EA Forums - Banner

Pucks need to bounce/deflect more

Replies

  • HoodHoppers
    1486 posts Member
    Sgt_Kelso wrote: »
    I think we need to separate intentional deflections (ie. trying to score with deflecting the puck), and random deflections from blocks/hitting the stick etc. to make sense of the conversation here.

    It's beyond annoying to see your shot hitting the opponent's body or their stick, and just stopping dead there. It's not realistic and it just gives the opponent an opportunity to breakaway or easy counter attack in any case (especially if the shooter is d-man).... which *seems* intentional.

    OR the shot stops dead when hitting a player, and the goalie has already reacted to the original shot (animations!), and just watches helplessly as another player shoots the puck in the open net.

    Those kind of deflections need happen more realistically, and not just make the puck stop dead in its tracks.

    I've seen maybe one or two times this year deflection where I stretch my stick with DSS in front of the shot, and the puck is redirected realistically. Those need to happen more, not all the time but more. Whereas currently almost the only way to deflect the puck in to the stands is shoot the puck high on the stick side, and it's almost 99% time out of the game (unless you score...)

    Exactly this. Random deflections to half walls, to the end boards, to back the other way, etc. need to happen far more often. Tip-in's should happen at maybe a 10% rate with the accuracy of it being pretty random. Also the goalies reactions are way out to lunch on the tip-ins as well. Sometimes they make the most unrealistic desperation saves out of them and then other times they watch it slide by at 2km/hour.
  • mikeq67
    134 posts Member
    Sticks randomly breaking were a horrible feature for online competitive modes. No thanks

    Deflections are super broken though. We always have a net front presence and he hardly deflects everything, the puck will just hit him half the time. Yet the opposing team will have a guy skate in front of his teammate while he cranks a slapshot and hell deflect that from 5 feet in front of him though. It makes no sense.
  • Davanial
    267 posts Member
    Having your stick break is horrible in any mode, including actual hockey mode. But it's in the game...
  • bryta47
    373 posts Member
    smyth9779 wrote: »
    Adding more deflections to the game doesn't mean they always have to go in. And nothing can he worse than the cross crease one timers then go in 95% of the time. I'll take my chances with deflections any day of that cheese cross crease one time. Enough is enough. Hockey players who play the game want HOCKEY PLAYS. Deflections are part of hockey. The puck going into the crowd is part of hockey. How about we see a goalie reach his stick out once in a while to stop the cross crease pass? Can we at least do that ?

    @smyth9779 @Davanial

    Maybe balance out concerns of deflections going in too often by reducing stamina on players hit by the puck if they get hit too many times throughout the game? This way it discourages slapshot spamming?

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.
  • EA_Aljo
    2160 posts EA Community Manager
    bryta47 wrote: »
    smyth9779 wrote: »
    Adding more deflections to the game doesn't mean they always have to go in. And nothing can he worse than the cross crease one timers then go in 95% of the time. I'll take my chances with deflections any day of that cheese cross crease one time. Enough is enough. Hockey players who play the game want HOCKEY PLAYS. Deflections are part of hockey. The puck going into the crowd is part of hockey. How about we see a goalie reach his stick out once in a while to stop the cross crease pass? Can we at least do that ?

    @smyth9779 @Davanial

    Maybe balance out concerns of deflections going in too often by reducing stamina on players hit by the puck if they get hit too many times throughout the game? This way it discourages slapshot spamming?

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    Defending better is a way you can make an immediate impact against "cheese" plays. When we advise that, we're not saying there is no problem. That's just a way to combat it because we don't know if/when it'll be addressed. If you see someone repeatedly using the same offensive strategy against you, and are successful with it, the best way to stop those goals is to defend them.
  • HoodHoppers
    1486 posts Member
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    bryta47 wrote: »
    smyth9779 wrote: »
    Adding more deflections to the game doesn't mean they always have to go in. And nothing can he worse than the cross crease one timers then go in 95% of the time. I'll take my chances with deflections any day of that cheese cross crease one time. Enough is enough. Hockey players who play the game want HOCKEY PLAYS. Deflections are part of hockey. The puck going into the crowd is part of hockey. How about we see a goalie reach his stick out once in a while to stop the cross crease pass? Can we at least do that ?

    @smyth9779 @Davanial

    Maybe balance out concerns of deflections going in too often by reducing stamina on players hit by the puck if they get hit too many times throughout the game? This way it discourages slapshot spamming?

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    Defending better is a way you can make an immediate impact against "cheese" plays. When we advise that, we're not saying there is no problem. That's just a way to combat it because we don't know if/when it'll be addressed. If you see someone repeatedly using the same offensive strategy against you, and are successful with it, the best way to stop those goals is to defend them.

    Speaking of which, snap shots are way too bloody accurate and beat goaltenders far more often than they should. Literally the hardest animation to defend in the game is generating more goals than a standard wrist shot or a drag shot.
  • jmwalsh8888
    1184 posts Member
    bryta47 wrote: »
    smyth9779 wrote: »
    Adding more deflections to the game doesn't mean they always have to go in. And nothing can he worse than the cross crease one timers then go in 95% of the time. I'll take my chances with deflections any day of that cheese cross crease one time. Enough is enough. Hockey players who play the game want HOCKEY PLAYS. Deflections are part of hockey. The puck going into the crowd is part of hockey. How about we see a goalie reach his stick out once in a while to stop the cross crease pass? Can we at least do that ?

    @smyth9779 @Davanial

    Maybe balance out concerns of deflections going in too often by reducing stamina on players hit by the puck if they get hit too many times throughout the game? This way it discourages slapshot spamming?

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    As I see it...the real problem with deflections has nothing to do with offensive side of the "puck". As usual its defensive deficiencies that make deflections over powered. 5 defensive players could be collapsed back and one single offensive player sitting in the middle of them. Point slapper basically has no path through at this point. Yet I would bet 75% of the slapshots would get through. And that solo fwd will probably deflect 10x more shots than the 5 defenders will block.
  • EA_Blueberry
    3960 posts EA Community Manager
    bryta47 wrote: »

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.
  • untouchable_BF1
    985 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    bryta47 wrote: »
    smyth9779 wrote: »
    Adding more deflections to the game doesn't mean they always have to go in. And nothing can he worse than the cross crease one timers then go in 95% of the time. I'll take my chances with deflections any day of that cheese cross crease one time. Enough is enough. Hockey players who play the game want HOCKEY PLAYS. Deflections are part of hockey. The puck going into the crowd is part of hockey. How about we see a goalie reach his stick out once in a while to stop the cross crease pass? Can we at least do that ?

    @smyth9779 @Davanial

    Maybe balance out concerns of deflections going in too often by reducing stamina on players hit by the puck if they get hit too many times throughout the game? This way it discourages slapshot spamming?

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    Defending better is a way you can make an immediate impact against "cheese" plays. When we advise that, we're not saying there is no problem. That's just a way to combat it because we don't know if/when it'll be addressed. If you see someone repeatedly using the same offensive strategy against you, and are successful with it, the best way to stop those goals is to defend them.

    Speaking of which, snap shots are way too bloody accurate and beat goaltenders far more often than they should. Literally the hardest animation to defend in the game is generating more goals than a standard wrist shot or a drag shot.

    Well if DSS was actually a low-risk play like irl, this would be a non-issue as you could easily mirror the stick. Also, this is a classic example of “shooting takes no skill” in this game, as snap shots are way too powerful and accurate from positions where they’re normal not taken.

    Snap shots should primarily be used when the chest is facing the net. This is where you actually have the leverage to pull of an accurate, hard snap shot. Snap shots are deceptive, meaning anything inside the tops of the circle will probably result in some sort of rebound (doesn’t need to be a dangerous one, but there probably will be one if it doesn’t hit center mass) due to the speed and lack of telegraphing a snapshot provides. The con of snapshots should obviously be accuracy. If you’re attempting these with lower attribute players, hitting center mass or missing should be rather common. Also, taking these at angles where you chest isn’t facing the net (9-11 o’clock, 1-3 o’clock) should SIGNIFICANTLY reduce shot power because it’s simply not a good angle for the shooter. There’s no leverage to flex the stick cross-body when you’re chest it literally facing the strong-side boards while being on strong-side of the ice.

    When you find yourself at the above mentioned angles, this is where wrist shots should be almost exclusively used if you want a powerful, accurate shot. These shots are designed to be loaded up before shooting. It’s a way to get a decent attempt on net from bad shooting angles (a left at 9-11 o’clock on the strong-side on the net) and it’s a great way to snipe a goalie when facing the net or being at the 9-11 o’clock angles while on your weakside, as wristers are more accurate and should be equally as powerful as a snapshot. The downside is they take longer to shoot, and the stick curve can be read by the goalie, so better goalies will have more success saving even well-placed shots from low attribute shooters who don’t have a ton of shot deception.

    Lastly, we’ve added the “Matthews” shot animation into the game, but what elite shooter doesn’t change their angle slightly with a toe-n-snap as I like to call it? Why doesn’t every elite shooter do this in-game because they certainly all do it. This is another example of why shooting lacks depth. As a goalie, it’s infinitely harder to make a save on a shot where the shooter pulls and snaps the shot like that, even if he’s stationary. It hides their shot placement intention and it forces me to compensate for the small angle change in a very small amount of time. But again, you don’t see the RS down deke with an immediate shot after rewarded any more than gliding and shooting from the tops of the circles or higher in this game. To me, that screams “no skill required” and it really makes me question where all this “balance” or “skill gap” is being implemented/required on the offensive side of the puck.

    So, there’s some really in-depth parameters that go into “what shot should I take” and also for determining goaltender vs shooter success rates (hint: goalies should win over 90% of the time). I don’t mean to be critical, I’m simply asking for more balance on the offensive side of the puck if we’re going to continue justifying defensive skill gaps everywhere. Look at the depth that could be added to shooting alone!
  • untouchable_BF1
    985 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    bryta47 wrote: »

    Slapshot spamming? First time I've heard that one.

    Often when people complain about an offense strategy being too viable you EA guys advise them to play better defense. Why is this any different? Just don't let them take those shots. Right?

    Ofc the puck needs to be more dynamic.

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    Well deflections are “random” are they not? Why would adding realistic puck deflections drastically increase the amount of goals scored? Not asking for a bunch of tip/deflection goals, we’re asking for shots that hit shafts and the sides of legs to bounce, roll, shoot out to the endbaords. Not asking for twine-seeking goals, just realistic deflections to tone down odd-man rushes due to pucks stopping dead, and also to encourage shooting through traffic more. Shooting with screens is more than accepted form of trying to score in real hockey, but the risk outweighs the reward in the game due to how easy it is to stop pucks dead in their tracks and spake an odd-man rush from it.
  • Sgt_Kelso
    1325 posts Member
    edited May 2020

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    I feel like we're talking different language here... what I was referring to, and what I believe the OP was too, was that pucks need to bounce and deflect more - around the ice, not into the goal. So if I shoot and a d-man blocks it, it might deflect into the boards etc. I don't want to increase the number of deflection goals, nothing like that. So I don't get why you insist on talking about deflection *goals*?

    In the past, when I questioned the puck stopping dead in its tracks when blocked etc. I believe one dev said it was because the 'flow' of the game requires it. Ie. too much time would be wasted on pucks bouncing on around the boards. So you want the puck to stop in its tracks, so the player can pick it and continue play. Isn't that was this is really about?
  • untouchable_BF1
    985 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    Sgt_Kelso wrote: »

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    I feel like we're talking different language here... what I was referring to, and what I believe the OP was too, was that pucks need to bounce and deflect more - around the ice, not into the goal. So if I shoot and a d-man blocks it, it might deflect into the boards etc. I don't want to increase the number of deflection goals, nothing like that. So I don't get why you insist on talking about deflection *goals*?

    In the past, when I questioned the puck stopping dead in its tracks when blocked etc. I believe one dev said it was because the 'flow' of the game requires it. Ie. too much time would be wasted on pucks bouncing on around the boards. So you want the puck to stop in its tracks, so the player can pick it and continue play. Isn't that was this is really about?

    Yes, it’s why “balance” means “defense needs perfect execution” to shutdown an even average offensive player in this game.
  • Yet another feature that was mysteriously removed when game went next gen..
  • Sgt_Kelso wrote: »

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    I feel like we're talking different language here... what I was referring to, and what I believe the OP was too, was that pucks need to bounce and deflect more - around the ice, not into the goal. So if I shoot and a d-man blocks it, it might deflect into the boards etc. I don't want to increase the number of deflection goals, nothing like that. So I don't get why you insist on talking about deflection *goals*?

    In the past, when I questioned the puck stopping dead in its tracks when blocked etc. I believe one dev said it was because the 'flow' of the game requires it. Ie. too much time would be wasted on pucks bouncing on around the boards. So you want the puck to stop in its tracks, so the player can pick it and continue play. Isn't that was this is really about?

    Yeah that’s what I meant. I should have specified that. Having the puck bounce more around the ice would make wrapping the puck around the boards better than what it is imo.

    Also. Remember on old gen when a pass was too strong it would bounce off the stick? It’s gone this gen and cleanly intercepting missile passes makes no sense.
  • HoodHoppers
    1486 posts Member
    EpiCxOwNeD wrote: »
    Sgt_Kelso wrote: »

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    I feel like we're talking different language here... what I was referring to, and what I believe the OP was too, was that pucks need to bounce and deflect more - around the ice, not into the goal. So if I shoot and a d-man blocks it, it might deflect into the boards etc. I don't want to increase the number of deflection goals, nothing like that. So I don't get why you insist on talking about deflection *goals*?

    In the past, when I questioned the puck stopping dead in its tracks when blocked etc. I believe one dev said it was because the 'flow' of the game requires it. Ie. too much time would be wasted on pucks bouncing on around the boards. So you want the puck to stop in its tracks, so the player can pick it and continue play. Isn't that was this is really about?

    Yeah that’s what I meant. I should have specified that. Having the puck bounce more around the ice would make wrapping the puck around the boards better than what it is imo.

    Also. Remember on old gen when a pass was too strong it would bounce off the stick? It’s gone this gen and cleanly intercepting missile passes makes no sense.

    Please don't bring up good memories of what I used to love :'(
  • NHLDev
    1680 posts EA NHL Developer
    .
    Sgt_Kelso wrote: »

    What I was referring to was the same frustrating "glitch goals" that players like to describe them. Wrap arounds from behind the net and shots from positions like this. If players found a high success rate in a long range slapshot you don't think they'll take more shots from that spot throughout the game? They absolutely will.

    How do you feel when a goal is scored on you from near the blue line? An increase in deflected goals reminds me in those. Could see more of those, sure, but as long as it doesn't get to a state where players aren't relying on it.

    I feel like we're talking different language here... what I was referring to, and what I believe the OP was too, was that pucks need to bounce and deflect more - around the ice, not into the goal. So if I shoot and a d-man blocks it, it might deflect into the boards etc. I don't want to increase the number of deflection goals, nothing like that. So I don't get why you insist on talking about deflection *goals*?

    In the past, when I questioned the puck stopping dead in its tracks when blocked etc. I believe one dev said it was because the 'flow' of the game requires it. Ie. too much time would be wasted on pucks bouncing on around the boards. So you want the puck to stop in its tracks, so the player can pick it and continue play. Isn't that was this is really about?

    Not sure who would have said that. I am the only dev that comments about gameplay on these boards as far as I know and I wouldn't have said that.

    There is nothing pre-programmed into the random deflections of the the puck that occur when it hits a body, stick, etc. It is just the pucks physics.

    The issue with the stick though is that there isn't a give to the stick right now when the puck hits it with force, so if it hits it square, instead of moving the stick inside the players hand and/or forcing their wrist to bend, it treats it like it is held in that position strong.

    As far as what it does off a players body, it is just the raw collision volumes of the player and the puck. The materials and shapes of those objects could be tuned but it is just physics that determine where the puck goes.
  • Davanial
    267 posts Member
    I think your physicist might actually be a geologist, @NHLDev
  • NHLDev wrote: »

    The issue with the stick though is that there isn't a give to the stick right now when the puck hits it with force, so if it hits it square, instead of moving the stick inside the players hand and/or forcing their wrist to bend, it treats it like it is held in that position strong.

    Could you elaborate on this? I'm not getting how the stick being rigid is causing pucks to stop dead when "blocked" by a stick. If there's physics being simulated shouldn't the puck bounce away even more when colliding with an unmovable object?

    This doesn't look or feel realistic at all and it happens multiple times a game. And this isn't the worst example I've seen, but it's what I have uploaded right now.



  • j0rtsu67
    558 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    Every time when physics is mentioned, there should be quotation marks around it... :#
  • NHLDev
    1680 posts EA NHL Developer
    NHLDev wrote: »

    The issue with the stick though is that there isn't a give to the stick right now when the puck hits it with force, so if it hits it square, instead of moving the stick inside the players hand and/or forcing their wrist to bend, it treats it like it is held in that position strong.

    Could you elaborate on this? I'm not getting how the stick being rigid is causing pucks to stop dead when "blocked" by a stick. If there's physics being simulated shouldn't the puck bounce away even more when colliding with an unmovable object?

    This doesn't look or feel realistic at all and it happens multiple times a game. And this isn't the worst example I've seen, but it's what I have uploaded right now.



    Yes, this is the example we are talking about for sure. It is most likely the dampening in the material of the stick itself. Possibly done in the past to try and mimic the give that it would have in a players hand but in many cases is way too much. It is a tough balance as we do see a well positioned DSS generate great deflections up and over the glass.

    It is something that is on our list to improve for sure. I was just explaining how it currently works so people understand that it isn't canned or done on purpose to favor defense or easy pickups. And that is why I was saying it can most definitely be adapted and tuned further to get better results.

    The other thing we have to be careful of are blends in animation. It is possible at times for a stick to move faster than it should be able to and we don't want the puck to be hit in those cases at extreme speeds due to an error in an animation blend. You will still see some of those cases from time to time in game but those are edge cases within physics as well and a product of trying to simulate the outcomes in physics vs canned results.
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!