EA Forums - Banner

NHL 20 Content Update December 5th

Replies

  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager

    I'll give you some feedback...

    The server-side patch you dropped today actually makes multiplayer games playable for defensemen. It was very refreshing playing a test Drop-In 6's game just now as a left defenseman. We'll see how it is against an LG team (with their LT puck control madness) in 6's club.

    Kudo's to you guys on the patch today. Is it perfect? No (it never will be), but again, multiplayer games are actually playable now.

    Good job.

    Thanks. That's good to hear. Out of curiosity, what made the game unplayable as a defender previously? Too much LT'ing?
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »

    I'll give you some feedback...

    The server-side patch you dropped today actually makes multiplayer games playable for defensemen. It was very refreshing playing a test Drop-In 6's game just now as a left defenseman. We'll see how it is against an LG team (with their LT puck control madness) in 6's club.

    Kudo's to you guys on the patch today. Is it perfect? No (it never will be), but again, multiplayer games are actually playable now.

    Good job.

    Thanks. That's good to hear. Out of curiosity, what made the game unplayable as a defender previously? Too much LT'ing?

    What is a “server side” patch?
  • Froommey
    800 posts Member
    edited January 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    SMH.... And not in a good way.

    It sounds like you have some feedback on this. Feel free to post it. We're always interested in constructive input from the community.

    Didn't buy the game on release and wasn't planning on getting it at all until a buddy of mines texted me mid November asking me if I wanted to buy it for 20 bucks because he wanted to get the new Star Wars game. I told him no thanks and he went down to $15. The only reason I did it was to help him out.

    After playing the game I soon realized I made the right choice in not paying full price. You call this game "Innovating, Revolutionary and Cutting Edge". I'll lay it down simple. It's the same flawed game it's been for years. That's my constructive input.

    That's really not very constructive as it doesn't tell us anything about the issues you have with the game. You're basically saying you don't like it, but don't say why. It doesn't give us any feedback we can actually use. I still appreciate the input though.

    .... many of us told you about, but you don’t want to listen. As I posted before, the Gameplay would rate 9/10, the graphic details like Player, Goalie equipment, likenesses only 2/10 points. Since years the same. So in general the game is not downgraded and boring about the Gameplay, it’s about lack of the graphics. The gameplay is the best ever. Maybe some minor adding like more shortcuts scenes, more Popups with statistics during the game would made look like this game a bit fresher. We are missing 3 Stars selection, maybe a singer with the anthem before the game. Some background information before, after and during the game with interviews and much more. Where ist the All Star game ? Why can we not play a Franchise mode in all Leagues ? Why only with a single Team. The list is long. I miss the creativeness from this Team. Many Customers do not believe anymore in this Team, cause they are disappointed that they do not hear and work for their wishes. So at the end your game in general looks the same since years. No wonder that Customer getting lesser and lesser from year to year when wishes will be ignored or they doing it like the Customer told before. To buy as used from private for less price.
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager
    Froommey wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    SMH.... And not in a good way.

    It sounds like you have some feedback on this. Feel free to post it. We're always interested in constructive input from the community.

    Didn't buy the game on release and wasn't planning on getting it at all until a buddy of mines texted me mid November asking me if I wanted to buy it for 20 bucks because he wanted to get the new Star Wars game. I told him no thanks and he went down to $15. The only reason I did it was to help him out.

    After playing the game I soon realized I made the right choice in not paying full price. You call this game "Innovating, Revolutionary and Cutting Edge". I'll lay it down simple. It's the same flawed game it's been for years. That's my constructive input.

    That's really not very constructive as it doesn't tell us anything about the issues you have with the game. You're basically saying you don't like it, but don't say why. It doesn't give us any feedback we can actually use. I still appreciate the input though.

    .... many of us told you about, but you don’t want to listen. As I posted before, the Gameplay would rate 9/10, the graphic details like Player, Goalie equipment, likenesses only 2/10 points. Since years the same. So in general the game is not downgraded and boring about the Gameplay, it’s about lack of the graphics. The gameplay is the best ever. Maybe some minor adding like more shortcuts scenes, more Popups with statistics during the game would made look like this game a bit fresher. We are missing 3 Stars selection, maybe a singer with the anthem before the game. Some background information before, after and during the game with interviews and much more. Where ist the All Star game ? Why can we not play a Franchise mode in all Leagues ? Why only with a single Team. The list is long. I miss the creativeness from this Team. Many Customers do not believe anymore in this Team, cause they are disappointed that they do not hear and work for their wishes. So at the end your game in general looks the same since years. No wonder that Customer getting lesser and lesser from year to year when wishes will be ignored or they doing it like the Customer told before. To buy as used from private for less price.

    Those would be very cool features to have for sure. However, the majority of the feedback we've received is that the game needs to play better. We know many of you are very passionate about these presentation aspects. Presentation had some big updates with 20, but things like interviews require a huge amount of work. There's also a lot of licensing that needs to happen. Especially when it comes to things like the ASG, goal songs and horns, the Winter Classic, etc. They would definitely be cool to have, but are also being requested by a pretty smaller portion of the community. With a finite amount of time to work on the game each year, we need to hit as many of the big community requests as possible. If we only addressed the concerns of the few, we'd have a very large audience complaining they are being ignored. As much as we try to make as many people happy as possible, it's a very ambitious task. We'll certainly keep listening and acting on as much feedback as we can.

    First and foremost though, this is a hockey game where playing our favorite sport is at the heart of it. I know it's not as immersive as some of you would like and we hate letting you down. Hopefully, over time, that level of immersion will be raised.
  • JoyToTheWorld14
    51 posts Member
    edited January 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    TheMajjam wrote: »

    The way people play is a product of the game's design. This is in no way a game for patient people. Patience and team play, in my humble opinion, are the niche ways to play NHL. In order to get people to change the way they play, the gameplay needs to be tailored in that direction. You forced us D-men to stop poking at pucks by making the poke check a penalty magnet. You forced this even more by making penalties for people that play 3's a penalty shot instead of putting an extra man on the ice like in previous versions. Perhaps you guys should take the time to create two modes of play for 6's play in NHL. One like this where it is possible for one guy to deke through a team. More of an arcade style of play. Then another mode suited more for methodical team play, where passing, positioning, and decisions mean more.

    You choose to stop poking at pucks because you're taking too many penalties. I play defense. Almost exclusively and I'm using the poke check successfully almost all the time. Because I worked at getting it down instead of just blaming the game and not being accountable for my own skill. This is what I'm talking about when people say they want a sim mode. If you can't learn to poke without taking a ton of penalties, a more arcade-style of play where pokes are more forgiving is probably more your speed.

    Threes is an arcade mode. The standard rules don't really apply so penalty shots for penalties is fine. It's not supposed to mimic authentic hockey as it's a very different ruleset. Unless you're talking about penalty shots in EASHL 3s. Unfortunately, I wasn't aware that was the case as I just play 6s and arcade Threes once in a while.

    As far as one guy dekeing through a team goes, isn't it on the team to play good defense and stop them? Passing, positioning and making good decisions in general already contribute to defending well and setting up good scoring chances. Not everyone has the same vision and can see those plays developing. That's not really something we can teach.

    "Thanks. That's good to hear. Out of curiosity, what made the game unplayable as a defender previously? Too much LT'ing?"

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.

    I posted a video in another thread about this. I pressed on the check button, and all I did was bounce off the AI player. Didn't even phase him. Not even an "oomph". This happens all too frequently.

    Now, if it's some type of slider setting, then please enlighten us. I know I have asked several times throughout the years what slider settings you guys use since you created the game, and I never get a response. If you know the ins/outs to create a better game to be more realistic and balanced (players play according to ratings not some additional slider) would love to finally know. The mystery continues.
  • JoyToTheWorld14
    51 posts Member
    edited January 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    1) It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    2) As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    3) You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    4) I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.

    1) I'm guessing that's because it's the same poke check animation regardless of the gap distance? That makes sense of course, but where a 2nd poke check animation (invoked from a closer distance) would solve that problem. Defensemen in the NHL can dynamically change the way they poke check based on distance, which should be reproduced in the game.

    2) Being "possible" is one thing. Being abused, is another thing. I can't recall the last NHL game I've seen where on every rush, the puck carrier is skating backwards into the zone, and towards the net. It's definitely a dilemna for you, as I'm sure you don't support exploit abuse. Unfortunately, I see it performed all the time by the "elite" players of the product.

    3) In fact, when I DSS, I'm also changing the direction of my stick while holding it on the ice, so I'm definitely conscious of this. But when I hold it straight out in one direction (as a means to claim space), I should not be called for a tripping penalty if an opposing puck carrier decides to skate into my stationary stick. If I MOVE the stick into his legs, then yes, a penalty call is deserved, and that has definitely happened to me (deservedly so).

    4) If one plays proper positional defense (which is my game - or which I at least try to make my game), you don't even HAVE to hit. That's why the definition of a check is "separating a player from the puck". Hitting is not required for this, as Nicklas Lidström proved in his illustrious career. As for hitting, it shouldn't be how many times you hit, but WHEN you hit. Starting your body check from the defensive zone faceoff dot, and executing it at the blue line, over and over again (with no charging calls), is NOT the way defense is played in the NHL. But I bet it's very exciting for a large portion of your customers. :)
    [Socair - edited swear filter]
    Post edited by Socair on
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.

    I posted a video in another thread about this. I pressed on the check button, and all I did was bounce off the AI player. Didn't even phase him. Not even an "oomph". This happens all too frequently.

    Now, if it's some type of slider setting, then please enlighten us. I know I have asked several times throughout the years what slider settings you guys use since you created the game, and I never get a response. If you know the ins/outs to create a better game to be more realistic and balanced (players play according to ratings not some additional slider) would love to finally know. The mystery continues.

    Can you post that video again? I'm not seeing it.

    As far as the slider settings go, what mode are you playing?
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    1) It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    2) As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    3) You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    4) I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.

    1) I'm guessing that's because it's the same poke check animation regardless of the gap distance? That makes sense of course, but where a 2nd poke check animation (invoked from a closer distance) would solve that problem. Defensemen in the NHL can dynamically change the way they poke check based on distance, which should be reproduced in the game.

    2) Being "possible" is one thing. Being abused, is another thing. I can't recall the last NHL game I've seen where on every rush, the puck carrier is skating ****-backwards into the zone, and towards the net. It's definitely a dilemna for you, as I'm sure you don't support exploit abuse. Unfortunately, I see it performed all the time by the "elite" players of the product.

    3) In fact, when I DSS, I'm also changing the direction of my stick while holding it on the ice, so I'm definitely conscious of this. But when I hold it straight out in one direction (as a means to claim space), I should not be called for a tripping penalty if an opposing puck carrier decides to skate into my stationary stick. If I MOVE the stick into his legs, then yes, a penalty call is deserved, and that has definitely happened to me (deservedly so).

    4) If one plays proper positional defense (which is my game - or which I at least try to make my game), you don't even HAVE to hit. That's why the definition of a check is "separating a player from the puck". Hitting is not required for this, as Nicklas Lidström proved in his illustrious career. As for hitting, it shouldn't be how many times you hit, but WHEN you hit. Starting your body check from the defensive zone faceoff dot, and executing it at the blue line, over and over again (with no charging calls), is NOT the way defense is played in the NHL. But I bet it's very exciting for a large portion of your customers. :)

    It would be great if we could control how far you poke. That's probably a tricky one to do as we're limited by the options on a standard controller.

    I understand that it's unrealistic to backskate into the zone repeatedly. If you notice they are doing this, step up for a hit or just use your body to hinder their movement. They can be stopped.

    Thanks for the feedback on DSS. I'll pass it on.

    A charging call should be happening when you're holding the hit for too long. I believe 3 strides or more. I see those get called pretty regularly so if you have any issues with them not being called, get us some video for review and I'll send it over to the dev team.
  • I've definitely noticed a flaw this year with poke checks going straight for the feet when you're in great position to get the puck. I think its connection based though because it's not often but when it happens it seems like you're just boned and need to remove the RB from your controller until the next game or it will keep happening.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    1) It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    2) As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    3) You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    4) I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.

    1) I'm guessing that's because it's the same poke check animation regardless of the gap distance? That makes sense of course, but where a 2nd poke check animation (invoked from a closer distance) would solve that problem. Defensemen in the NHL can dynamically change the way they poke check based on distance, which should be reproduced in the game.

    2) Being "possible" is one thing. Being abused, is another thing. I can't recall the last NHL game I've seen where on every rush, the puck carrier is skating ****-backwards into the zone, and towards the net. It's definitely a dilemna for you, as I'm sure you don't support exploit abuse. Unfortunately, I see it performed all the time by the "elite" players of the product.

    3) In fact, when I DSS, I'm also changing the direction of my stick while holding it on the ice, so I'm definitely conscious of this. But when I hold it straight out in one direction (as a means to claim space), I should not be called for a tripping penalty if an opposing puck carrier decides to skate into my stationary stick. If I MOVE the stick into his legs, then yes, a penalty call is deserved, and that has definitely happened to me (deservedly so).

    4) If one plays proper positional defense (which is my game - or which I at least try to make my game), you don't even HAVE to hit. That's why the definition of a check is "separating a player from the puck". Hitting is not required for this, as Nicklas Lidström proved in his illustrious career. As for hitting, it shouldn't be how many times you hit, but WHEN you hit. Starting your body check from the defensive zone faceoff dot, and executing it at the blue line, over and over again (with no charging calls), is NOT the way defense is played in the NHL. But I bet it's very exciting for a large portion of your customers. :)

    It would be great if we could control how far you poke. That's probably a tricky one to do as we're limited by the options on a standard controller
    .

    I understand that it's unrealistic to backskate into the zone repeatedly. If you notice they are doing this, step up for a hit or just use your body to hinder their movement. They can be stopped.

    Thanks for the feedback on DSS. I'll pass it on.

    A charging call should be happening when you're holding the hit for too long. I believe 3 strides or more. I see those get called pretty regularly so if you have any issues with them not being called, get us some video for review and I'll send it over to the dev team.

    Well reports say next gen consoles (at least ps5) will have haptic feedback and force sensitive bumpers and triggers. Would that help in creating a way to control poke distance?
  • WainGretSki
    3660 posts Member
    edited January 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    1) It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    2) As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    3) You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    4) I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.

    1) I'm guessing that's because it's the same poke check animation regardless of the gap distance? That makes sense of course, but where a 2nd poke check animation (invoked from a closer distance) would solve that problem. Defensemen in the NHL can dynamically change the way they poke check based on distance, which should be reproduced in the game.

    2) Being "possible" is one thing. Being abused, is another thing. I can't recall the last NHL game I've seen where on every rush, the puck carrier is skating ****-backwards into the zone, and towards the net. It's definitely a dilemna for you, as I'm sure you don't support exploit abuse. Unfortunately, I see it performed all the time by the "elite" players of the product.

    3) In fact, when I DSS, I'm also changing the direction of my stick while holding it on the ice, so I'm definitely conscious of this. But when I hold it straight out in one direction (as a means to claim space), I should not be called for a tripping penalty if an opposing puck carrier decides to skate into my stationary stick. If I MOVE the stick into his legs, then yes, a penalty call is deserved, and that has definitely happened to me (deservedly so).

    4) If one plays proper positional defense (which is my game - or which I at least try to make my game), you don't even HAVE to hit. That's why the definition of a check is "separating a player from the puck". Hitting is not required for this, as Nicklas Lidström proved in his illustrious career. As for hitting, it shouldn't be how many times you hit, but WHEN you hit. Starting your body check from the defensive zone faceoff dot, and executing it at the blue line, over and over again (with no charging calls), is NOT the way defense is played in the NHL. But I bet it's very exciting for a large portion of your customers. :)

    It would be great if we could control how far you poke. That's probably a tricky one to do as we're limited by the options on a standard controller.

    I understand that it's unrealistic to backskate into the zone repeatedly. If you notice they are doing this, step up for a hit or just use your body to hinder their movement. They can be stopped.

    Thanks for the feedback on DSS. I'll pass it on.

    A charging call should be happening when you're holding the hit for too long. I believe 3 strides or more. I see those get called pretty regularly so if you have any issues with them not being called, get us some video for review and I'll send it over to the dev team.

    Maybe pass this along too if you deem it worthy:

    When your DSS is out (mostly straight ahead of you) because you don't want the carrier to come back in front of you, I often get a tripping call because he dekes into my stick. As you know, some of these deke animations can have a player move very quickly and maybe this is just on me, but my reflexes are not as quick as the animation so I do not bring back my stick and of course, with the game's coding, I touched both skates, so down he goes and of to the box I go. I really don't agree with that. In that scenario, ideally I would want my stick to touch the other leg and get pushed out to the side, or for matter of programming and simplicity, just make my stick non existent and not dislodge the puck. It wouldn't look realistic or pretty, but still better than a trip imo.

    So when I get real twitchy carriers, I stop using DSS most times as some players are great at abusing this "tripping magnet" .
  • Kmahrle83 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »

    Speaking from a dedicated teal perspective in multi-player game modes...

    Limiting poke checking to where you have to time them just right to be useful is not a problem for me (I've got the timing down very well). What IS a problem for me is when I, as a defensemen, am properly positioned (back-skating and facing) against a puck carrier entering the zone, I slow down to close the gap on him, and I hit poke check, the animation has me swinging the stick at his feet, as opposed to his stick blade (which is right in front of me). What defensemen in the NHL, in this situation, swats at the puck carrier's feet and not the puck carrier's stick blade? That's just pure fantasy. I won't even get into LT spin use by the puck carrier in that situation as a means to draw a tripping penalty, as naturally, that's a flaw in the code (the defensemen is properly positioned, and shouldn't be penalized in that situation). It's a bail out for the puck carrier.

    If a puck carrier turns the corner on me, and I poke check him from behind, I fully deserve a penalty in that situation. The same goes for lazy play. If I'm off my game, and find myself behind the play more than I should be, I SHOULD be put into the box every single time I poke check from behind. No argument here.

    Finally, sticks on the ice...

    If I'm properly positioned on D, and I hold my stick out on the ice (to keep the puck carrier on the short side of my goalie), and the puck carrier skates into my stick (pulling my goalie off of his post), that's an automatic penalty for me. How can that be a penalty for me, when I have just as much right to that open space (which I got to first) as the puck carrier does? That too is a bail out for puck-hogging, LT abusers.

    Or, say if I'm beaten by a puck carrier (happens from time to time), where now he is on a breakaway on my goalie, and I'm right behind him. My job at that point, is to try to keep him on one side of the goalie. So, say he is on the right side of the slot, and I hold my stick straight out towards him but on his left side (to prevent him from crossing over the goalie), and then he skates into my out-stretched stick. Should I get a tripping penalty for that, since I claimed that open ice space before the puck carrier did? This is how your code logic currently works, which again favors the puck carrier.

    Currently, positional defensive play is an extremely under-rewarding experience. Yesterday's patch helped a LOT in multiplayer modes, but it's still not quite where it needs to be from a defensive aspect, especially against the Boitano-like LT'ers.

    1) It would be good to see when you're swinging at his feet instead of the stick. When you poke, it's aimed at the puck, but if there's not much of a gap, your chances of hitting their feet go up a lot. I'd really have to see video on this. I'm a mostly dedicated D man myself and I've had the same thing happen, but it's always when I slow up to much to shorten the gap when it happens. Also, it's possible when you slow down, you're also hitting up on the stick, which would cause you to make more of a lunging poke. Those have a much higher risk of causing a trip than if you were still backskating. Just something to watch out for.

    2) As far as LT'ing goes, that's not a flaw in the code. The ability to do this has lessened a lot, but a player going into a backskate is still possible of course. It's something defenders need to be mindful of. I've received many a tripping call in that same situation. It's a lack of patience on my own part. Especially when I've seen them attempt it previously in that game.

    3) You need to be in control of your stick. The idea is not to just continually hold in DSS and get away with knocking the puck loose. You still have to be mindful of where it is. It would cause a trip if it goes from inside the leg to the outside. When your stick is getting too close, pull it back. It's up to you to control your stick better. I'm not saying we can't improve here so please don't take it that way. I use DSS a lot and am always conscious of the carrier's legs so that I minimize my chances of having them skate into my stick.

    4) I just can't agree with you that positional defensive play is unrewarding. Again, I agree it could be improved, but proper positioning is going to greatly reduce the carrier's options. You can force them to the outside and cut off their passing/shooting lanes. I get it might not be as exciting as throwing a big hit, but you're still doing your part as a defender.

    1) I'm guessing that's because it's the same poke check animation regardless of the gap distance? That makes sense of course, but where a 2nd poke check animation (invoked from a closer distance) would solve that problem. Defensemen in the NHL can dynamically change the way they poke check based on distance, which should be reproduced in the game.

    2) Being "possible" is one thing. Being abused, is another thing. I can't recall the last NHL game I've seen where on every rush, the puck carrier is skating ****-backwards into the zone, and towards the net. It's definitely a dilemna for you, as I'm sure you don't support exploit abuse. Unfortunately, I see it performed all the time by the "elite" players of the product.

    3) In fact, when I DSS, I'm also changing the direction of my stick while holding it on the ice, so I'm definitely conscious of this. But when I hold it straight out in one direction (as a means to claim space), I should not be called for a tripping penalty if an opposing puck carrier decides to skate into my stationary stick. If I MOVE the stick into his legs, then yes, a penalty call is deserved, and that has definitely happened to me (deservedly so).

    4) If one plays proper positional defense (which is my game - or which I at least try to make my game), you don't even HAVE to hit. That's why the definition of a check is "separating a player from the puck". Hitting is not required for this, as Nicklas Lidström proved in his illustrious career. As for hitting, it shouldn't be how many times you hit, but WHEN you hit. Starting your body check from the defensive zone faceoff dot, and executing it at the blue line, over and over again (with no charging calls), is NOT the way defense is played in the NHL. But I bet it's very exciting for a large portion of your customers. :)

    It would be great if we could control how far you poke. That's probably a tricky one to do as we're limited by the options on a standard controller
    .

    I understand that it's unrealistic to backskate into the zone repeatedly. If you notice they are doing this, step up for a hit or just use your body to hinder their movement. They can be stopped.

    Thanks for the feedback on DSS. I'll pass it on.

    A charging call should be happening when you're holding the hit for too long. I believe 3 strides or more. I see those get called pretty regularly so if you have any issues with them not being called, get us some video for review and I'll send it over to the dev team.

    Well reports say next gen consoles (at least ps5) will have haptic feedback and force sensitive bumpers and triggers. Would that help in creating a way to control poke distance?

    No, it means hip check next year will be holding down R3, tapping x, and holding both triggers down half way.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.

    I posted a video in another thread about this. I pressed on the check button, and all I did was bounce off the AI player. Didn't even phase him. Not even an "oomph". This happens all too frequently.

    Now, if it's some type of slider setting, then please enlighten us. I know I have asked several times throughout the years what slider settings you guys use since you created the game, and I never get a response. If you know the ins/outs to create a better game to be more realistic and balanced (players play according to ratings not some additional slider) would love to finally know. The mystery continues.

    Can you post that video again? I'm not seeing it.

    As far as the slider settings go, what mode are you playing?

    Honestly, getting tired of constantly re-posting the same videos over and over and over. When consistently asked to re-post it really feels like EA isn't listening or selective on what they read. Mode wise...exhibition.
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.

    I posted a video in another thread about this. I pressed on the check button, and all I did was bounce off the AI player. Didn't even phase him. Not even an "oomph". This happens all too frequently.

    Now, if it's some type of slider setting, then please enlighten us. I know I have asked several times throughout the years what slider settings you guys use since you created the game, and I never get a response. If you know the ins/outs to create a better game to be more realistic and balanced (players play according to ratings not some additional slider) would love to finally know. The mystery continues.

    Can you post that video again? I'm not seeing it.

    As far as the slider settings go, what mode are you playing?

    Honestly, getting tired of constantly re-posting the same videos over and over and over. When consistently asked to re-post it really feels like EA isn't listening or selective on what they read. Mode wise...exhibition.

    I looked at your posts and didn't see where it was posted. If you could tell me which thread it's in, that would help.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Steven5470 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Well obviously you and I have different opinions on what a bubble is, @EA_Aljo. What I consider a bubble is what something would look like if you've ever seen bubble sports in general (where they get in those giant inflatable ones and play soccer or hockey or whatever). Ever seen a weak hit in one of those things? They just bounce off and get pushed to the side. The fact you don't see the clip at 4:42 as there being no bubble effect is absurd and shows your bias. It literally looks the exact same thing as half the collisions in this video:

    I understand the point you're trying to make, but in that video, they're still hitting each other with enough force to knock them down. The videos I've seen from you guys as examples of the bubble show nothing happening when you try to hit someone that is skating away from you. Which is intended. It's all about colliding with someone with enough force to cause them to fall or stumble. I'm just not seeing where 2 players are hitting each other solidly and nothing is happening. The force of the impact, how much of the body you hit, player size and ratings are all factored into whether or not a hit is successful.

    I posted a video in another thread about this. I pressed on the check button, and all I did was bounce off the AI player. Didn't even phase him. Not even an "oomph". This happens all too frequently.

    Now, if it's some type of slider setting, then please enlighten us. I know I have asked several times throughout the years what slider settings you guys use since you created the game, and I never get a response. If you know the ins/outs to create a better game to be more realistic and balanced (players play according to ratings not some additional slider) would love to finally know. The mystery continues.

    Can you post that video again? I'm not seeing it.

    As far as the slider settings go, what mode are you playing?

    Honestly, getting tired of constantly re-posting the same videos over and over and over. When consistently asked to re-post it really feels like EA isn't listening or selective on what they read. Mode wise...exhibition.

    I looked at your posts and didn't see where it was posted. If you could tell me which thread it's in, that would help.

    You replied to it in another thread.
  • EA_Aljo
    3227 posts EA Community Manager

    You replied to it in another thread.

    Thanks. Found it. I respond to a lot of posts here and was having trouble tracking it down.

    @Steven5470

    Chances are good that hit would have knocked the puck loose, but the pass was made before we could find out. A head-on collision like that should dislodge it, but not the impact wasn't enough to knock him down.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »

    You replied to it in another thread.

    Thanks. Found it. I respond to a lot of posts here and was having trouble tracking it down.

    @Steven5470

    Chances are good that hit would have knocked the puck loose, but the pass was made before we could find out. A head-on collision like that should dislodge it, but not the impact wasn't enough to knock him down.

    The funny thing, my guy was skating full speed. When he hit, it was as if nothing even registered. The other player didn't even move. Yet, when the CPU does this to your player, your guy goes flying to the ice. Heck, the CPU can knock you down within a foot! It's frustrating and very unrealistic. This is another thing users have reported. The hitting is weird like that. Not only a bubble sometimes, but feels like you can hit the opposing player when it's "convenient" and not when it should happen.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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