EA Forums - Banner

NHL 20 CHEL NOTES - HUT Deep dive


Andrew Marks HUT Producer and Nicholas Shewchuk Live Content Producer discuss HUT in NHL 20.
Check it out here.

EA NHL 19 is garbage.

12345679Next

Replies

  • Sgt_Kelso
    1096 posts Member
    edited April 22
    I can understand that there's a downside to each defensive move like hitting, poking, extending your stick and stick-lift - this is a video game after all. Se there needs to be risk involved with each reward, I guess. Since penalties are a part of the game, they need to be in somehow.

    And if you do defensive tools by separating penalty worthy moves (ie. 'get a penalty button') and legal moves, then hardly anyone will use the former on purpose, unless in dire situation, like stopping breakaways. I am mean, who would use a 'slash button' on purpose? So they keep buttons relatively few and simple, and make them situational, ie. if you're in a good place when pressing X etc., you don't get a penalty. (And I suppose discipline affects this too?)

    It's tuning these defensive tools that now need some work. Stick-lifting is way too good right now, you get stick lifted multiple times these days, starting even before you get a puck. I've performed stick-lifts to counter stick-lifts, so the opponent can't get to a puck etc. It's rather horrible right now.

    Likewise, I was among the ones who liked the way little bumps dislodge the puck and make you lose posession a while back when we discussed the various patches. I am not so sure anymore. It's making it impossible to do anything with the puck, coupled with stick lifting.

    What is more, I'd like to see the devs do something about bumping and obstructing players who don't have the puck. This way too common now, and can really hinder and slow you down. Many times these would warrant a penalty, imho. Just because you don't use the hit stick, doens't mean you're not obstructing a guy. Especially big players who ram you at speed. Even the AI does this, for goodness sake! Do something about it, will ya?
  • using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference
  • NHLDev
    1306 posts NHL Developer
    using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference

    This is done by design. Having an action the User controls allows us to understand intent. There is a big difference between running into someone at high speed accidentally without awareness to avoid, running into someone while trying to avoid and actively trying to hit and drive through them.

    Interference penalty calls are a separate piece as they can assess the situation the same way an official would in a real world game based on intent and outcome in the logic. There can always be improvements made to logic for calls that fall into a more subjective territory in the same way referees in real life have people argue calls of that nature in the real world NHL as well.
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference

    This is done by design. Having an action the User controls allows us to understand intent. There is a big difference between running into someone at high speed accidentally without awareness to avoid, running into someone while trying to avoid and actively trying to hit and drive through them.

    Interference penalty calls are a separate piece as they can assess the situation the same way an official would in a real world game based on intent and outcome in the logic. There can always be improvements made to logic for calls that fall into a more subjective territory in the same way referees in real life have people argue calls of that nature in the real world NHL as well.

    without wasting time arguing how much subjectivity there is in real hockey interference calls. I would argue that you actually get the exact opposite of what you are trying for in EA NHL.

    First, IMO, there are two types of interference calls in this game. Guys charging a puck carrier and then finishing their check too late after the puck is gone. And the other WAY more common type, using hitstick "accidentally" and just hitting some random player on the ice...i'm sure almost always unintentional.

    On the flip side, as long as you don't hit that right thumb stick, you can skate around the ice intentionally interfering with players all over the place and you will never get a call. Even if you are a 6-4 250lb enforcer and you just flatten a small player to the ice, you will not get called.

    I understand it may be very difficult to do it properly, and thats why i've accepted it as just a part of the game. but you are getting the opposite of the desired affect. its very easy to interfere intentionally all over the ice and never get a penalty. only interference calls are almost always accidental.

    I would ask, why does the right thumb stick "hit stick" even target non puck carriers? Couldn't the logic be updated to ignore non puck carriers?
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference

    This is done by design. Having an action the User controls allows us to understand intent. There is a big difference between running into someone at high speed accidentally without awareness to avoid, running into someone while trying to avoid and actively trying to hit and drive through them.

    Interference penalty calls are a separate piece as they can assess the situation the same way an official would in a real world game based on intent and outcome in the logic. There can always be improvements made to logic for calls that fall into a more subjective territory in the same way referees in real life have people argue calls of that nature in the real world NHL as well.

    without wasting time arguing how much subjectivity there is in real hockey interference calls. I would argue that you actually get the exact opposite of what you are trying for in EA NHL.

    First, IMO, there are two types of interference calls in this game. Guys charging a puck carrier and then finishing their check too late after the puck is gone. And the other WAY more common type, using hitstick "accidentally" and just hitting some random player on the ice...i'm sure almost always unintentional.

    On the flip side, as long as you don't hit that right thumb stick, you can skate around the ice intentionally interfering with players all over the place and you will never get a call. Even if you are a 6-4 250lb enforcer and you just flatten a small player to the ice, you will not get called.

    I understand it may be very difficult to do it properly, and thats why i've accepted it as just a part of the game. but you are getting the opposite of the desired affect. its very easy to interfere intentionally all over the ice and never get a penalty. only interference calls are almost always accidental.

    I would ask, why does the right thumb stick "hit stick" even target non puck carriers? Couldn't the logic be updated to ignore non puck carriers?

    There is a 3rd way to get interference penalties. If the other team has somebody gooning it up checking our players a lot they usually run around with their arms up because they never let go of the stick. I will step in front of a check meant for somebody else any chance they give me to send them to the box :wink:
  • jrago73 wrote: »
    NHLDev wrote: »
    using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference

    This is done by design. Having an action the User controls allows us to understand intent. There is a big difference between running into someone at high speed accidentally without awareness to avoid, running into someone while trying to avoid and actively trying to hit and drive through them.

    Interference penalty calls are a separate piece as they can assess the situation the same way an official would in a real world game based on intent and outcome in the logic. There can always be improvements made to logic for calls that fall into a more subjective territory in the same way referees in real life have people argue calls of that nature in the real world NHL as well.

    without wasting time arguing how much subjectivity there is in real hockey interference calls. I would argue that you actually get the exact opposite of what you are trying for in EA NHL.

    First, IMO, there are two types of interference calls in this game. Guys charging a puck carrier and then finishing their check too late after the puck is gone. And the other WAY more common type, using hitstick "accidentally" and just hitting some random player on the ice...i'm sure almost always unintentional.

    On the flip side, as long as you don't hit that right thumb stick, you can skate around the ice intentionally interfering with players all over the place and you will never get a call. Even if you are a 6-4 250lb enforcer and you just flatten a small player to the ice, you will not get called.

    I understand it may be very difficult to do it properly, and thats why i've accepted it as just a part of the game. but you are getting the opposite of the desired affect. its very easy to interfere intentionally all over the ice and never get a penalty. only interference calls are almost always accidental.

    I would ask, why does the right thumb stick "hit stick" even target non puck carriers? Couldn't the logic be updated to ignore non puck carriers?

    There is a 3rd way to get interference penalties. If the other team has somebody gooning it up checking our players a lot they usually run around with their arms up because they never let go of the stick. I will step in front of a check meant for somebody else any chance they give me to send them to the box :wink:

    agreed... although i would put that in the "accident" category
  • Agreed
  • NHLDev wrote: »
    using a "hit stick" instead of just using physics is a major problem with the game. i have to assume they know its not the best way but feel it would be a struggle to make hitting a natural thing based purely on physics and then be able to properly call interference

    This is done by design. Having an action the User controls allows us to understand intent. There is a big difference between running into someone at high speed accidentally without awareness to avoid, running into someone while trying to avoid and actively trying to hit and drive through them.

    Interference penalty calls are a separate piece as they can assess the situation the same way an official would in a real world game based on intent and outcome in the logic. There can always be improvements made to logic for calls that fall into a more subjective territory in the same way referees in real life have people argue calls of that nature in the real world NHL as well.

    without wasting time arguing how much subjectivity there is in real hockey interference calls. I would argue that you actually get the exact opposite of what you are trying for in EA NHL.

    First, IMO, there are two types of interference calls in this game. Guys charging a puck carrier and then finishing their check too late after the puck is gone. And the other WAY more common type, using hitstick "accidentally" and just hitting some random player on the ice...i'm sure almost always unintentional.

    On the flip side, as long as you don't hit that right thumb stick, you can skate around the ice intentionally interfering with players all over the place and you will never get a call. Even if you are a 6-4 250lb enforcer and you just flatten a small player to the ice, you will not get called.

    I understand it may be very difficult to do it properly, and thats why i've accepted it as just a part of the game. but you are getting the opposite of the desired affect. its very easy to interfere intentionally all over the ice and never get a penalty. only interference calls are almost always accidental.

    I would ask, why does the right thumb stick "hit stick" even target non puck carriers? Couldn't the logic be updated to ignore non puck carriers?

    My club calls those “picks” like the ones in the NBA. By definition it’s interference and everyone seems to do them. Really annoying honestly. Like you said, you can flatten people without use RS and still not a penalty. I ain’t gonna lie, we do them too.
  • yeah at different times this game has really struggled with calling interference. to promote "in front of net battles" they used to allow just destroying anyone that got within 10 feet of the goalie. those days were fun. i remember back checking was basically steam rolling anyone that dared to setup for a one timer and running them all the way to the boards.

    Then they added real net battles to be like board battles but out in open ice. essentially taking a horrible mechanic like board battles and allowing it out in the slot and without a puck carrier. like defenders were a magnet that could just suck players in and not allow them to do anything for long periods of time.

    same old story, just have to work around it

    I've suggested this many times in the past. I see no reason why you should be able to "HIT" a player that doesn't have the puck. Sure as hell would fix all the noobs that crash the net and get 5 min interference calls when they are actually trying to slam home a rebound or one timer and dont hold L2.
  • Since we have a Dev in here answering questions. I have two.

    1. Was it the intention of the team that the LT backwards skating/spasming would become the meta at the highest levels of this game? If not, why has this not been fixed and why was it not caught in testing? This is single handedly ruining this game.

    2. Is there any way the team for next year can make it so it very rarely happens that a poke checked puck goes directly back to the puck carrier 70% of the time? It seems counterintuitive to nerf poke check so much and also make it so when you actually do connect it does not matter anyway (and in fact usually puts the puck carrier in a better scoring position than he was before the poke connected).
  • apperos76 wrote: »
    Since we have a Dev in here answering questions. I have two.

    2. Is there any way the team for next year can make it so it very rarely happens that a poke checked puck goes directly back to the puck carrier 70% of the time? It seems counterintuitive to nerf poke check so much and also make it so when you actually do connect it does not matter anyway (and in fact usually puts the puck carrier in a better scoring position than he was before the poke connected).

    best i can tell, the reason so many pokes end up with the carrier keeping the puck is usually because it seems to register as hitting the stick first instead of puck. The carrier, who is not in the middle of doing something just instantly retains the puck while the defender is still in the act of poking. This seems to be new this year. i don't know how many 100s of times i've attacked a puck carrier from the front, poked right into the puck, hear the sound, only to see nothing more than a little stutter by their stick and they just keep going with the puck.

    Some of this is also why L2 abuse is so successful. So often when someone stick checks a carrier doing this, the puck goes no where and they just keep possession of the puck, even skating through multiple defenders. My theory is because all of those players are actively poking/stick lifting and as such can't gain possession.

    as usual in these situations the best way to defend is literally to face hug them, home you bump them off the puck but basically do nothing. often waiting for auto animations or whatever to kick in and just steal the puck from them while you are literally doing nothing more then sitting in their hip pocket.
  • EpiCxOwNeD
    580 posts Member
    edited April 27
    apperos76 wrote: »
    Since we have a Dev in here answering questions. I have two.

    1. Was it the intention of the team that the LT backwards skating/spasming would become the meta at the highest levels of this game? If not, why has this not been fixed and why was it not caught in testing? This is single handedly ruining this game.

    2. Is there any way the team for next year can make it so it very rarely happens that a poke checked puck goes directly back to the puck carrier 70% of the time? It seems counterintuitive to nerf poke check so much and also make it so when you actually do connect it does not matter anyway (and in fact usually puts the puck carrier in a better scoring position than he was before the poke connected).


    Or somehow it goes to a opposing teammate a lot of times you poke? I have video about this where I make stick on stick contact then poke the loose puck but it goes through my stick into the slot for a goal.

    https://gamerdvr.com/gamer/epicxowned/video/73685796

    Full speed video. Nothing seems wrong huh? Let’s check it out in slow mo.

    https://gamerdvr.com/gamer/epicxowned/video/73685797

    As you clearly see, I went to poke the loose puck out only for it to go through my stick and find his Ai in the slot for a goal.
  • I don't get it, but I'm leaning towards EA just being lazy or not having enough hockey knowledge, but in all the years you've been making this game how can you not have an animation or action for when you grab a loose puck after you hit someone on the ice to have your player lift one of his legs to avoid the player on the ice after he grabs the puck. So many times you grab the puck and start trying to skate away while the other guy is flat on the ice because you just decked him and then your outside skate bumps his legs and now your guy is tripping all over the place to just lose the puck and let the guy you just checked get up and take it right back from you. This logic has made no sense for so many years, how a player can't lift one of his legs to avoid the contact of a player laying on the ice just baffles me, little things like this imo shows the lack of hockey knowledge in EA developers or just pure ignorance on their part.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!