HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > EA Sports NHL
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
EA Sports NHL Discussion forum for EA Sports NHL video games.

Bluth Company 360 GM League Discussion/Signup Thread PT 6: UPDATED RULES

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-16-2012, 03:21 PM
  #1001
EvoLu7ioN
Registered User
 
EvoLu7ioN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,173
vCash: 500
Damn Gary lol, good game, so many big hits. I feel bad for hitting Giroux tho... you're right he really does get blown over by a small gust of wind lol.

EvoLu7ioN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 03:25 PM
  #1002
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoLu7ioN View Post
Damn Gary lol, good game, so many big hits. I feel bad for hitting Giroux tho... you're right he really does get blown over by a small gust of wind lol.
Haha. Yeah good game. Thought for sure one of us would have injuries after that game.

Gary83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 04:04 PM
  #1003
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
59 combined shots, 2 combined goals in the - game.

That's either excellent goaltending, or inept finishing.



where did you go? I kept inviting you, you kept hopping into other games without any message back, then you sent me a message during a game, said you could play in a few minutes, but were offline by the time I got out of that game 10 minutes later? If you see this, message me on here. I'm going "Away" on the xbox to put football on, but I can jump back in if you're good to play.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 12-16-2012 at 04:11 PM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 04:56 PM
  #1004
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
Can we get some clarification on the faceoff tie-up rule?

Is it completely banned? Banned only at center-ice (as it relates to the breakaway exploit)? Banned only in excess?

I really think it needs to at least be allowed in the defensive zone--particularly if you are not doing it all the time--but I'm really not clear on what the rule is at the moment...

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:14 PM
  #1005
That Habs Fan
CH fan in TO
 
That Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,211
vCash: 500
definitely agree that it's okay in the d-zone, particularly on the pk, basically anytime it would be used in real life.

using it often, or at centre-ice however is kinda cheese.

That Habs Fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:20 PM
  #1006
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Eh. Either allow tie ups or don't. I don't use them really. What's next? No slot wrist shots or backhand forehand when you're leading? You can only stockey when tied or losing?

Gary83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:31 PM
  #1007
Price 89
Registered User
 
Price 89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 984
vCash: 500
Banned at center ice and abusing it

Like stockey and best in the world use it but don't over use it

Price 89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 06:23 PM
  #1008
HaroldDruken
Registered User
 
HaroldDruken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Can we get some clarification on the faceoff tie-up rule?

Is it completely banned? Banned only at center-ice (as it relates to the breakaway exploit)? Banned only in excess?

I really think it needs to at least be allowed in the defensive zone--particularly if you are not doing it all the time--but I'm really not clear on what the rule is at the moment...
Use it less than you're using it now. You're obviously annoying people with it.

HaroldDruken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 06:40 PM
  #1009
cbenini87
Registered User
 
cbenini87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
NYI will be on sporadicly throughout the evening. Drop me a message on here and we'll schedule when I get a chance.

cbenini87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 06:44 PM
  #1010
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldDruken View Post
Use it less than you're using it now. You're obviously annoying people with it.
Hah! Is that the threshold for the backhand-forehand too? Disallowed as soon as it annoys your opponent?

I'm not really sure what you're talking about. One poster complained about face-off tie-ups in one of my games, then admitted that it only happened a few times. I haven't received any other complaints, but I'm getting absolutely killed on faceoffs in the defensive zone, so it seemed worth clarifying.

It seems to me that the only true exploit is at center, as it relates to the breakaway.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 12-16-2012 at 06:59 PM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:32 PM
  #1011
Price 89
Registered User
 
Price 89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Hah! Is that the threshold for the backhand-forehand too? Disallowed as soon as it annoys your opponent?

I'm not really sure what you're talking about. One poster complained about face-off tie-ups in one of my games, then admitted that it only happened a few times. I haven't received any other complaints, but I'm getting absolutely killed on faceoffs in the defensive zone, so it seemed worth clarifying.

It seems to me that the only true exploit is at center, as it relates to the breakaway.
diversity

Price 89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:42 PM
  #1012
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Price 89 View Post
diversity
I think you missed the point.

The question was whether it was always banned, only banned in excess, or only banned in certain areas.

You would seem to suggest its B. HaroldDruken would seem to think it is A (since he seemed to back the claim that 4 out of 25+ faceoffs was "too often"). A few other posters (including myself) suggested that it really only made sense to ban it at center.

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 08:01 PM
  #1013
dunner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
I think you missed the point.

The question was whether it was always banned, only banned in excess, or only banned in certain areas.

You would seem to suggest its B. HaroldDruken would seem to think it is A (since he seemed to back the claim that 4 out of 25+ faceoffs was "too often"). A few other posters (including myself) suggested that it really only made sense to ban it at center.
This is foolish because it is no more effective then other faceoffs. I hope people realize that when you lose a faceoff with the tie up your player doesn't even move so you don't even see that your opponent tried to tie you up.

I understand don't use it at center because of the breakaway but anywhere else it should be allowed as much anyone wants. I have been getting absolutely dominated in faceoffs lately because since this stupid rule there is almost no chance of beating a player with a better faceoff attribute which in real life is BS because as someone said even the best are like 60%.

dunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 08:57 PM
  #1014
xX Hot Fuss
Registered User
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,942
vCash: 500
Why is this still an issue? I've clearly addressed this 3 times now. Tying people up on faceoffs is like anything (Stockey/Price goals). It's allowed but excessive use and/or relying on it to win most of your faceoffs is not allowed

xX Hot Fuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 09:48 PM
  #1015
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
Why is this still an issue? I've clearly addressed this 3 times now. Tying people up on faceoffs is like anything (Stockey/Price goals). It's allowed but excessive use and/or relying on it to win most of your faceoffs is not allowed
The confusion, I think, comes from the equation of one part of the face-off triangle with the rebound-goal or backhand-forehand deke. Both of the latter are overpowered because the AI on its own is not equipped to deal. They thus require an unusual degree (and type) of human intervention (e.g., taking over the goalie, abandoning the defensive player closest the puck to cover the slot). There is no "AI" on a faceoff, it is all a matter of 1) timing and 2) human strategy.

The tie-up will lose most of the time against a forehand draw-back, assuming similar timing, etc. The tie-up will beat the backhand draw-back, which is why it is particularly appealing in the defensive zone. The backhand draw-back beats the forehand draw-back. And then you layer in stick lifts, which have their own logic.

If you are saying that one of those three methods is subject to some sort of special standard about using it all the time, does that mean that the other two are as well? After all, eliminating one of the three options unbalances the system EA created--in this case, by overpowering the backhand draw-back. There's no natural "counter," and thus it ends up giving undue weight to the faceoff attribute.

Anyway, for those who are curious, this seems to be a generally well-regarded guide: http://nhlguides.net/faceoffs/

EDIT: also, that's not at all what you said when you initially laid out the rule:

Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
It's too overpowered and I'm banning it from my league. Already talked to Millw00d about it and he's agreed to stop. No other GM is allowed to do it.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 12-17-2012 at 12:19 PM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:03 PM
  #1016
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Yikes. Not looking like a good block to get games in.

Gary83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:14 PM
  #1017
Nick1219
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
For people who didn't see my earlier posts... please play the Edmonton CPU until Wednesday night. Busy with exams and work. Thanks.

Nick1219 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:23 PM
  #1018
HaroldDruken
Registered User
 
HaroldDruken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
The confusion, I think, comes from the equation of one part of the face-off triangle with the rebound-goal or backhand-forehand deke. Both of the latter are overpowered because the AI on its own is not equipped to deal. They thus require an unusual degree (and type) of human intervention (e.g., taking over the goalie, abandoning the defensive player closest the puck to cover the slot). There is no "AI" on a faceoff, it is all a matter of 1) timing and 2) human strategy.

The tie-up will lose most of the time against a forehand draw-back, assuming similar timing, etc. The tie-up will beat the backhand draw-back, which is why it is particularly appealing in the defensive zone. The backhand draw-back beats the forehand draw-back. And then you layer in stick lifts, which have their own logic.

If you are saying that one of those three methods is subject to some sort of special standard about using it all the time, does that mean that the other two are as well? After all, eliminating one of the three options unbalances the system EA created--in this case, by overpowering the backhand draw-back. There's no natural "counter," and thus it ends up giving undue weight to the faceoff attribute.

Anyway, for those who are curious, this seems to be a generally well-regarded guide: http://nhlguides.net/faceoffs/
I think you're the only one still asking about it...

Just don't do it all the time and you'll be fine. For example, if there are 4 ways to win a faceoff, do the tie-up 1/4 of the time. This doesn't mean always do the tie-up in the offensive zone and not in the defensive or neutral, but switch it up in all 3 zones as well.

People who do the tie-up are typically really good at it and therefore nearly impossible to defend against... no matter what.

HaroldDruken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:26 PM
  #1019
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 26,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldDruken View Post
I think you're the only one still asking about it...

Just don't do it all the time and you'll be fine. For example, if there are 4 ways to win a faceoff, do the tie-up 1/4 of the time. This doesn't mean always do the tie-up in the offensive zone and not in the defensive or neutral, but switch it up in all 3 zones as well.

People who do the tie-up are typically really good at it and therefore nearly impossible to defend against... no matter what.
My question is if two people try the tie up, who wins?

ArGarBarGar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:30 PM
  #1020
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldDruken View Post
I think you're the only one still asking about it...

Just don't do it all the time and you'll be fine. For example, if there are 4 ways to win a faceoff, do the tie-up 1/4 of the time. This doesn't mean always do the tie-up in the offensive zone and not in the defensive or neutral, but switch it up in all 3 zones as well.

People who do the tie-up are typically really good at it and therefore nearly impossible to defend against... no matter what.
...I asked about it because when I used the tie-up four times out of 25 the other night, someone complained, which you know, because you took up their case about an hour ago. I don't consider four times to be excessive, but since I'm new, I haven't really used it since--not more than once or twice anyway--but as dunner pointed out, it kills you if your opponent has even adequate centers and good timing. There's no counter to it if you take the tie-up out.

My point is simply this: if I never choose my handedness first, and I only ever choose the tie-up option to counter a back-hand draw--as EA intended, does that mean I'm spamming the tie-up, or my opponent is spamming the backhand draw?

EDIT: Why should anyone have to pick the "wrong" response simply to conform with some arbitrary one-quarter-of-the-time standard?


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 12-16-2012 at 10:49 PM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 01:30 AM
  #1021
Chessarmy
Its a Marty Party
 
Chessarmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,780
vCash: 500
meh, another game, another loss due to a dinky wrister from the high slot. Then the other goalie stops everything. Same old story

Chessarmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 08:15 AM
  #1022
HaroldDruken
Registered User
 
HaroldDruken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
...I asked about it because when I used the tie-up four times out of 25 the other night, someone complained, which you know, because you took up their case about an hour ago. I don't consider four times to be excessive, but since I'm new, I haven't really used it since--not more than once or twice anyway--but as dunner pointed out, it kills you if your opponent has even adequate centers and good timing. There's no counter to it if you take the tie-up out.

My point is simply this: if I never choose my handedness first, and I only ever choose the tie-up option to counter a back-hand draw--as EA intended, does that mean I'm spamming the tie-up, or my opponent is spamming the backhand draw?

EDIT: Why should anyone have to pick the "wrong" response simply to conform with some arbitrary one-quarter-of-the-time standard?
4 out of 25 is not excessive. Not sure why someone would be complaining about it.

HaroldDruken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 08:45 AM
  #1023
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Damn you Paul Martin, injured again!

Gary83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 09:27 AM
  #1024
cbenini87
Registered User
 
cbenini87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
Washington, I tried to reach you on xbox last night, no response. I also tried to reach you during the day on HFboards but your message box is full. Please let me know if you'll be able to play today.

cbenini87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-17-2012, 10:21 AM
  #1025
EvoLu7ioN
Registered User
 
EvoLu7ioN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbenini87 View Post
Washington, I tried to reach you on xbox last night, no response. I also tried to reach you during the day on HFboards but your message box is full. Please let me know if you'll be able to play today.
Between 5-11PM pacific time.

EvoLu7ioN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.