EA Forums - Banner

Glitch scoring/cross one 1timer bought stacked teams

Prev134
I am tired if seeing people buy there team and all the do is use their speed from there highly ranked players just to do a cross ice 1 timer and if you play a solid defensive game to stop them cheap goals, they resort to glitch scoring. Hut has become a money making feature for EA sports and they don't care about the cheaters/farmers who cheat. No matter how hard you work to build your team, you get matched up to losers who have farm teams who don't play. They just collect coins and the packs given from rewards to them just to sell them for $10 million and then use their bought team to pick up the good cards and then use the easiest way possible to win. What happen to good old fashion hockey? Gone are the days of playing to be better then the other player. Now its buy your team and cheat to win

Replies

  • Follisimo
    1181 posts Member
    There are 0 glitch goals in the game. What you consider a glitch goal isn't a glitch. A puck going in the net and counting from say the back of the net is an example of a glitch goal.

    I haven't spent a dime in HUT and I can finish top 20. If you aren't maximizing your ability online with what works then it's on you. Online players are about winning at all costs. Now I'm not saying people who rag the puck constantly are worthy opponents. But if they rely on the cross crease 1 timer then so be it. It goes both ways and you can do it also. You choose not to because of whatever reasons and that is simply going to hinder your success online.

    Honestly it just sounds like HUT isn't for you sadly.

  • Have you checked youtube out for glitch goals? Yeah there are goals and alotta players resort to them when they can't do the cross ice one timers cause you play a solid defensive game.
  • Nuketheyanks420
    3 posts Member
    edited June 3
    If you think there are zero glitch goals in the game, you are either [profanity removed] or you are a glitcher who thinks they are fair goals. Youtube shows you it least multiple glitch goals you see regularly in the game if they can't land the signature cross ice 1 timer everyone goes for


    Edit: Removed profanity. -CM
    Post edited by EA_Aljo on
  • Follisimo
    1181 posts Member
    If you think there are zero glitch goals in the game, you are either **** or you are a glitcher who thinks they are fair goals. Youtube shows you it least multiple glitch goals you see regularly in the game if they can't land the signature cross ice 1 timer everyone goes for

    I'm a 6s player mostly. I don't care for 1v1 gameplay because when the CPU is involved it's not you losing games always.

    It's ok like I said what you consider a glitch isn't my idea of a glitch. I call what you think is a glitch just programming that people figured out.
    Now a puck going thru back of the net and counting is a glitch. A puck going thru a goalies leg pad in the middle of it is a glitch. Going thru his glove hand is a glitch.

  • If you think there are zero glitch goals in the game, you are either [profanity removed] or you are a glitcher who thinks they are fair goals. Youtube shows you it least multiple glitch goals you see regularly in the game if they can't land the signature cross ice 1 timer everyone goes for


    Edit: Removed profanity. -CM

    @Follisimo is 100% right.

    Can you link us to some of the YouTube videos showing 'glitch' goals?

  • Greyinsi
    130 posts Member
    How about the 45degree glide wrister that 99,5% does in threes? Or just simply pass to 5hole, goalies dont even react.
  • People who thinks there is now glitch goals are they people glitch score to win games. If I coyld post links from youtube I would. But it won't allow me cause I just joined this forum. All you gotta do it put glitch goals nhl 21 and there are multiple videos. In 1 video I tried to post, you hear the guy saying if EA doesnt patch the glitch goals, then exploit then for easy wins.
  • Follisimo
    1181 posts Member
    edited June 3
    Not hard to post videos.


    Not a glitch goal. It's called programming.


    Not a glitch goal. It's called programming.


    NOW THIS IS A GLITCH GOAL.


    Go look up Video Game Glitches and you will see what actual glitches are. Whether it be graphical or physics based.

  • Sega82mega
    3794 posts Member
    Yeah the expression glitch goal has really lost its meaning.

    It's one thing to show a goal in practice mode without any defense that works 9 out of 10 times.

    Feels more like goals thats hard to defend gets namned as glitch goals.

    So in that case - when it comes to goals I let in - I would have to say, stop - turns - speed - dekes - hook pass - one timer - goal.

    That chain of reactions is on my 'glitch list'.

    Other goals then that I seem to defend pretty well and is therefore - no glitch goals. 😏
  • Flaming threads by playing the “word game” is getting stale, everyone. We all know what OP is referring too, just express that you’ll be referring to them as “exploits” or “high percentage shots” and proceed to actually contribute to the thread.

    OP, yes it is tiring seeing goalies programmed to be perfect on everything that isn’t one of the 2-3 ways “programmed” to score. It’s not hockey, it’s not fun, it’s so incredibly boring that I’d rather watch field hockey on repeat than ever partake in an online game of NHL.

    Where in the community did people ask for literal perfection on everything outside of one-timers and the 45 degree glide shot? Not saying it didn’t happen because the competitive scene in this game has alsmot zero real hockey experience and has helped develop one of the most boring, ridiculous, unskilled, arcade representations of the sport I’ve ever seen, but I just want to know what medium this feedback was captured with.

    What real NHL game was watched to determine that goalies simply don’t give up rebounds on 99% of shots? What game was watched where scrambles don’t happen due to rebounds? What game was watched where screens had nearly zero affect on goalies?
  • Sega82mega
    3794 posts Member
    edited June 4
    Im genuinely interesting to know how this game would be/feel - If two people that played each other knew exactly how every game mechanics worked and both of them were trying their best to get the most fun out of it.

    In that perspective I cant help feeling sorry for the developers and EA - cause im sure the game would be quite awsome and diffrent - that way.

    Unfortunately I havent played against 1 singel player that only care about getting the most out of this game.

    Instead it's a mad-pursuit to get the 'easiest' goals and to find the fastest way to win.

    It's like two diffrent sides - EA at one side, trying their best to give us a fun hockey game - and then we got ourselves - the gamers on the other side - that trying the best we can to find 'back-doors/flaws' to make it as 'simpel' we can - to win games.

    I wish this game wasen't so easy - that it would take much more then it do - to be 'good' in this game.

    The 'meta' is too easy to just copy/paste - that everyone that play this game more then a month - will pick it up - and then start to use it - over and over again..
  • jrago73
    693 posts Member
    Sega82mega wrote: »
    Im genuinely interesting to know how this game would be/feel - If two people that played each other knew exactly how every game mechanics worked and both of them were trying their best to get the most fun out of it.

    In that perspective I cant help feeling sorry for the developers and EA - cause im sure the game would be quite awsome and diffrent - that way.

    Unfortunately I havent played against 1 singel player that only care about getting the most out of this game.

    Instead it's a mad-pursuit to get the 'easiest' goals and to find the fastest way to win.

    It's like two diffrent sides - EA at one side, trying their best to give us a fun hockey game - and then we got ourselves - the gamers on the other side - that trying the best we can to find 'back-doors/flaws' to make it as 'simpel' we can - to win games.

    I wish this game wasen't so easy - that it would take much more then it do - to be 'good' in this game.

    The 'meta' is too easy to just copy/paste - that everyone that play this game more then a month - will pick it up - and then start to use it - over and over again..

    Its up to the dev team to make that happen. A majority of gamers are playing to win in any game and ea controls what is effective to win, if their goal is to have people play like real hockey then they have to make real hockey the most effective way to win.
  • Sega82mega
    3794 posts Member
    edited June 4
    jrago73 wrote: »
    Sega82mega wrote: »
    Im genuinely interesting to know how this game would be/feel - If two people that played each other knew exactly how every game mechanics worked and both of them were trying their best to get the most fun out of it.

    In that perspective I cant help feeling sorry for the developers and EA - cause im sure the game would be quite awsome and diffrent - that way.

    Unfortunately I havent played against 1 singel player that only care about getting the most out of this game.

    Instead it's a mad-pursuit to get the 'easiest' goals and to find the fastest way to win.

    It's like two diffrent sides - EA at one side, trying their best to give us a fun hockey game - and then we got ourselves - the gamers on the other side - that trying the best we can to find 'back-doors/flaws' to make it as 'simpel' we can - to win games.

    I wish this game wasen't so easy - that it would take much more then it do - to be 'good' in this game.

    The 'meta' is too easy to just copy/paste - that everyone that play this game more then a month - will pick it up - and then start to use it - over and over again..

    Its up to the dev team to make that happen. A majority of gamers are playing to win in any game and ea controls what is effective to win, if their goal is to have people play like real hockey then they have to make real hockey the most effective way to win.

    Get what you sayin - and of course I agree - but in hockey there's 1.000 000 000 diffrent scenarios that could play a big part in how the puck and the players will travel, before a goal take place.

    Meanwhile if you take a shooter game for example - where there's more or less only one way to kill the enemy. Point the cross-hair - fire off.

    Maybe a bad example - but to demand 'real hockey' being the most effective way to win is one thing - (the easy part) but to get it just like that is a whole nother thing.(the hard part)

    Cross creases is a real hockey play - a really common and effective way to score IRL - but look how good that work in our game?

    I do think EA would like to make real hockey the most effective way to win - but it's a loooong road to go. Would probebly take a more or less perfect AI that could adjust really dynamic to the puck and possible plays.

    At least for the 1vs1 section.
  • Sega82mega
    3794 posts Member
    Puck ragging is quite interesting - it's not something EA on purpose created for us to do - it's something we took and made it to our thing.

    And how can EA prevent us from just skating around the ice with the puck without taking 'real hockey' out of it?

    We would probebly move 10 step back in our wish to play real hockey if they took out some importen game mechanics to make life harder for 'puck ragging'.
  • IceLion68
    1575 posts Member
    Flaming threads by playing the “word game” is getting stale, everyone. We all know what OP is referring too, just express that you’ll be referring to them as “exploits” or “high percentage shots” and proceed to actually contribute to the thread.

    OP, yes it is tiring seeing goalies programmed to be perfect on everything that isn’t one of the 2-3 ways “programmed” to score. It’s not hockey, it’s not fun, it’s so incredibly boring that I’d rather watch field hockey on repeat than ever partake in an online game of NHL.

    Where in the community did people ask for literal perfection on everything outside of one-timers and the 45 degree glide shot? Not saying it didn’t happen because the competitive scene in this game has alsmot zero real hockey experience and has helped develop one of the most boring, ridiculous, unskilled, arcade representations of the sport I’ve ever seen, but I just want to know what medium this feedback was captured with.

    What real NHL game was watched to determine that goalies simply don’t give up rebounds on 99% of shots? What game was watched where scrambles don’t happen due to rebounds? What game was watched where screens had nearly zero affect on goalies?

    Ya people arguing on semantics when we all know what we are referring to is pretty pedantic.
    Dad. Gamer. Rocker. Geek.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1731 posts Member
    edited June 4
    There's a big difference between glitch goals and high percentage shot areas.

    The distinction is important and the people in this thread pointing that out are not wrong, nor are they being pedantic.

    There are also no 'programmed' ways to score. That's just hilarious.

    Also - goalies don't hold 99% of the shots with no rebounds. If they are for you, then maybe you have a slider adjustment issue. When I play OVP, HUT or EASHL and I am aiming for a rebound, I get a rebound probably 50-60% of the time. It's not difficult and acting like it never happens just demonstrates how you're playing with sliders that a majority of the people aren't playing with - so maybe the issue is your sliders?
  • KidShowtime1867
    1731 posts Member
    edited June 4
    I am tired if seeing people buy there team and all the do is use their speed from there highly ranked players just to do a cross ice 1 timer and if you play a solid defensive game to stop them cheap goals, they resort to glitch scoring. Hut has become a money making feature for EA sports and they don't care about the cheaters/farmers who cheat. No matter how hard you work to build your team, you get matched up to losers who have farm teams who don't play. They just collect coins and the packs given from rewards to them just to sell them for $10 million and then use their bought team to pick up the good cards and then use the easiest way possible to win. What happen to good old fashion hockey? Gone are the days of playing to be better then the other player. Now its buy your team and cheat to win

    Can you post a video of someone resorting to glitch scoring?

    If you're giving up a lot of cross-crease goals, you need to work on defending. If your opponent is able to consistently find open space in high % scoring areas, they're going to score. This is not a glitch. It's called being successful at the game and mastering the mechanics should come with success and should not be artificially nerfed just cuz some people can't defend it.

    And if you're mad that people are successful in HUT and have a better team than you, I would suggest not playing HUT or at least taking the online competition less seriously.
  • There's a big difference between glitch goals and high percentage shot areas.

    The distinction is important and the people in this thread pointing that out are not wrong, nor are they being pedantic.

    There are also no 'programmed' ways to score. That's just hilarious.

    Also - goalies don't hold 99% of the shots with no rebounds. If they are for you, then maybe you have a slider adjustment issue. When I play OVP, HUT or EASHL and I am aiming for a rebound, I get a rebound probably 50-60% of the time. It's not difficult and acting like it never happens just demonstrates how you're playing with sliders that a majority of the people aren't playing with - so maybe the issue is your sliders?

    So just to confirm, we all know what the OP is referring too yet the two people that “had to make the distinction” had to make the distinction because...why? What confusion did it clear up? What constructive dialogue stemmed from it? Oh, zero...like usual.

    As far as your additional flame bait in your little rant about my sliders, I think it was fairly obvious to understand that I was referring to online gameplay when talking about rebounds, but the funny thing is, you literally proved my point while trying to again claim I have some misconceptions about the game because of my sliders.

    Goalies IRL give up rebounds even on shots where you’re not specifically aiming for one. Hence the problem, goalies in this game are way too perfect on good chances. How many more deflections do we need to see ski-ball ramp up into the top corner where it’s then reacted too and CLEANLY saved by the goalie to believe that rebounds aren’t in a good place? We’re not seeing reactionary glove saves with a rebound, we’re not seeing blocking torso saves where the puck gets shot out past the goalie’s covering arch which prevents rebounds, all of these things ARE addressed in my sliders, thank you very much, but that doesn’t make the online game magically better because you’re able to curl wrist a low shot to beat the ridiculously fast stick deflection animations lol. The “rebound” system is clearly designed by and praised by people who don’t understand a single thing about goaltending. They’re robotic and rebounds are anything but. They’re organic, they’re unique, they happen on chest shots, shoulder shots, pad shots, glove shots, you name it. There’s so many shots you see that require a block or a quick reaction through a screen that there’s no reason why you should have to literally plan out in your head “I am going to try to get a rebound” to actually generate one. It’s just a fundamental lack of understanding of the position. Why are there so few scrambles in this game if pucks aren’t going in/being saved too cleanly?

    I watched two hockey games last night, both didn’t involve slowing gliding around the outside whipping their arms behind their backs to fend off checks till they got to a 45 degree angle and then shot the shot everyone knows is “highly successful” past the goalie’s glove. Didn’t see a tip save start bottom blocker, get ramped up top glove only to result in a clean glove save, did you? I did see a one-timer goal off of a pant deflection though where the goalie was partially screened and it rolled through his 7-hole. Seen that in this game online? Of course you haven’t, it doesn’t happen! You know what? I think I even saw a few rebounds on glove-side shots and chest shots too. Crazy right?

    To that point “rebounds” is also a vague term, so for all I know you’re shooting pucks from the blueline with zero screen, watching the goalie deflect the pucks into the corner, and are considering that a “rebound” you know? I’m probably going to need about 10,000 videos at least from you to somewhat maybe assume you’re not considering “controlled rebounds” as “rebounds” which is something that actually requires a distinction which would actually lead to a constructive dialogue, but I’ll leave you with that hint for now and will further define it if necessary.
  • IceLion68 wrote: »
    Flaming threads by playing the “word game” is getting stale, everyone. We all know what OP is referring too, just express that you’ll be referring to them as “exploits” or “high percentage shots” and proceed to actually contribute to the thread.

    OP, yes it is tiring seeing goalies programmed to be perfect on everything that isn’t one of the 2-3 ways “programmed” to score. It’s not hockey, it’s not fun, it’s so incredibly boring that I’d rather watch field hockey on repeat than ever partake in an online game of NHL.

    Where in the community did people ask for literal perfection on everything outside of one-timers and the 45 degree glide shot? Not saying it didn’t happen because the competitive scene in this game has alsmot zero real hockey experience and has helped develop one of the most boring, ridiculous, unskilled, arcade representations of the sport I’ve ever seen, but I just want to know what medium this feedback was captured with.

    What real NHL game was watched to determine that goalies simply don’t give up rebounds on 99% of shots? What game was watched where scrambles don’t happen due to rebounds? What game was watched where screens had nearly zero affect on goalies?

    Ya people arguing on semantics when we all know what we are referring to is pretty pedantic.

    I’ve been hearing the phrase “glitch goals” since NHL 07 and the “curve shot” lol. It’s not an “accurate” term but it’s certainly an accepted term in the NHL community and everyone who has played even a year of online NHL should know exactly what is being referenced. Pedantic is a perfect word, thank you Ice. Wish I thought of that myself.
  • KidShowtime1867
    1731 posts Member
    edited June 4
    So just to confirm, we all know what the OP is referring too

    Do we?
    if you play a solid defensive game to stop them cheap goals, they resort to glitch scoring.

    ......
    yet the two people that “had to make the distinction” had to make the distinction because...why? What confusion did it clear up? What constructive dialogue stemmed from it? Oh, zero...like usual.

    GLITCH = unexpected error that results in the game state becoming unresponsive and/or executing commands in such a way that is outside the normal and expected behaviour.

    The constructive dialogue is this: OP claims people are using 'GLITCH GOALS' to get the upper hand. There are no glitch goals. There are no goals that can be scored with consistency that are the result of a GLITCH.

    As far as your additional flame bait in your little rant about my sliders

    Can you please take some criticism without claiming it's a 'flame bait'? It was an honest evaluation of what you are experiencing in your games. I'm not here to flame bait you and claiming that I am is NOT moving the discussion forward whatsoever.
    I think it was fairly obvious to understand that I was referring to online gameplay when talking about rebounds, but the funny thing is, you literally proved my point while trying to again claim I have some misconceptions about the game because of my sliders.

    It's not obvious to understand you are referring to online gameplay because you claim on a consistent basis that you ONLY play offline. And you ONLY play with sliders that mold to YOUR specific gameplay style.

    So when you chime in on a topic and say:
    What real NHL game was watched to determine that goalies simply don’t give up rebounds on 99% of shots? What game was watched where scrambles don’t happen due to rebounds? What game was watched where screens had nearly zero affect on goalies?

    One can only assume based on your post history that this specific perspective about rebounds is likely skewed due to you playing the game with sliders that cater to your specific idea of what YOU think hockey SHOULD be played like, rather than the sliders we are all playing with in the competitive online community.

    If you spent some time playing in the competitive scene, you'd have a much better perspective for online specific complaints, IMO.


    Goalies IRL give up rebounds even on shots where you’re not specifically aiming for one.

    And they do in NHL 21 too!

    How many more deflections do we need to see ski-ball ramp up into the top corner where it’s then reacted too and CLEANLY saved by the goalie to believe that rebounds aren’t in a good place?

    I have plenty of clips of deflections that AREN'T cleanly saved by the goalie:

    wPYDyYP.gif

    We’re not seeing reactionary glove saves with a rebound

    tmPx0BV.gif


    all of these things ARE addressed in my sliders, thank you very much,

    Maybe they are for YOU based on the way YOU play the game.


    The “rebound” system is clearly designed by and praised by people who don’t understand a single thing about goaltending.

    Here we go again saying that a development team who's been steeped in NHL and all things hockey for 30 years "doesn't understand a single thing about goaltending"....



    They’re robotic and rebounds are anything but. They’re organic, they’re unique, they happen on chest shots, shoulder shots, pad shots, glove shots, you name it. There’s so many shots you see that require a block or a quick reaction through a screen that there’s no reason why you should have to literally plan out in your head “I am going to try to get a rebound” to actually generate one. It’s just a fundamental lack of understanding of the position. Why are there so few scrambles in this game if pucks aren’t going in/being saved too cleanly?

    Because 90% of the people playing this game shoot top shelf 99% of the time. If players were encouraged to take different shots and aim at different places on the net, you'd see more rebounds like you're talking about.

    It's not EA's fault people ONLY shoot top corner.

    I watched two hockey games last night, both didn’t involve slowing gliding around the outside whipping their arms behind their backs to fend off checks till they got to a 45 degree angle and then shot the shot everyone knows is “highly successful” past the goalie’s glove.

    Yes because NHL teams know how to defend that garbage and a lot of online competitive players know how to defend it too... so what's your point?


    To that point “rebounds” is also a vague term, so for all I know you’re shooting pucks from the blueline with zero screen, watching the goalie deflect the pucks into the corner, and are considering that a “rebound” you know? I’m probably going to need about 10,000 videos at least from you to somewhat maybe assume you’re not considering “controlled rebounds” as “rebounds” which is something that actually requires a distinction which would actually lead to a constructive dialogue, but I’ll leave you with that hint for now and will further define it if necessary.

    Fine. I'll whip up some rebound videos for you. It's not going to be that difficult.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

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