up in the 60s and the CPU goalie sliders down in the 60s and run up huge point totals to get a team full of 90+ ovr players.

    While scouting needs an overhaul, actual development is very good. Players grow according to ice time, role and within the parameters of potential. None of those things are guaranteed though, which is good. It would be a bad sim if you could simply don't same thing with every player and that would gaurantee they see growth. Sometimes, despite doing all the right things, a top 5 draft pick is a bust, both in real life and in a game. Just like sometimes, that Low Top 9 forward from the 5th round becomes a star. Some players respond better to playing above their suggested role, while some suffer from being called up too soon. I asked Ben about this and he told me that when a player gets called up can have a major impact on a players growth. So it's a cornucopia of things that make up player development. If your argument is "player development is broken because I ran up huge scores with ridiculous point totals and it didn't grow my player 35+ ovr points" then we have a different view of what makes good player development for the game. Which is cool, it's just different. I however, think player development is one of the things the game does very well.

    As far as the sim engine goes, it could definitely use some improvement, it's far from the broken mess you make it out to be. In the tons of seasons I have simulated I find in most of them, the good teams end up in or near the spot they should be.

    See I feel the complete opposite. Like I said with Panarin... The guy was undrafted, teams passed over him obviously because nobody saw the potential in him. Now Ea after his rookie season had him at what? An 87 or 88 overall? That's with 30 goals and 70 something points. So why in the real NHL does a player show up out of nowhere, have a great year, and in the next release has a player rating given by EA to show that. Whereas in their franchise mode, I can't take an undrafted player and do the same thing?

    You saying that you could just crank up all the sliders and have a great season with your whole team and rank them all up to high overalls is also not a very good argument. I mean, not only would you be forced to trade the majority away at contract time due to the cap and the salaries a team of 90 overall players would want, but who would play 82 game seasons with the sliders tuned making the game beyond easy, it wouldn't be any fun.

    You saying my a player with 3 100+ point NHL seasons getting a rating boost of 13 points but being a low enough overall to not even crack an ahl roster is ridiculous.

    Do you know why some players in real life drafted in the first round are sometimes a bust, and some players nobody expected to be a star that got drafted in late rounds, or went undrafted? It's because players get ranked by scouts based on their junior careers, at 17-18 years old, players are not on their prime and have not peaked. 100% of what makes a real nhl superstar is what they can do on the ice. Do you think nhl coaches or GMs are going to tell a 50 goal scorer "sorry when you were 18 years old the scouts told us you could only play in the ahl", No, 3 50 goal seasons would make a player a superstar and I guarantee EA would give that player a 90+ overall in the game.

    Yeah, but your whole premise is taking a player and putting up absurdly unrealistic numbers with him and expecting the game to have mechanics to respond to that. How do you get that player to 100 points, a number that the highest rated players in the game struggle to get to when games are simulated? You must have played the games because there is no way a sub 80 something player simulated to over 100 points. So the only answer is that you cheesed it. You ran up the score while playing the CPU to create unrealistic stats, and you expect the game to have a mechanic in place to compensate for your cheesing of it's core systems. That's ridiculous. You obviously made the game beyond easy because you had a sub 70 ovr player score over 100 points. I just created a team with all sub 70 guys and simmed and entire season and the team won 9 games and the leading scorer had 16 goals and 41 points.

    Also, your "you would have to trade them because of the salary cap argument doesn't work because who cares? You can just cheese another player to 90 over in their place, and you will receive major assets in picks or prospects when you trade those players.

    In truth your whole experiment doesn't speak to the quality of player development in the game at all. You created an absurd situation and expected the game to respond in a certain way. The game is built to operate on certain rules. When you cheat to break those rules and then say "It didn't respond to my cheating like I wanted!" That doesn't mean that mechanic is badly designed.
  • DeejNYLV wrote: »
    DeejNYLV wrote: »
    So, with having unbearable lag online, offline has been the only way to get my hockey fix as painful as it's been to play against AI. The main reason I did it was to test if what actually happens over the course of a season has any effect on the outcome of your team/players.

    So what I did was created the Vegas Franchise, and made the entire team just 50-55 overall, 18 year old players playing their first season in the league, all being ahl potential players. I played on all-star settings (3 minute periods) and played all 82 games as well as winning the cup in all 3 of the seasons i played.

    Here's the top player for all 3 seasons, i had 4 other players with very similar stats with the same outcomes

    Brayden Burke -
    S1 - 55 overall, scores 113 points
    S2 - 62 overall, scores 109 points
    S3 - 64 overall, scores 121 points

    At the season 4 start he is 68 overall... That's 343 points in 246 GP during regular season games, as well as 3 Stanley cups and tons of awards, yet because he has the "AHL potential" that ea gave him, what he actually does on the ice has zero impact on his development.

    Same goes for the goalie as well. 3 seasons below a 1.2 GAA and above . 900%, leading the league by a mile in wins, as well as the 3 Stanley cups and he goes from a 52 overall to a 58 overall after 3 seasons.

    The mode is a joke and absolutely pointless to play when the ONLY thing that matters is their potential rating given before they even play a single game in their nhl career. The sad part is there isn't even any rhyme or reason to when someone has an elite potential anyways, sometimes they can grow to 90+ and other times an elite potential will cap out at 86 overall.

    Also i would like to mention the fact that with Burke scoring 113 points in season 1 while playing 1st line center, a player I had scratched the whole season had grown more in the player growth menu than Burke did without even playing a game (while having the same ahl potential rating).

    Not only is the player development brutal, but so is the sim engine itself. All 3 seasons I played, had the penguins at the bottom 10 in the standings, as well as Vancouver Arizona and buffalo finishing the 1st season near the top of the league. Anyone who watched 2BC stream the other week saw him take the eastern all stars into a playoff sim and lose the 1st round 4 games to 1 against Minnesota. There's absolutely no consistency with the mode and it doesn't matter what kind of team you build or what happens on this ice with the players and their season stats.

    Ea is under the impression that the only star players in the NHL were drafted with top 5 picks I guess...


    I have played out several franchise modes through the entire 25 seasons and on ice performance does affect growth and players can absolutely outshine their potential as I have had AHL top 6 forward potential players reach 88 ovr. On ice performance though is only a part of development. Your top player started at 55 and he is now a 68, that's 13 points of growth. Now, without the great on ice performance, he probably is a 59 or a 61. I'm sure there is a cap on how much the on ice performance can grow a player because otherwise people could just draft anyone, put the shooting sliders up in the 60s and the CPU goalie sliders down in the 60s and run up huge point totals to get a team full of 90+ ovr players.

    While scouting needs an overhaul, actual development is very good. Players grow according to ice time, role and within the parameters of potential. None of those things are guaranteed though, which is good. It would be a bad sim if you could simply don't same thing with every player and that would gaurantee they see growth. Sometimes, despite doing all the right things, a top 5 draft pick is a bust, both in real life and in a game. Just like sometimes, that Low Top 9 forward from the 5th round becomes a star. Some players respond better to playing above their suggested role, while some suffer from being called up too soon. I asked Ben about this and he told me that when a player gets called up can have a major impact on a players growth. So it's a cornucopia of things that make up player development. If your argument is "player development is broken because I ran up huge scores with ridiculous point totals and it didn't grow my player 35+ ovr points" then we have a different view of what makes good player development for the game. Which is cool, it's just different. I however, think player development is one of the things the game does very well.

    As far as the sim engine goes, it could definitely use some improvement, it's far from the broken mess you make it out to be. In the tons of seasons I have simulated I find in most of them, the good teams end up in or near the spot they should be.

    See I feel the complete opposite. Like I said with Panarin... The guy was undrafted, teams passed over him obviously because nobody saw the potential in him. Now Ea after his rookie season had him at what? An 87 or 88 overall? That's with 30 goals and 70 something points. So why in the real NHL does a player show up out of nowhere, have a great year, and in the next release has a player rating given by EA to show that. Whereas in their franchise mode, I can't take an undrafted player and do the same thing?

    You saying that you could just crank up all the sliders and have a great season with your whole team and rank them all up to high overalls is also not a very good argument. I mean, not only would you be forced to trade the majority away at contract time due to the cap and the salaries a team of 90 overall players would want, but who would play 82 game seasons with the sliders tuned making the game beyond easy, it wouldn't be any fun.

    You saying my a player with 3 100+ point NHL seasons getting a rating boost of 13 points but being a low enough overall to not even crack an ahl roster is ridiculous.

    Do you know why some players in real life drafted in the first round are sometimes a bust, and some players nobody expected to be a star that got drafted in late rounds, or went undrafted? It's because players get ranked by scouts based on their junior careers, at 17-18 years old, players are not on their prime and have not peaked. 100% of what makes a real nhl superstar is what they can do on the ice. Do you think nhl coaches or GMs are going to tell a 50 goal scorer "sorry when you were 18 years old the scouts told us you could only play in the ahl", No, 3 50 goal seasons would make a player a superstar and I guarantee EA would give that player a 90+ overall in the game.

    Yeah, but your whole premise is taking a player and putting up absurdly unrealistic numbers with him and expecting the game to have mechanics to respond to that. How do you get that player to 100 points, a number that the highest rated players in the game struggle to get to when games are simulated? You must have played the games because there is no way a sub 80 something player simulated to over 100 points. So the only answer is that you cheesed it. You ran up the score while playing the CPU to create unrealistic stats, and you expect the game to have a mechanic in place to compensate for your cheesing of it's core systems. That's ridiculous. You obviously made the game beyond easy because you had a sub 70 ovr player score over 100 points. I just created a team with all sub 70 guys and simmed and entire season and the team won 9 games and the leading scorer had 16 goals and 41 points.

    Also, your "you would have to trade them because of the salary cap argument doesn't work because who cares? You can just cheese another player to 90 over in their place, and you will receive major assets in picks or prospects when you trade those players.

    In truth your whole experiment doesn't speak to the quality of player development in the game at all. You created an absurd situation and expected the game to respond in a certain way. The game is built to operate on certain rules. When you cheat to break those rules and then say "It didn't respond to my cheating like I wanted!" That doesn't mean that mechanic is badly designed.

    I had said that I actually played the games on all star settings. The reason I did this was because going 82-0-0 using a real team would get boring, as it stands with a team of 50-60 overall players I was losing like 5-10 games each season.

    How this is creating an absurd situation I have no idea. I'm not scoring 100+ points with all 18 skaters on the team. This is besides the point though, whatever argument you make doesn't change the fact that a players potential rating given to them is what they are stuck with and can never develop beyond that no matter what they actually accomplish on the ice. If you're cool with that then good for You, I just find it makes the mode pointless to play.

    Almost everything in the mode has no rhyme or reason to it. Morale is another example, my team wins game 3 of the Stanley cup final to go up 3-0, and somehow the locker room chemistry drops, like really? Guess my players were upset they are now 1 game from the cup. I go to sign a free agent at the end of the season after winning a cup, locker room chemistry is at 91%, and he tells me something along the lines of having disfunctional locker room.

    It's all set in stone, get your players potential rating, grow them till they cap at age 16, watch them decline once 31-32 years old, then retire at 35-38, with no reasoning for most of what happens throughout their career. I really don't see how you find the mode ok the way it is
  • b24hhh wrote: »
    The AI is worse with gameplay, but I agree that it's flawed anyway. EA seems to think that when a player reaches the age of 26, they don't grow anymore, and begin to decline instead. I think that is total ****. Players grow until they get the age of 30. That's because it's the prime of their body + brains. It's true that it's downhill on their body after 26, but they still grow their brains, and can do that until death.

    Players quit NHL, because younger players are fitting better under the teams cap limit. It's just that the other leagues that you have in NHL game can't get the former NHL players that are free agents, and EA has to accelerate the retirement of players to get rid of too many free agents, that won't fit under cap limit.

    Also, any European player won't be playing in AHL after they don't get an NHL contract, because they want to support the league in their home countries, or play in KHL to get the money they think they deserve.

    I think the part I highlighted is my biggest beef with how EA handles the skill degeneration. Offensive awareness and defensive awareness should NEVER decline. What great player in the NHL forgets how to play hockey as they age? They get slower, maybe can't hit or shoot as well, but their awareness - their hockey sense - shouldn't decline.
  • They should just switch to XP system. Every players gets XP depending on what he does on ice. Gets extra XP for reaching milestones, getting rewards, etc... You spend that XP wherever you want, price of attributes goes up as the player gets older. Their potential should be going up or downs based on their performance. Everyone happy.
  • Assisted_NHL
    114 posts Member
    edited June 2017
    Milanpop87 wrote: »
    They should just switch to XP system. Every players gets XP depending on what he does on ice. Gets extra XP for reaching milestones, getting rewards, etc... You spend that XP wherever you want, price of attributes goes up as the player gets older. Their potential should be going up or downs based on their performance. Everyone happy.

    Exactly. How anyone can argue the fact that a proven 3 season 100+ point scorer in the NHL seems ok rated in the 60s overall is beyond me. Sorry, but in a mode that's all about drafting, and developing players, but having the players on ice performance during their career mean nothing is a joke to me.

    I mean, if that's the case, I'm guessing some people would be ok with be a pro mode randomly assigning you a potential rating and you just have to deal with staying as a 60 overall no matter how you play or what you accomplish in a season
  • Workin_OT
    469 posts Member
    edited June 2017
    If default franchise mode isn't set up in such a way that caters to the way you like to run it, there is plenty of sliders and tweaking you can do to make it work for you..

    In this case, adjust player potentials. Problem solved, eh bud? ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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