EA Forums - Banner

Poke Check Nerf/removal.

While watching the NHL the pokecheck is much to powerful. It’s extremely useful as a dman, however it kills the flow of the game.

Defensive Skill Stick should replace the normal poke check. Still allow the ability to play the body but, if you watch the NHL defensive players getting a pokecheck on the puck is so rare it’s almost more useful to angle people off with the stick.

Replies

  • llamaverox
    31 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    I’m also a dman, so I know what this is implying. However the ability for Dmen like myself to completely shut down players ever getting into the zone is a bit too much. Make positioning on D more important.

    The Defensive Skill stick should be adapted to allow for more nuanced movement. However the ability of players to poke check everything near them off is so unrealistic to the NHL.
  • HandsomeCatf1sh
    1707 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    Not if the offensive player plays the right angle,protects the puck or holds the stick away or even...*gasp* ...pass or dump the puck. It’s pretty easy to draw a penalty against poke happy d-men.
    Most players don’t do that...not the games fault.
    Offensive is OP, always has been in this series.
    So let’s not talk about nerfing anything defense related...ok guys. Thanks :)
  • Play better O
  • EASHL, I guess it's alright...???
    But there's something wrong with pokes, sometimes they will run straight through opponents stick, other times they will stop the puck dead in its tracks or send it across the rink, there's no telling what will happen. Sometimes poking from behind rewards you with a well deserved penalty, other times it fetches the puck back for you, you're just raking it in.
    Sometimes, if it goes through someone's legs, it is rendered as it never happened, other times it's a clear penalty. Just like goals being disallowed 'cause someone was close to the goalie, what's a trip and what's negated is extremely unclear.
    Not to take away anything from D, but still, I think poke-checks needs a ton of tuning.
  • HandsomeCatf1sh
    1707 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    SpillGal wrote: »
    EASHL, I guess it's alright...???
    But there's something wrong with pokes, sometimes they will run straight through opponents stick, other times they will stop the puck dead in its tracks or send it across the rink, there's no telling what will happen. Sometimes poking from behind rewards you with a well deserved penalty, other times it fetches the puck back for you, you're just raking it in.
    Sometimes, if it goes through someone's legs, it is rendered as it never happened, other times it's a clear penalty. Just like goals being disallowed 'cause someone was close to the goalie, what's a trip and what's negated is extremely unclear.
    Not to take away anything from D, but still, I think poke-checks needs a ton of tuning.
    Also what you see happening in real-time May look like something else SHOULD of happened.
    The only way to really analyze this, is too look at everything you question in replay over the course of 3 games or so...to really get a grasp of what should or shouldn’t of happened.

    In my finding the game gets it right 9/10 times.
    Of course there are some **** moments,(in which there are many veriables ...lag...player builds...just the game messing up ..etc.) Overall I think I (we) tend to get mad and then look at the replay and go... “oh, ok I see what happened.” And it makes sense. (Most of the time.)
    Post edited by HandsomeCatf1sh on
  • That’s not my concern with the poke check at all. My concern is the ability to close distance with offensive players and the ability to poke off with such percision that the neutral zone turns into a cluster over 1 player setting up and reaching out in a 360 degree radius to wherever the puck is. It’s just not realistic.
  • Which I am referring to EASHL, I play great offense. So the play better O isn’t really an issue for me. The concerns over puck pickups and passing is another issue entirely that I could devote an entire thread to. This is a suggestion to make the pokecheck harder to perform. Whether you agree or not, that’s fine. However being able to get close to players carrying the puck poke between their legs with almost 80% of the time effienciency even if they have body control. It’s dumb honestly.
  • Bmh245
    905 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    SpillGal wrote: »
    EASHL, I guess it's alright...???
    But there's something wrong with pokes, sometimes they will run straight through opponents stick, other times they will stop the puck dead in its tracks or send it across the rink, there's no telling what will happen. Sometimes poking from behind rewards you with a well deserved penalty, other times it fetches the puck back for you, you're just raking it in.
    Sometimes, if it goes through someone's legs, it is rendered as it never happened, other times it's a clear penalty.

    This is exactly right. It's the complete inconsistency that's so frustrating. Tripping penalties are the most obvious - and egregious - example, since the game regularly allows people to put their sticks into people's skates/legs without calling anything, only to turn around and call tripping when a stick grazes a player's skates. But there are also the ghost pokes, the pokes that hit the puck and do nothing (even when the stick hasn't gone through a player's legs), the successful pokes through players' bodies, the magic stick-puck physics, and so on.

    And the idea that the game gets these things "right" - which is to say, that the game applies its physical and mechanical rules consistently - 9 out of 10 times is crazy.
    Post edited by Bmh245 on
  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    And the idea that the game gets these things "right" - which is to say, that the game applies its physical and mechanical rules consistently - 9 out of 10 times is crazy.

    If something happens 90% of the time, doesn't that show consistency?

    Keep in mind there are player ratings as well. The various attributes are at play. Discipline, poke checking, etc. How many of those pokes that don't hit the puck are passing through the player's legs/skates first? You can't affect the puck when that happens. EA turned up tripping penalties a couple years ago and the community freaked out because they couldn't adjust. They fixed poke spam and everyone cried out when they couldn't change how they play and poke more appropriately. They changed it back after a couple days due to community outrage. Once again, this makes me feel like this community asks for realism, but wants an arcade game.


  • Lol, git gud.

    Seriously though, pass the puck bro.
  • If poke checking is over powered for defensive purposes then its over powered for offensive purposes too.

    It goes both ways.
  • It's already too easy for offense to draw the puck back and create a near invincible stance that allows the typical 180 for a pass or dump thats not impeded at all.

    The defensive skill stick mixed with a poke check gives you some what of a less predictable defensive strategy.

    If they really nerf a standard poke you'll be stuck with only a defensive skill stick that is prone to tripping penalties and even more abuse of the invincibility puck holding stances.
  • Bmh245 wrote: »
    SpillGal wrote: »
    EASHL, I guess it's alright...???
    But there's something wrong with pokes, sometimes they will run straight through opponents stick, other times they will stop the puck dead in its tracks or send it across the rink, there's no telling what will happen. Sometimes poking from behind rewards you with a well deserved penalty, other times it fetches the puck back for you, you're just raking it in.
    Sometimes, if it goes through someone's legs, it is rendered as it never happened, other times it's a clear penalty.

    This is exactly right. It's the complete inconsistency that's so frustrating. Tripping penalties are the most obvious - and egregious - example, since the game regularly allows people to put their sticks into people's skates/legs without calling anything, only to turn around and call tripping when a stick grazes a player's skates. But there are also the ghost pokes, the pokes that hit the puck and do nothing (even when the stick hasn't gone through a player's legs), the successful pokes through players' bodies, the magic stick-puck physics, and so on.

    And the idea that the game gets these things "right" - which is to say, that the game applies its physical and mechanical rules consistently - 9 out of 10 times is crazy.

    The inconsistency of “tripping” penalties is one of the things that annoys me the most. One never knows when they’re called or not right or wrong.

    Also the coaches feedback/evaluation is ****. Since when does the NHL rules for tripping state you can’t put your stick (poke check) in between or within a stick length of yourself and the puck carrier like EA states?

    It doesn’t.

    Rule 57 – Tripping
    57.1 Tripping – A player shall not place the stick, knee, foot, arm, hand or
    elbow in such a manner that causes his opponent to trip or fall.
    Accidental trips which occur simultaneously with a completed play will not be penalized. Accidental trips occurring simultaneously with or after a stoppage of play will not be penalized.
    57.2 Minor Penalty - A minor penalty shall be imposed on any player who shall place his stick or any portion of his body in such a manner that it shall cause his opponent to trip and fall.

    These rules are actually very vague. My player can be at a complete standstill while holding my dss out and if an opposing player skates into my stick and trips/falls I receive a penalty for tripping.

    That would be like illegally trying to cross the road (J-walking) and getting hit by a car and then charging the driver which would be **** in my opinion too.
  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    mhandymanb wrote: »
    The inconsistency of “tripping” penalties is one of the things that annoys me the most. One never knows when they’re called or not right or wrong.

    This is why you see so much poke spam. You have to expect the trip though. It will happen if you're spamming away. I think the problem is that it's pretty easy to poke and people are used to carrying the puck through traffic like they did in the last generation of games. You could poke away and the carrier would very frequently get it back. Now forwards have to be conscious of this and make a solid effort to protect the puck. If you're not going to do that, you're going to lose the puck. There is skill in protecting and moving the puck. The poke is OP from behind, but from other angles, it's fine. Again, you want the poke check spam resolved, make tripping count a lot more. That upsets people too much and they don't want to adjust so you're probably going to have to be happy with how it is.

    The issue with sticks passing through legs has been discussed thoroughly here. Again though, make it cause a trip every time and you guys will get the pitchforks out.

  • llamaverox
    31 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    Once again this isn't about my ability to play offense or my ability to pass the puck. I'm arguing my own defensive capabilities are extremely over powered. There is no reason I should be able to poke puck with 100% percision when a person has body position and are angling the puck away. Once again it's urealistic for the 4th time without that being addressed.
  • mhandymanb
    408 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    Sinbin wrote: »
    mhandymanb wrote: »
    The inconsistency of “tripping” penalties is one of the things that annoys me the most. One never knows when they’re called or not right or wrong.

    This is why you see so much poke spam. You have to expect the trip though. It will happen if you're spamming away. I think the problem is that it's pretty easy to poke and people are used to carrying the puck through traffic like they did in the last generation of games. You could poke away and the carrier would very frequently get it back. Now forwards have to be conscious of this and make a solid effort to protect the puck. If you're not going to do that, you're going to lose the puck. There is skill in protecting and moving the puck. The poke is OP from behind, but from other angles, it's fine. Again, you want the poke check spam resolved, make tripping count a lot more. That upsets people too much and they don't want to adjust so you're probably going to have to be happy with how it is.

    The issue with sticks passing through legs has been discussed thoroughly here. Again though, make it cause a trip every time and you guys will get the pitchforks out.

    It’s the inconsistency with the poke checks and DSS that I have a problem with. Often right or wrong “tripping” penalties occur or not. Sometimes poke checks happen through skates/legs or not.

    As a dman, I can make a perfect poke check and the opposing player still easily gets the puck back.

    Poke checks always seem to end up in great situations for the opposing team.

    I’ve seen great poke checks from the attacking team in the offensive zone that redirect perfectly to the defending team for an easy odd man rush or breakaway for the other team.

    Or how many times have we seen poke checks from defending players that redirect perfectly to an open offensive player for an easy goal?

    Or even the what seems like quite often a defensive player makes a poke check that somehow redirects into his own net.

    Obviously those are due to lousy puck physics which are very annoying and sometimes makes it feel like in certain situations EA is trying to force something to happen.

    This game just doesn’t feel natural.

  • Sinbin
    1331 posts Member
    mhandymanb wrote: »
    Sinbin wrote: »
    mhandymanb wrote: »
    The inconsistency of “tripping” penalties is one of the things that annoys me the most. One never knows when they’re called or not right or wrong.

    This is why you see so much poke spam. You have to expect the trip though. It will happen if you're spamming away. I think the problem is that it's pretty easy to poke and people are used to carrying the puck through traffic like they did in the last generation of games. You could poke away and the carrier would very frequently get it back. Now forwards have to be conscious of this and make a solid effort to protect the puck. If you're not going to do that, you're going to lose the puck. There is skill in protecting and moving the puck. The poke is OP from behind, but from other angles, it's fine. Again, you want the poke check spam resolved, make tripping count a lot more. That upsets people too much and they don't want to adjust so you're probably going to have to be happy with how it is.

    The issue with sticks passing through legs has been discussed thoroughly here. Again though, make it cause a trip every time and you guys will get the pitchforks out.

    As a dman, I can make a perfect poke check and the opposing player still easily gets the puck back.

    Poke checks always seem to end up in great situations for the opposing team.

    I’ve seen great poke checks from the attacking team in the offensive zone that redirect perfectly to the defending team for an easy odd man rush or breakaway for the other team.

    Or how many times have we seen poke checks from defending players that redirect perfectly to an open offensive player for an easy goal?

    Or even the what seems like quite often a defensive player makes a poke check that somehow redirects into his own net.

    Obviously those are due to lousy puck physics which are very annoying and sometimes makes it feel like in certain situations EA is trying to force something to happen.

    This game just doesn’t feel natural.

    You'd have to look at how the puck reacts to the area of the blade, consider it's trajectory and speed as well as other objects it's coming in contact with. If you roll back the video of it, the majority of the time it looks natural. I know, it's frustrating. I've had many pokes go back to the carrier, but I've also had many of them result in a turn over. Often times the puck is poked away, but the carrier is able to reach out and pick it up. It depends on the situation. I'm definitely not saying that every poke is perfect and this system doesn't need work at all though. There's always room for improvement.
  • We agree that the pull back needs to be nerfed. However the ability to close the distance with players with speed is also stupid. Just because one is handling the puck shouldn't slow them down and allow the defender to catch up. Also extremely unrealistic. I actually complained about that in the beta. As I was having trouble keeping up with puck carriers. Which was just a bias on my part for being able to play **** D for years.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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