EA Forums - Banner

Forcing tripping

Replies

  • TheMajjam wrote: »
    Sega82mega wrote: »
    We need to have a L2 that work properly, how it suppose to do. It would open up so many options for the game to develop.

    And what about all the people that just turn back when they got the puck, over and over again, away from the play. Is it that scary to at least try to challenge the opponent 1 on 1?... It destroy the game, so it almost becomes a vacuum(protecting bubbel) between the players on the ice, and nothing gets in sync.

    I'm assuming that L2 is the PS4 version of Left Trigger? Vision control?

    I also want to add, I don't know how you Sony Ponies play this game with symmetrical sticks.

    4akxs0.jpg

    :D

    why you gotta upload a video of me getting beat? :(
  • TheMajjam wrote: »
    Sega82mega wrote: »
    We need to have a L2 that work properly, how it suppose to do. It would open up so many options for the game to develop.

    And what about all the people that just turn back when they got the puck, over and over again, away from the play. Is it that scary to at least try to challenge the opponent 1 on 1?... It destroy the game, so it almost becomes a vacuum(protecting bubbel) between the players on the ice, and nothing gets in sync.

    I'm assuming that L2 is the PS4 version of Left Trigger? Vision control?

    I also want to add, I don't know how you Sony Ponies play this game with symmetrical sticks.

    4akxs0.jpg

    :D

    why you gotta upload a video of me getting beat? :(

    Some have to die to that others may live. I did post myself making a wrong decision on a play. We even.
  • You're all wasting your breath. Stop buying this game. It's a crap product. Tell all your friends.
  • You're all wasting your breath. Stop buying this game. It's a crap product. Tell all your friends.

    The 21 year might be the first year I buy 0 EA games! FIFA has me intrigued though. You can finally cross the ball as well as you can in PES. Took them long enough.
  • I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.
  • I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.

    Is it too much to ask for, say, when you miss a poke you get burned instead of taking an instant penalty?
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited August 2020
    I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.

    The funny thing is that the original complaint about the poke checking being OP was done because people who were bad at defense would get blown by, and then they would start rapidly mashing the RB button (poke) while trailing you. There would be no penalty for this tactic, no reduced speed, no tripping penalties and to make matters worse the stick would auto-track the puck from any position and could easily dislodge the puck from you. Even worse, it would sometimes (often) hit the puck on the return animation, thus bringing the puck back to them, thus rewarding them for bad defense.

    This was addressed in a patch, that was later famously rolled back less than 24 hours after it came out, because every scrub on earth started crying on EA's social media that they were taking too many penalties and their games were lasting over 40 minutes. Instead of EA telling THEM to "git gud", they just capitulated and put the poke checks back to what they were.

    Eventually, they would get around to "fixing" the issue, but they fixed it with what we have now: a function that is useless unless you use it with 100% perfection. Use it at the bad time? You get a penalty. Use it at the right time? You get a penalty. So you end up not using it at all, unless you like spending time in the sin bin or allowing penalty shots (3s).

    Adding the nail to the coffin that is our function as defensemen. We can't use our sticks effectively (DSS also causes tripping... because EA says it's balanced). We can't use our bodies to hit the carrier, because all he needs to do is keep rotating his body slightly at lightning speeds to make hits glance off him. We can't tie up players right next to us to stop their forward progress, because in order to tie up their body or their stick, they and YOU need to be at a complete stand-still. Again, because that's EA's idea of "realism" and "balance".

    Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, goalies still suck. Both the AI ones and the human ones.

    So what's left that still works relatively well and has almost NO downside? Yup! The Offense.
  • TheMajjam
    794 posts Member
    edited August 2020
    VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.

    The funny thing is that the original complaint about the poke checking being OP was done because people who were bad at defense would get blown by, and then they would start rapidly mashing the RB button (poke) while trailing you. There would be no penalty for this tactic, no reduced speed, no tripping penalties and to make matters worse the stick would auto-track the puck from any position and could easily dislodge the puck from you. Even worse, it would sometimes (often) hit the puck on the return animation, thus bringing the puck back to them, thus rewarding them for bad defense.

    This was addressed in a patch, that was later famously rolled back less than 24 hours after it came out, because every scrub on earth started crying on EA's social media that they were taking too many penalties and their games were lasting over 40 minutes. Instead of EA telling THEM to "git gud", they just capitulated and put the poke checks back to what they were.

    Eventually, they would get around to "fixing" the issue, but they fixed it with what we have now: a function that is useless unless you use it with 100% perfection. Use it at the bad time? You get a penalty. Use it at the right time? You get a penalty. So you end up not using it at all, unless you like spending time in the sin bin or allowing penalty shots (3s).

    Adding the nail to the coffin that is our function as defensemen. We can't use our sticks effectively (DSS also causes tripping... because EA says it's balanced). We can't use our bodies to hit the carrier, because all he needs to do is keep rotating his body slightly at lightning speeds to make hits glance off him. We can't tie up players right next to us to stop their forward progress, because in order to tie up their body or their stick, they and YOU need to be at a complete stand-still. Again, because that's EA's idea of "realism" and "balance".

    Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, goalies still suck. Both the AI ones and the human ones.

    So what's left that still works relatively well and has almost NO downside? Yup! The Offense.

    Tripping penalty for poke.
    Tripping penalty for DSS.
    Tripping penalty for using shot block.
    Tripping penalty for desperation dive.
    Tripping penalty for breathing.
  • VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.

    The funny thing is that the original complaint about the poke checking being OP was done because people who were bad at defense would get blown by, and then they would start rapidly mashing the RB button (poke) while trailing you. There would be no penalty for this tactic, no reduced speed, no tripping penalties and to make matters worse the stick would auto-track the puck from any position and could easily dislodge the puck from you. Even worse, it would sometimes (often) hit the puck on the return animation, thus bringing the puck back to them, thus rewarding them for bad defense.

    This was addressed in a patch, that was later famously rolled back less than 24 hours after it came out, because every scrub on earth started crying on EA's social media that they were taking too many penalties and their games were lasting over 40 minutes. Instead of EA telling THEM to "git gud", they just capitulated and put the poke checks back to what they were.

    Eventually, they would get around to "fixing" the issue, but they fixed it with what we have now: a function that is useless unless you use it with 100% perfection. Use it at the bad time? You get a penalty. Use it at the right time? You get a penalty. So you end up not using it at all, unless you like spending time in the sin bin or allowing penalty shots (3s).

    Adding the nail to the coffin that is our function as defensemen. We can't use our sticks effectively (DSS also causes tripping... because EA says it's balanced). We can't use our bodies to hit the carrier, because all he needs to do is keep rotating his body slightly at lightning speeds to make hits glance off him. We can't tie up players right next to us to stop their forward progress, because in order to tie up their body or their stick, they and YOU need to be at a complete stand-still. Again, because that's EA's idea of "realism" and "balance".

    Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, goalies still suck. Both the AI ones and the human ones.

    So what's left that still works relatively well and has almost NO downside? Yup! The Offense.

    Kinda weird how a certain group of people can make such big changes...
  • VeNOM2099 wrote: »
    I think one of the major problems with tripping is that it's not actually tied to where the puck is on the ice, but rather what the opponent is pressing on their controller. The game is clearly programmed to draw a trip if you poke while they are moving their stick to either side. If the devs can clean up this faulty logic and have pokes just aim for the puck it would help a lot. We could get closer to a point where poking through someone's legs causes a trip like it should, but holding the puck to the side just a little bit doesn't turn the defender into a complete idiot.

    The funny thing is that the original complaint about the poke checking being OP was done because people who were bad at defense would get blown by, and then they would start rapidly mashing the RB button (poke) while trailing you. There would be no penalty for this tactic, no reduced speed, no tripping penalties and to make matters worse the stick would auto-track the puck from any position and could easily dislodge the puck from you. Even worse, it would sometimes (often) hit the puck on the return animation, thus bringing the puck back to them, thus rewarding them for bad defense.

    This was addressed in a patch, that was later famously rolled back less than 24 hours after it came out, because every scrub on earth started crying on EA's social media that they were taking too many penalties and their games were lasting over 40 minutes. Instead of EA telling THEM to "git gud", they just capitulated and put the poke checks back to what they were.

    Eventually, they would get around to "fixing" the issue, but they fixed it with what we have now: a function that is useless unless you use it with 100% perfection. Use it at the bad time? You get a penalty. Use it at the right time? You get a penalty. So you end up not using it at all, unless you like spending time in the sin bin or allowing penalty shots (3s).

    Adding the nail to the coffin that is our function as defensemen. We can't use our sticks effectively (DSS also causes tripping... because EA says it's balanced). We can't use our bodies to hit the carrier, because all he needs to do is keep rotating his body slightly at lightning speeds to make hits glance off him. We can't tie up players right next to us to stop their forward progress, because in order to tie up their body or their stick, they and YOU need to be at a complete stand-still. Again, because that's EA's idea of "realism" and "balance".

    Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, goalies still suck. Both the AI ones and the human ones.

    So what's left that still works relatively well and has almost NO downside? Yup! The Offense.

    Kinda weird how a certain group of people can make such big changes...

    Remember though, we’re the vocal minority...not the actual vocal minority that gets changes every time they cry lol.
  • Follisimo wrote: »

    I feel when they talk about offense being overpowered it's because there is either CPU involved which we know aren't 100% reliable or that the team doesn't play defense as a whole. You can shut down top teams by playing smart defense with your defenders angling offenders into position for your should be backchecking forwards to rub them off the puck and transition back up the ice.

    You are correct... to a point. I still feel that there is an imbalance favoring offense and their "toolset" vs defense and theirs.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Follisimo wrote: »
    Davanial wrote: »
    TheMajjam wrote: »
    LOL. My head just hurts thinking about the crap show '21 is going to be like.

    uzUW5k9.gif

    I wonder if I'll even be lucky enough for an explanation on just why you'd want to do this to players not even out of position.

    I'd be curious to know the Discipline of the player(s) your were using there.

    What does/could discipline have to do with a prime poke check?

    Because they matter in how well your control your stick. You do know the game isn't based totally on how well you aim your poke always or how well you aim your shots. The game is an RPG and always has been. Aiming properly does help but the other attributes also get taken into account.

    Take face-offs for example it takes a bunch of things into account.. Overall of the Face-offs stat + Counter of their face-off + timing (which can hurt if your connection is trash)

    I guess. You would think a sure-fire poke check would negate under the hood stuff. I guess I am mistaken.

    If poke checks worked perfectly every time, would that be seen as not sim enough or overpowered?

    Only if it is like that even during bad angles or positioning.

    If you're in good position and a good angle, it should work as expected. If you're not, it should increase the chances of getting or just simply result in a penalty.

  • Back to NHL 20:

    From a realism perspective, I can’t body check someone then pull the puck through them while their flat on the ice because of collisions and solid objects, and “realism” yet a micro inch of my stick blade that glances off the tiniest part of the heel of a skate blade of a guy who isn’t even picking up his feet can trip him? I can’t pull the puck through a skate even a microsecond after dislodging the puck from a carrier who decided to just straight-line into me because of “realism” but my stick can clip through a guys hip, glance the outside of his knee and trip him? Point being, for how many frustrating examples of “realism” we see in this game, why is poke checking purposefully tuned to be NOT realistic? Especially when it makes the game even more frustrating and less realistic from a hockey perspective?

    I’m not really sold on the idea that poke check balance is in a good place for many reasons. 100% perfect execution required to simply not take a penalty, not even get the puck but simply to just not take a penalty, is neither in a “balanced” state nor is it even close to realistic. Active stick play can be expected from about the age of 8-9 and up. This game discourages, if not punishes, active stick play.

    Preach!
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • VeNOM2099
    3178 posts Member
    edited August 2020
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    Follisimo wrote: »
    Davanial wrote: »
    TheMajjam wrote: »
    LOL. My head just hurts thinking about the crap show '21 is going to be like.

    uzUW5k9.gif

    I wonder if I'll even be lucky enough for an explanation on just why you'd want to do this to players not even out of position.

    I'd be curious to know the Discipline of the player(s) your were using there.

    What does/could discipline have to do with a prime poke check?

    Because they matter in how well your control your stick. You do know the game isn't based totally on how well you aim your poke always or how well you aim your shots. The game is an RPG and always has been. Aiming properly does help but the other attributes also get taken into account.

    Take face-offs for example it takes a bunch of things into account.. Overall of the Face-offs stat + Counter of their face-off + timing (which can hurt if your connection is trash)

    I guess. You would think a sure-fire poke check would negate under the hood stuff. I guess I am mistaken.

    If poke checks worked perfectly every time, would that be seen as not sim enough or overpowered?

    Only if it is like that even during bad angles or positioning.

    If you're in good position and a good angle, it should work as expected. If you're not, it should increase the chances of getting or just simply result in a penalty.

    The issue is, I can be skating parallel to the puck carrier, pointing/skating TOWARDS where he's carrying the puck. I hit RB to poke the puck that is obviously directly in front. The other player isn't using A to protect the puck or RS to move the puck to the side. He's just lightly weaving with the LS, but the puck is direct in front of him, in the open, unprotected. Easy poke, right?

    But when the poke comes out, it goes BACKWARDS right into his skates. Logic? EA seems to think so. Logical and Balanced... :/

    But hey, we're the ones that need "skill" when using an automated function that aims for us. LOL!
    Post edited by VeNOM2099 on
  • EA_Aljo wrote: »
    When do we say the game is perfect? We explain mechanics and are instantly shot down. I'm not debating the realism or what a real defender would do. I'm discussing how it works in the video game and the choices people make when they play in the game's current state. I'm not saying anyone is wrong with what they think should happen. That's why I talk about defending exploits. Yes, exploits exist, but they also depend on one side not defending them. Is it totally realistic? No. So, the option is to defend them or have them used against you successfully.

    Nobody is saying we're always right and the players are always wrong. There's a lot of assuming about how we feel which, like many other assumptions, people believe to be real. We don't think you guys are wrong and we're right all the time. If we did, we wouldn't be so interested in feedback and engagement with you all. Changes don't happen overnight. It takes a long time to gather feedback and implement it.

    Explaining how the mechanic works is a good thing. I am happy that EA understands and can explain why things happen, based on the functioning of the mechanics.

    It's great someone from EA can look at a clip and explain what happened or (occasionally) admit when something looks like an actual glitch.

    But the reason these discussions just seem to go around in circles is that we can never seem to get past the explanation of "things are working as designed" and debunking misconceptions on what we thought *should* have happened, and read between the lines here and address the underlying issue; which is that we want/need better/different mechanics for some of these systems.

    The failure to make this assumptive leap is what leaves many of us feeling frustrated and unheard.

    Presumably addressing this sort of thing successfully is what gave us TPS for example. I would love to hear that EA is looking at some of these other systems similarly and acknowledging their shortcomings.

    So IOW, great the mechanic works this way, as it was designed. I think what needs to be inferred here is that while the implementation, may be working as designed, it is DESIGNED wrong. There are flaws - logical or conceptual - that people are trying to point out. That is what is seemingly ignored or brushed off.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • Would be wonderful to get invited behind the scenes, to get a clue of what they are working on to improve this game serie. Something tells me, alot of the stuff that we are critical against, is probebly things they are aware of, and maybe working with to find a solution.

    perhaps a better communication between player base and developers would gain alot, at least silence the worst squealers.
  • EA_Aljo
    3204 posts EA Community Manager
    IceLion68 wrote: »
    EA_Aljo wrote: »
    When do we say the game is perfect? We explain mechanics and are instantly shot down. I'm not debating the realism or what a real defender would do. I'm discussing how it works in the video game and the choices people make when they play in the game's current state. I'm not saying anyone is wrong with what they think should happen. That's why I talk about defending exploits. Yes, exploits exist, but they also depend on one side not defending them. Is it totally realistic? No. So, the option is to defend them or have them used against you successfully.

    Nobody is saying we're always right and the players are always wrong. There's a lot of assuming about how we feel which, like many other assumptions, people believe to be real. We don't think you guys are wrong and we're right all the time. If we did, we wouldn't be so interested in feedback and engagement with you all. Changes don't happen overnight. It takes a long time to gather feedback and implement it.

    Explaining how the mechanic works is a good thing. I am happy that EA understands and can explain why things happen, based on the functioning of the mechanics.

    It's great someone from EA can look at a clip and explain what happened or (occasionally) admit when something looks like an actual glitch.

    But the reason these discussions just seem to go around in circles is that we can never seem to get past the explanation of "things are working as designed" and debunking misconceptions on what we thought *should* have happened, and read between the lines here and address the underlying issue; which is that we want/need better/different mechanics for some of these systems.

    The failure to make this assumptive leap is what leaves many of us feeling frustrated and unheard.

    Presumably addressing this sort of thing successfully is what gave us TPS for example. I would love to hear that EA is looking at some of these other systems similarly and acknowledging their shortcomings.

    So IOW, great the mechanic works this way, as it was designed. I think what needs to be inferred here is that while the implementation, may be working as designed, it is DESIGNED wrong. There are flaws - logical or conceptual - that people are trying to point out. That is what is seemingly ignored or brushed off.

    Thank you for that feedback. It's absolutely appreciated. As far as poke checks working as designed, that's something a dev would need to comment on, but I believe they're working mostly as designed. Of course there are going to be instances where unintended actions happen. That doesn't mean we all think poke checks are perfect and don't need any work. They are currently serving the purpose of breaking up plays and knocking away the puck when used well and without spamming them. There of course is room for improvement, but it also takes a long time to see that happen. We basically have to gather feedback for weeks, months or a year before potentially seeing changes. Which makes people think they're being ignored when that's not the case. It takes a lot of time to code, balance and tune game mechanics.
  • TheMajjam
    794 posts Member
    edited August 2020
    So earlier in the thread someone mentioned to me that using DSS instead of the poke check when trying to cut off the angles in what I showed in the OP. This was my response.

    [But this is EA NHL we're talking about here. The player would've magnetically gained the puck back anyway and because you are DDSing, you slide right on by and out of the play. Oh, you know, like this. The skater literally has to do nothing and the puck returns back on their stick.]

    I also posted this gif of my buddy early in the thread.

    8ov8b5w.gif

    This weekend, I was "fortunate" enough to be put in the same situation. I didn't poke, but I used DSS with a forward coming down the wing. He only does an RS puck protect, but brings the puck forward again right on my stick (and body, and skates). I suppose anyone that knows this game knows what the outcome is going to be.

    kZiXpwh.gif

    When I play D with the AI, I'm often forced to play both sides of the ice. No matter what setting we use, the AI never challenges forwards coming across the blue line in a straight line. He gives them all the room in the world so I have to pressure while the center on my team hustles to cover the slot while the AI does absolutely nothing. If I poke here, I pick up a trip. Because I'm hustling, if I hit this guy at full speed, I'm going to puck up a charge. If the other team is smart enough and passes to the teammate wing instead of taking the shot, this play started by nothing more than a skater doing the bare minimum to retain the puck, results in a goal.

    You can say there's room for improvement on the mechanics until you're blue in the face, but the defensive mechanics of the game have gone downhill since 19.
  • TheMajjam wrote: »
    So earlier in the thread someone mentioned to me that using DSS instead of the poke check when trying to cut off the angles in what I showed in the OP. This was my response.

    [But this is EA NHL we're talking about here. The player would've magnetically gained the puck back anyway and because you are DDSing, you slide right on by and out of the play. Oh, you know, like this. The skater literally has to do nothing and the puck returns back on their stick.]

    I also posted this gif of my buddy early in the thread.

    8ov8b5w.gif

    This weekend, I was "fortunate" enough to be put in the same situation. I didn't poke, but I used DSS with a forward coming down the wing. He only does an RS puck protect, but brings the puck forward again right on my stick (and body, and skates). I suppose anyone that knows this game knows what the outcome is going to be.

    kZiXpwh.gif

    When I play D with the AI, I'm often forced to play both sides of the ice. No matter what setting we use, the AI never challenges forwards coming across the blue line in a straight line. He gives them all the room in the world so I have to pressure while the center on my team hustles to cover the slot while the AI does absolutely nothing. If I poke here, I pick up a trip. Because I'm hustling, if I hit this guy at full speed, I'm going to puck up a charge. If the other team is smart enough and passes to the teammate wing instead of taking the shot, this play started by nothing more than a skater doing the bare minimum to retain the puck, results in a goal.

    You can say there's room for improvement on the mechanics until you're blue in the face, but the defensive mechanics of the game have gone downhill since 19.

    The amount of times that I've made a defensive play on the puck carrier and they automatically regain possession is infuriating. I know this was said earlier in this thread or another, but a lot of the explanations for these types of plays is that the defensive player didn't do something correctly. I've said this in many threads but the defense needs better tools to compete with the offense. The ability to pin players is broken and often leads to holding penalties. Hitting is inconsistent as hell. Too many times, the puck carrier is just shifted with no indication/animation suggesting that they were hit. I don't think it's too much to ask for an overhaul of defensive animations and tools but I know that offense sells so.....
  • TheMajjam wrote: »
    So earlier in the thread someone mentioned to me that using DSS instead of the poke check when trying to cut off the angles in what I showed in the OP. This was my response.

    [But this is EA NHL we're talking about here. The player would've magnetically gained the puck back anyway and because you are DDSing, you slide right on by and out of the play. Oh, you know, like this. The skater literally has to do nothing and the puck returns back on their stick.]

    I also posted this gif of my buddy early in the thread.

    8ov8b5w.gif

    This weekend, I was "fortunate" enough to be put in the same situation. I didn't poke, but I used DSS with a forward coming down the wing. He only does an RS puck protect, but brings the puck forward again right on my stick (and body, and skates). I suppose anyone that knows this game knows what the outcome is going to be.

    kZiXpwh.gif

    When I play D with the AI, I'm often forced to play both sides of the ice. No matter what setting we use, the AI never challenges forwards coming across the blue line in a straight line. He gives them all the room in the world so I have to pressure while the center on my team hustles to cover the slot while the AI does absolutely nothing. If I poke here, I pick up a trip. Because I'm hustling, if I hit this guy at full speed, I'm going to puck up a charge. If the other team is smart enough and passes to the teammate wing instead of taking the shot, this play started by nothing more than a skater doing the bare minimum to retain the puck, results in a goal.

    You can say there's room for improvement on the mechanics until you're blue in the face, but the defensive mechanics of the game have gone downhill since 19.

    Holding the stick out isn't a great way to dislodge the puck away even if you do make contact in this game. Granted that guy most likely shouldn't have recovered the puck going forward with it.

    Makes you wonder how the game determines how the puck reacts to a stick held out instead of an actual poking motion. Also if it keeps you from recovering the puck. Always remember RPG stats are taken into account on things.

    This will still exist in 21 guaranteed

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

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