HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > General Fantasy Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

General Fantasy Talk Forum for fantasy leagues, mock and all time drafts, and hockey video games.

Franchise Hockey Manager 3 - Part 2

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-22-2016, 10:54 AM
  #26
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
It's a common practice for development teams under the same roof to fork a new game over from an older codebase to save time and resources versus programming from scratch. FHM1 clearly was a fork off of an early version of OOTP; however, I wasn't sure if EHM1 was a fork off of FM's revised codebase from a period later than 2007. In a rather roundabout and somewhat insulting manner, you cleared that up for me. Thanks.
Football also clearly has much more in common with hockey than hockey does with baseball - the former are both free-flowing, possession based team sports that involve putting an object in the back of a net, so it would be much easier to share things between EHM and FM in both a stylistic and thematic sense. I'm thus deeply sceptical about the claim that there is nothing from FM which now informs the builds of EHM from the 07 version onwards.

Baseball in contrast is a largely individual sport broken down into defined moments such as batter vs pitcher - it's why it lends itself to statistical analysis so well. You can therefore understand why the FHM developers would want to forge their own path rather than use the OOTP architecture.

brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 11:27 AM
  #27
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
Well, I take my cue from your own ehmtheblueline wiki:

http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/wiki/i...ential_Ability

I mean, it contains doozies like 'Potential Ability (PA) The highest ability a player can reach in his career.' This is the very definition of 'hard-coded' potential.

It then expands on this in the 'Calculation of Attributes', explaining how current ability is assigned across the defensive and offensive attributes, as well as the relative cost for each attribute.

Pretty much exactly the same as in Football Manager, which is what I've said all along...

But I guess this isn't the conventional wisdom, right? Or if it is, it's now been superseded by your 'testing'?
That explains a lot actually...

Sorry if it has been/is a bit awkward in the explanations, but not everything is public knowledge (while I never signed a nondisclosure agreement regarding EHM like I did when I was an FHM researcher, I still don't talk outright/in detail about the EHM07 and new EHM guidance that was available/given)



I "discovered" EHM in the summer/fall of 2010, and what you're referring to was known as wrong then; I believe it may have been correct for the first two versions of EHM (EHM04/EHM05) but it was NOT correct for EHM07. You can see JeffR's explaining this back in 2010 here http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums...p?f=110&t=5334 (yes, the same JeffR that's an FHM developer)

I did many hundreds of hours of work compiling/looking at thousands of hours of testing in the 2010-2014 timeframe to get a fuller understanding (and this testing showed just how wrong what was posted was & how the Guide that JeffR references was wrong in places too). When Colin (archibalduk) at TBL created the EHM Updater years ago, and all the data was exportable into excel spreadsheets, "testing" to determine correctness became quite easy (and knowing exactly what Attributes developed "normally" and which rarely developed/didn't develop and which didn't change ever became clear too)

My understanding is the OOTP/FHM manuals "aren't perfect" so hopefully you'll understand that not everything gets fixed/corrected/explained when ideally it would be (and TBL is all volunteers doing things in their spare time).....that's why not everything is "current/correct" (and honestly, I think it's been known for years on TBL that I'm the source for answers/explanations & anyone new posting on TBL asking questions learns that immediately)

The other factor is not everyone is obsessive and number/data oriented like me! HaHa

CJ has done the NHL for the TBL Rosters for years now, and HE IS! But after him and I, I don't know of any other researcher that uses excel formulas and focuses on a data driven/test results approach like we do.

Over the years I posted things in the private TBL Researcher Forums, but even then PM conversations were held with further detail among a few of us (CJ, Christoffer, Colin and Alessandro) and the postings in the Researchers Forum rarely received responses from others

Via PM I still speak with TBL researchers (especially CJ/Christoffer) & answer questions from many others



Since this spring I've had direct contact with Riz, and have had LOTS of questions answered and explanations given; I have shared the details with only two other people (CJ, and Christoffer/Manimal. Christoffer, except for a few months this year when I was, has been in charge of the TBL Rosters since I discovered EHM in 2010).

In early July of this year I stepped down as the head of the TBL Rosters and left the private TBL Forums (I asked to be removed). I did this for my own mental health, and since then I've been a "free agent" and it's been much better! Not that I still don't have some struggles effectively communicating (as this thread shows HaHa), but "long story short" it has helped/continues to help.



My testing/posting has formed the basis of the current researcher guidelines for EHM. You can find all my recent testing, a researchers guide for the new EHM and more publicly available in the TBL Data Editing Forum in threads I started http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums...orum.php?f=110

So far I've done 4000 hours of testing on the new EHM (three copies/computers often running simultaneously), and the new EHM has HUGE differences compared to EHM07 in terms of editing/Attribute development, and they're noted in my postings (and what you're referencing wasn't correct for EHM07, so LOTS has changed from what you understand)

There's also bugs/issues and other "weirdness" that's evident too, and I've publicly noted this too (which is why I think it's incredibly unfair when I'm referenced to as a fanboy).



So to answer your questions "But I guess this isn't the conventional wisdom, right? Or if it is, it's now been superseded by your 'testing'?"
  • what you're referring to is not the conventional wisdom and hasn't been since before I discovered EHM in 2010
  • yes, what you referenced was superseded (years ago) by my EHM07 testing
  • and in the last 18 months my EHM07 testing has been superseded by my new EHM testing and clarifications/explanations from Riz

Hope that helps


Last edited by Nino33: 08-22-2016 at 11:40 AM.
Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 11:49 AM
  #28
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
Yes, in every single game I played on EHM using that database - variously with the Sabres, Wild, Oilers and Bruins (this is back when I thought EHM was the shizzle, before all the problems with the game started to rear their head to me) - Sean Day turned into an absolute monster. Each time it was with differing deveopment models - with the Sabres I left him in the CHL, with the Wild he went into the AHL, the Oilers straight onto my third pairing. Bruins I forget but was probably a mix of all three.

Maybe I lucked out each time, but if enough randomisation had been built in, then across 4 saves you'd expect one of them to not turn in to an All-star defender.
He was a -9 (150-180) in the 2014-15 database, sounds like that's what you were using (ratings aren't always perfect, in OOTP/FHM or FM/EHM or any other similar game)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 12:40 PM
  #29
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
Well, I don't know if you're referring to me with the second paragraph above, but I started my professional career out of college working for a PC game developer as a tester and (later) a designer, so I am actually quite familiar with game development, engineering, and so forth.
As I told another person using the same logic on SI, when compared to actual testing and (most importantly) actual contact with the developer, when what you're saying conflicts with the testing/developer I don't care at all about what you're saying unless you were working on the game in question



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
FHM1 clearly was a fork off of an early version of OOTP
Sebastian said it wasn't a number of times, and again I trust the actual developer of the game in question



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
The difference I see is that while you may have continued to support FHM past the point that I did, once you stopped you did a pretty significant about-face
See, that's completely false
I expressed my concerns about the "OOTPD stable" before FHM even had a name (because online research showed all the problems I've previously mentioned regarding "supporters" - my issues were not nor have they ever been about the games themselves)

And I quit as a researcher before FHM1 was even released; I took offense to Alessandro saying FHM was "boring as hell" publicly when nothing like that was said in the FHM researcher forum (we were both FHM researchers at the time) & when Jeff stepped in he and I had conflict and I quit

IMO the way things were managed by the FHM team initially (PR approach/false promises, allowing the conflict/being part of it) was just as big a problem as the release itself.....as I've mentioned, you don't see that now from the FHM developers (IMO the supporters actions seem the same to me, just different names)

Sebastian, Jeff and other FHM supporters seem to think I had a problem with FHM.....I had/have a problem with the negative environment that surrounds (practically engulfs) OOTP/FHM (that doesn't surround TBL/SI EHM) and the "PR approach" & I had those issues and openly expressed them before EHM1 was ever released!

And at times I've been part of the problem I know, it's nothing I'm proud of/happy about and I've done what I can to change things (such as not posting on the official FHM Boards and becoming a "free agent" and not being part of any official researcher team) while still trying to do what I enjoy (researching/testing, database creation, answering questions).....and I continue to try and find the right balance/approach

While alas Jeff/Sebastian and the FHM supporters and I have not worked things out, Alessandro and I did almost immediately (and we continued our relationship/still talk now)


I thought the money/sales was the most important thing to maintain development, so I "helped" as I could to maintain development, knowing it was actually money spent not for anything now but for what I hoped to get someday



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
FHM was rolled out in a state that I would categorize as "early alpha" rather than a release candidate. FHM2, from what I have read, is at best "early beta."
I agree, which is why I'm glad I'm not involved & it's why I take umbrage with the excessive praise/PR



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
My history as a game developer informs my status as a consumer, but it does not preclude me from making a judgment call when the price tag for a given product is worthy of a release candidate, but the product itself does not deliver on that investment. If the only way FHM can survive is by rushing out prerelease or beta versions of their software at a fifty-buck price point, then perhaps they deserve to go out of business. The market will have spoken.
I'm 49 now, and stopped playing video games back in the late 1990s (and even then essentially only played a couple/few sports games)
I never had a computer until the last decade or so, and what I had couldn't play the PC games that maybe looked interesting to me HaHa

I also like realism/simulations and that's about it...so when I discovered EHM in 2010 it was a halleluiah moment!

I find modern IRL hockey boring, and the money involved turns me off too, and preferred my childhood memories of hockey.....which is why I created a 1974 database for EHM!

I have no cell phone, no facebook account, and don't do social media at all, and I prefer reading to video (I'm a dinosaurs dinosaur I guess HaHa). Until the start of FHM in late 2012 the only online community I had experienced was TBL, and it's not like most every other community out there (no advertisements, conflict is frowned upon not excused, a "family friendly environment" is genuinely encouraged/expected).

While alas I've had some unacceptable moments (that I'm not proud of/wish had never happened), almost all of my posts were an attempt to help (I did all of Major Junior for years despite having no interest in modern hockey and not ever using a modern database, because I saw the need/lack of researchers, valued the efforts of Christoffer and others, and wanted to help the EHM community)

As one who intensely involved tester/editor of EHM I'm IMO as aware or more aware of it's issues than anyone! When FHM first came out (with a historical mode even) I was very excited! And after the initial crushing disappointment of EHM1 I too reassessed things, but I came to a different conclusion than you.....my conclusion was/is that it'll be YEARS before FHM will be acceptable/worth the money to me (but I supported development financially as I thought that was the only potential way we'd ever get to the point that I'd be happy with the product)

After working on a "dead game" for years (EHM07), and having essentially no interest in 99.9% of all games on the market, I didn't want FHM to die because of "growing pains" (like years ago when a band's first album or two may not be very good...like say Supertramp, without the millionaire friend supporting them initially we might never have got some great albums)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 12:50 PM
  #30
The Feckless Puck
Registered Loser
 
The Feckless Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,130
vCash: 1233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
As I told another person using the same logic on SI, when compared to actual testing and (most importantly) actual contact with the developer, when what you're saying conflicts with the testing/developer I don't care at all about what you're saying unless you were working on the game in question
Well, then, that completely shuts down any dialogues we can have on these subjects. Good luck with your testing.

The Feckless Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 01:49 PM
  #31
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
Football also clearly has much more in common with hockey than hockey does with baseball - the former are both free-flowing, possession based team sports that involve putting an object in the back of a net, so it would be much easier to share things between EHM and FM in both a stylistic and thematic sense. I'm thus deeply sceptical about the claim that there is nothing from FM which now informs the builds of EHM from the 07 version onwards.
I'm completely comfortable with the bolded words - given Riz is a coder for both FM (his primary job) and EHM (what was on his own time, and now is his secondary job with limited time allotted for it) it would likely be impossible for the connections to not be there in terms of style/theme.....but that doesn't at all mean the code is the same, and part of what can be informed is how not to do it/how to be different (how it might need to be different)

It's the assumption that "it's like this in FM so it's the same in EHM" that I disagree with (that's a completely different statement than influencing themes/styles and informing)

And it's only when the testing results and/or direct communication with Riz conflicts with those saying it's just like FM that I say anything - to agree with those saying such things I'd have to disbelieve my own results and believe Riz is lying, and I don't




Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
Baseball in contrast is a largely individual sport broken down into defined moments such as batter vs pitcher - it's why it lends itself to statistical analysis so well. You can therefore understand why the FHM developers would want to forge their own path rather than use the OOTP architecture.
Yep, but some people still think OOTP code was just taken and/or should be taken and inputted into FHM despite Sebastian saying right from the start that's not the case (I believe saying the OOTP code was just taken as the basis of FHM is saying Sebastian is lying, and I don't believe that)

My understanding is Marcus and Andreas helped get FHM2 completed, so maybe things changed and aren't exactly the same as what Sebastian said in 2012-2014



Riz had created a successful freeware version of EHM before SI hired him; Riz has his own vision for EHM (like Sebastian has for FHM) and the direct connections of the company they work for is IMO minimal (Sebastian has said so, I'm sure Riz feels the same way.....EHM is "Riz's baby" and FM is not, and FHM is "Sebastian's baby" and OOTP is not)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 01:59 PM
  #32
Habsfan18
Registered User
 
Habsfan18's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,254
vCash: 500
Haven't read every single post, but I did see Nino post to a link on the OOTP forums where some posters were complaing.

I'll just say that even with some issues, OOTP is still MILES ahead of both EHM and FHM in terms of depth and immersion. Outside of Football Manager, not any other Sports simulation game on the market comes close.

We can talk EHM vs FHM all day, but let's not bring OOTP into this. That series doesn't even belong in the same discussion as EHM and FHM. It's that good. Is it perfect? No. But compared to what's out there hockey wise, OOTP is on another level completely. Take my word for it.

__________________
Interested in checking out 50+ years worth of covers from "The Hockey News?" Check out my collection here: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1382901
Habsfan18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 02:12 PM
  #33
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsfan18 View Post
Haven't read every single post, but I did see Nino post to a link on the OOTP forums where some posters were complaing.

I'll just say that even with some issues, OOTP is still MILES ahead of both EHM and FHM in terms of depth and immersion. Outside of Football Manager, not any other Sports simulation game on the market comes close.

We can talk EHM vs FHM all day, but let's not bring OOTP into this. That series doesn't even belong in the same discussion as EHM and FHM. It's that good. Is it perfect? No. But compared to what's out there hockey wise, OOTP is on another level completely. Take my word for it.
If you had read more you would have seen the reference was regarding the negativity/fanboy defensive posters/attacking style of OOTP supporters, which is abundantly evident in the link

No one (certainly not me) has been talking about the game OOTP and it's depth/immersion/etc

You completely missed my point, but helped validate it by not reading/understanding and still feeling the need to praise the OOTP game as being so great

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 02:38 PM
  #34
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
There's also bugs/issues and other "weirdness" that's evident too, and I've publicly noted this too (which is why I think it's incredibly unfair when I'm referenced to as a fanboy)
To be frank, I think anyone who has done all this analysis on one particular game and who leaps to it's defence whenever it is challenged can only really be classified as a 'fanboy'. One of the defining aspects of a fan is that they think it's fine for them to moan about their own team but a mortal sin for anyone else to do it.

Fans also have the uncanny ability to miss the relevant points from those who challenge them, as you've done repeatedly in our discussion.

So just to cut through all the BS: you're categorically telling me that a player in EHM with a Potential Ability of 120 can achieve a Current Ability of, say, 180?

brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 03:12 PM
  #35
The Feckless Puck
Registered Loser
 
The Feckless Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,130
vCash: 1233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Yep, but some people still think OOTP code was just taken and/or should be taken and inputted into FHM despite Sebastian saying right from the start that's not the case (I believe saying the OOTP code was just taken as the basis of FHM is saying Sebastian is lying, and I don't believe that)
You are bringing an "either/or" binary here that is simply not applicable to programming in general and game development in particular. Most game coding of any value is modular. In the cases of EHM and FHM, there are common routines and subroutines of basic functionality that are separate from the sport-specific logic and bespoke gameplay. When I speak of FHM being a fork of OOTP, it is eminently probable that Sebastian took an early version of OOTP as a framework and thereafter created bespoke code for the hockey-specific gameplay necessary for FHM.

I've read Sebastian's comments about FHM being unique to OOTP and none of them preclude him doing what I describe above. For him to have coded FHM from scratch from the first line of code is impractical and unrealistic - and moreover, the behavior of FHM1 is too reminiscent of early versions of OOTP that I played in the past for it to be coincidental.

You are correct in saying that the OOTP and FHM code are not interchangeable, though. Though the two games probably share a common ancestor, the divergence in development for each has rendered them completely different animals. So it's not as if Sebastian et al. can simply grab a new subroutine from OOTP17 and update FHM in parallel because the games are simply too different at this juncture.

The Feckless Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 04:32 PM
  #36
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Feckless Puck View Post
You are bringing an "either/or" binary here that is simply not applicable to programming in general and game development in particular.
That makes sense (I recall seeing references to EHM initially being based on a version of "Championship Manager")

I honestly wasn't trying to make it so simple, to make it either/or, but in the face of so much ignorance and attacking I guess I didn't do a good job of communicating; my apologies for coming across as so closed minded to what you're saying, I really didn't mean to



This all started because I said that it was not correct to say in EHM CA/PA matching means further development is no longer possible, which is true

And when I corrected false assumptions I was still argued with (it's like facts/truth don't matter)



I said "I think the FHM system for Attributes is potentially more robust than that of EHM (and if all is working as intended significantly more robust)" and I meant it, and others who were involved in both games when FHM first started all felt the same way.....but like you I feel FHM2 is an "early beta" and so I don't yet give it the credit that that FHM supporters demand (potential is far from being realized)

I was willing to keep putting money into FHM in the hopes that the opportunity for continued development would eventually result in a far superior game than the current EHM.....but apparently that doesn't matter/count and is meaningless (and so after being subjected to the negativity of FHM supporters for so long I'm feeling more like you when you say "If the only way FHM can survive is by rushing out prerelease or beta versions of their software at a fifty-buck price point, then perhaps they deserve to go out of business")

As I've repeatedly said, my problem is not with OOTP or FHM as a game, it's with their "supporters"





Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
To be frank, I think anyone who has done all this analysis on one particular game and who leaps to it's defence whenever it is challenged can only really be classified as a 'fanboy'.
I honestly thought fanboy referred to someone who only said positive things, never saw fault, and regularly misspoke/lied to say these positive things/avoid the negative + attack other games repeatedly as "less"

I didn't come to EHM's defense, I simply corrected you (you didn't "challenge" anything...you either misspoke out of ignorance or outright lied in an effort to promote FHM - like what I though defined a fanboy)

Do you think every longtime OOTP/FM researcher is a fanboy? Do you think FHM researchers are fanboys?

Just because I choose to make what I learn public doesn't make me a fanboy (I think it helps the community, and that's why I do it & I've been told many times that it does help and been thanked many times for doing so too)

Just because I choose to spend my time doing what I'm doing doesn't make me a fanboy IMO (and it's because of people like me that thousands of people get to just play/enjoy the game.....I'm not going to feel bad/wrong for doing so)



Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
So just to cut through all the BS: you're categorically telling me that a player in EHM with a Potential Ability of 120 can achieve a Current Ability of, say, 180?
No, I never said anything like that (YOU DID about FHM when you made the comparison to Kane though, and then had to backtrack)

What I have done is shown beyond doubt you don't know what you were talking about in regards to EHM

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:03 PM
  #37
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Do you think every longtime OOTP/FM researcher is a fanboy? Do you think FHM researchers are fanboys?
No... only the ones that, when supposedly debating player development, start slagging off OOTP, how they don't think the claim that FHM2 sims accurately is right because of goalie save percentages, talk about guys being abusive on the FHM section of the blueline forums, repeatedly accuse me of lying etc. etc.

None of that was relevant. At All.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
No, I never said anything like that (YOU DID about FHM when you made the comparison to Kane though, and then had to backtrack)

What I have done is shown beyond doubt you don't know what you were talking about in regards to EHM
No, I didn't backtrack on the Kevin Roy / Pat Kane comparison. That is still very valid. I merely clarified that guys like Connor Hurley and Mark Friedman had developed into 1st line talents in our multi=player league rather than outright superstars, which is still more than what could happen to them in EHM.

And besides, you've just proved my argument, which is that Current Ability cannot exceed Potential Ability...?

That's been my whole point all along: that if a guy is born into EHM with PA of 120 then he will never be able to get a CA of 121. He will effectively always be a 3rd line talent because of that initial starting point which he will never, ever exceed.

To whit: hard coded potential, which was what I initially said to the original poster that caused such a furious and unwarranted reaction from you.


Last edited by brentdog: 08-22-2016 at 05:10 PM.
brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:03 PM
  #38
The Feckless Puck
Registered Loser
 
The Feckless Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,130
vCash: 1233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
As I've repeatedly said, my problem is not with OOTP or FHM as a game, it's with their "supporters"
Sadly, every game has its niche group of wild superfans - it has always been thus. It's just that with the increased footprint of social media, the yowling minority is able to be heard by a lot more people.

When I was a teenager I definitely went "fanboy" over stuff I bought and liked. It's taken many years of maturing and experience working the other side of the fence to purge me of those inclinations.

The Feckless Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:16 PM
  #39
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
And besides, you've just proved my argument, which is that Current Ability cannot exceed Potential Ability...?

That's been my whole point all along: that if a guy is born into EHM with PA of 120 then he will never be able to get a CA of 121.
Except what you actually said was "I'm afraid it isn't. Once a players CA matches with his PA in EHM he simply cannot develop any further." It's not my fault that your knowledge is so lacking you have no idea what development means/how it happens

I never once said CA surpasses PA; your being ignorant and unwilling to listen/learn made you misunderstand and your stubbornness made you fail to learn anything

Seriously, why don't you volunteer to fill the needed position of UK researcher for FHM? You'll learn how being specific/correct actually matters (and a lot more) and you'll be able to say you've actually done something helpful for the FHM community

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:30 PM
  #40
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Except what you actually said was "I'm afraid it isn't. Once a players CA matches with his PA in EHM he simply cannot develop any further."
I'm afraid Nino that it's you who is being wilfully ignorant and obtuse. This isn't about whether or not an attribute can move one or two points more. It's about whether a player can exceed his starting potential.

And the answer is no. Their potential does not develop beyond what it was meant to be. It is capped. Done. Finished.

In other words, hard coded. A guy who starts life in EHM with the potential to be a 3rd liner will only ever, at best, become a 3rd liner.

brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:32 PM
  #41
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
No, I didn't backtrack on the Kevin Roy / Pat Kane comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
To clarify: superstars might have been too strong a description on my part
Your words say you did...



You also said "He has essentially far outstripped his in-game potential to become a 4.5* superstar along the lines of Pat Kane. His Potential Offensive rating of 735 and defensive rating of 645 don't indicate that he should be achieving attribute ratings anything like this. Yet he went on a crazy development curve and the end result is as shown." And just like EHM Attributes can develop after CA/PA match, your words indicate FHM Attributes can develop beyond the Potential Offensive/Defensive rating

They're the same thing! You said FHM did it, EHM didn't. I showed you you were wrong (never said EHM did it better, just that you were wrong about what you were saying EHM didn't do)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:51 PM
  #42
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Except what you actually said was "I'm afraid it isn't. Once a players CA matches with his PA in EHM he simply cannot develop any further." It's not my fault that your knowledge is so lacking you have no idea what development means/how it happens
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
I'm afraid Nino that it's you who is being wilfully ignorant and obtuse. This isn't about whether or not an attribute can move one or two points more. It's about whether a player can exceed his starting potential.
You said cannot DEVELOP any further.
By your logic since in FHM the Offensive/Defensive Potential didn't change the player didn't develop either...

The language/words matter for a researcher (you really should volunteer to help FHM, you'll learn a lot and actually be doing something useful)

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 05:54 PM
  #43
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
You said cannot DEVELOP any further.
By your logic since in FHM the Offensive/Defensive Potential didn't change the player didn't develop either...

The language/words matter for a researcher (you really should volunteer to help FHM, you'll learn a lot and actually be doing something useful)
So a player moving from Current Ability of 101 to 105 isn't development by your logic? That's, what, non-development?

brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 09:59 PM
  #44
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
Your words say you did...



You also said "He has essentially far outstripped his in-game potential to become a 4.5* superstar along the lines of Pat Kane. His Potential Offensive rating of 735 and defensive rating of 645 don't indicate that he should be achieving attribute ratings anything like this. Yet he went on a crazy development curve and the end result is as shown." And just like EHM Attributes can develop after CA/PA match, your words indicate FHM Attributes can develop beyond the Potential Offensive/Defensive rating

They're the same thing! You said FHM did it, EHM didn't. I showed you you were wrong (never said EHM did it better, just that you were wrong about what you were saying EHM didn't do)
Nino, read my post again. At no point did I say Roy wasn't on course to become a superstar - I said it was too strong a description for Hurley & Friedman, not Kevin Roy.

Compare and contrast with the poor Kevin Roy in the latest TBL roster, who probably has a PA of about 100 - I mean, he's playing in Switzerland in my save. Are you seriously telling me that when he has maxed out his PA to 100 CA that he will continue to develop into a legit All-Star winger? We both know that simply isn't true.

brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 10:07 PM
  #45
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
No... only the ones that, when supposedly debating player development
There was no "debate" occurring, I was correcting you
You don't know enough about what you're talking about for there to be a debate, you're just an uniformed fanboy


Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
start slagging off OOTP, how they don't think the claim that FHM2 sims accurately is right because of goalie save percentages, talk about guys being abusive on the FHM section of the blueline forums, repeatedly accuse me of lying etc. etc.

None of that was relevant. At All.
All examples of the proliferation of OOTP/FHM fanboys, all of it relevant to my point that the problem with OOTP/FHM is the "supporters" (and how their PR approach can't be trusted), so all of it relevant to my point (I realize for you truth/facts may be inconvenient)



Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
So a player moving from Current Ability of 101 to 105 isn't development by your logic? That's, what, non-development?
Anytime in EHM that CA and/or Attributes increase development is occurring.
This is really basic; the more you post the less you seem to know/understand

Why don't you just stop? You were wrong about EHM, and don't have a clue about how EHM works
Why not just talk about FHM without having to mention EHM?
There is LOTS of traffic on multiple EHM sites, and no one mentions FHM.....


Last edited by Nino33: 08-22-2016 at 10:35 PM.
Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2016, 11:47 PM
  #46
Nino33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentdog View Post
Nino, read my post again. At no point did I say Roy wasn't on course to become a superstar - I said it was too strong a description for Hurley & Friedman, not Kevin Roy.

Compare and contrast with the poor Kevin Roy in the latest TBL roster, who probably has a PA of about 100 - I mean, he's playing in Switzerland in my save. Are you seriously telling me that when he has maxed out his PA to 100 CA that he will continue to develop into a legit All-Star winger? We both know that simply isn't true.
His PA was -13 so it'll vary game to game.....but I don't care, as it was never a debate

I get the point that FHM fanboys want to "debate" and say how FHM is better, but everyone I know feels like The Feckless Puck or worse...FHM was a disastrous release, FHM2 was "early beta" and both charged a big price for a crappy game, and the supporters/official forums at OOTP and FHM are horrible.....all of these things are the reason why the FHM Forum and FHM reddit are completely dead

All you've done is turn me away from the game more
FHM will have to be spectacularly good and bug free from release to overcome all the damage done IMO (including the continued damage that supporters do), and based on the track record "good luck"

I gave up on FHM and knew it would be YEARS before it might be worthy to me.
I, like almost everyone that's not associated with FHM, have no interest in debating it...it's not worth my time



I wish I'd never said anything
I need to learn to ignore better
It bugs me when people say things that are completely wrong, and then keep arguing and arguing trying to find a way to be right somehow someway

I'm sorry I ever said anything
I like learning, I like understanding things, I'd never argue with someone who knew more and showed me I was wrong, so I assume others will respond the same way (you were so wrong about EHM! you didn't know what you were talking about!)

But I don't care about FHM
I wasn't looking to debate anything about FHM

Nino33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2016, 03:21 AM
  #47
brentdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 42
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nino33 View Post
There was no "debate" occurring, I was correcting you
You don't know enough about what you're talking about for there to be a debate, you're just an uniformed fanboy


All examples of the proliferation of OOTP/FHM fanboys, all of it relevant to my point that the problem with OOTP/FHM is the "supporters" (and how their PR approach can't be trusted), so all of it relevant to my point (I realize for you truth/facts may be inconvenient)



Anytime in EHM that CA and/or Attributes increase development is occurring.
This is really basic; the more you post the less you seem to know/understand

Why don't you just stop? You were wrong about EHM, and don't have a clue about how EHM works
Why not just talk about FHM without having to mention EHM?
There is LOTS of traffic on multiple EHM sites, and no one mentions FHM.....

Not at all Nino. You have agreed with me that it is impossible for a player with a starting potential of 110PA to ever DEVELOP into a 111CA player.

This was my whole point all along!!!

So why are we even debating this? Why have you taken such a vile tone (variously and in no particular order) about:

How much you hated the first FHM release, FHM2 etc.?
Me personally, calling me a liar, a fanboy, ignorant, rude, of being 'jealous' about Football Manager, of being connected to FHM2 in an 'official capacity' etc. etc.?
Slagging off OOTP, trawling through the forum of a game and studio you supposedly dislike in order to find a link to some guys saying something negative?
Bringing up goalie save % in FHM2?
Talked about guys on the blueline forum being rude?

You've already responded to another person on here with at best a passive-aggressive tone. Another has asked why you're just generally slagging off the OOTP franchise - fair enough if you wanted to talk specifically about prospect development in OOTP, but you didn't do that, you just went on some sort of general rant.

I have done none of this. I've calmly and rationally gone about finding information on this topic, posted it on here to support my argument that CA cannot out-develop PA in SI games - and that's it. Some of it from your own EHM forum (which clearly needs updating by the way... I would wager most people that play EHM haven't trawled through the blueline forum to find your research)!

Look, I get that you're a passionate guy, you get stressed, that you've invested 6 years into EHM, that Riz is a mate of yours or whatever. But you've got so caught up on the semantics of this that you've gone well over the top. You're clearly talking about development of attributes specifically and whether it is still possible for them to move up or down once a player has reached his PA ceiling, which is a point I'm willing to concede (even if I don't feel this is really what the initial debate was about). In fact, I'd be interested to know how much a player can move his attributes by once his potential ceiling is reached... I'm guessing either not by much or only in certain categories, as otherwise this would presumably need an increase in CA, which as you've agreed is impossible?

In turn you have to be big enough to admit that what I was talking about was whether a player can develop beyond this initial ceiling, i.e will a 120/120 player ever develop into a 121/121 player.

In my initial post that so drew your ire I said this:

EHM, meanwhile, has more 'hard coded' potentials, which a player will never exceed.

You have yourself confirmed this by saying a player cannot advance his current ability past his potential ability.

And in the initial post where I showed the Kevin Roy screenshot - which you continually selectively quote me from, I note - I said the following:

In EHM this simply wouldn't happen. If a player is a potential 3rd liner with, say, 120 Potential Ability points, then he will never be able to progress beyond this once his current ability matches his potential, i.e 120/120.

They key phrase here is 'beyond this', with this being his potential ability. So, as you can see, I was very much talking about CA and PA and whether a player can out-develop this from the very start.

It's why I've continually pointed you in the direction of stuff that says 'Potential Ability - How good a player can become' etc. etc. on both the EHM and FM forums.

Now, with the information about attributes on the EHM wiki apparently being wrong, I'm assuming that the two are actually still linked? That PA does actually dictate how good a players attributes will ultimately become in EHM? That you're not going to see a player with a PA of 80 running around with 15 in every single attribute? Or that a 120/120 player is highly bloomin' unlikely to have overall/total/however-you-want-to-phrase-it attribute ratings as good as a 150/150 player?

In other words, that there simply isn't "the little 3rd liner that could" in EHM? He won't go on to become a genuine 1st line talent. His potential is hard-coded from the moment his PA is generated in-game - he starts life destined to be a 3rd liner and that's what he will always be.


Last edited by brentdog: 08-23-2016 at 08:01 AM.
brentdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2016, 10:59 PM
  #48
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,623
vCash: 50
Honestly Nino you should just stay in the EHM thread if you don't like FHM. You constantly come over here to slag on the game and it's fans every single chance you get. Then you message people and do the same thing. If you don't like the game just don't play or talk about it. Why must you personally attack people who are simply discussing the game? You've made it your personal mission to attack this game and it's fans every single chance you get. Like it's your duty to make sure no one likes or plays this game ever.

Daximus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2016, 12:03 PM
  #49
Perceptor
World Class
 
Perceptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 135
vCash: 500
I love EHM, but want to give this game a go. Should I just wait til the new version comes out? Also, is there a website other than the OOTP boards where I can reference a guide? Lastly, are facepacks and logo packs available and easy to add into the game?

I'm an OOTP guy so I want to see FHM do well just like EHM.

Perceptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2016, 03:29 PM
  #50
smetana
B2B2B2B HA Champs
 
smetana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: USA I.1
Country: United States
Posts: 1,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perceptor View Post
I love EHM, but want to give this game a go. Should I just wait til the new version comes out? Also, is there a website other than the OOTP boards where I can reference a guide? Lastly, are facepacks and logo packs available and easy to add into the game?

I'm an OOTP guy so I want to see FHM do well just like EHM.
FHM2 is a solid release. Pick it up, especially if it's on sale at some point.

It's not perfect, and there are plenty of areas to be fleshed out as time goes by, but I am comfortable in stating my opinion--IN THE FHM2 THREAD--that it is a better, more realistic game than EHM.

See, that's how opinions work. Reading this thread has been a chore, and I have bitten my tongue more than a few times to keep from posting.

All I will say is this: This perception of the OOTP/FHM community as being stubborn, hard to engage with, smug, overbearing--pick whatever word you like--is a bunch of hogwash.

Somebody should step off their high horse, or, alternately, grab its reins and gallop back to the EHM thread where he should be spending his valuable time.

I won't post again, so don't bother trying to bait me.


smetana 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 07:14 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.