tactics rule changes, a year later

[Femur]

is anyone else feeling a little frustrated about the rule changes we did last year in regards to the tactics on trapping an whatnot?

i know there are sound reasons we did this to be realistic, but i am finding the practical application is lessening the fun for me at least. now maybe i just suck, and i need to blow my team up to fit this new reality...well that probably is the case. but i always felt before that i could DO something if the team was going bad. right now, i feel it is like that vibration football. i set up my lines, test sim them out to at least get a fighting chance in each game, and no matter how carefully i put them together i get outshot 32-20.

i am sure a bunch of you think i am just crying because i am getting a taste of suckage, but in an honest self-assessment, i am not sure that is complete it. i think we may have overcooked it a bit.

[Virtual Jarmo]

This is something I've been thinking about lately. How much fun is the league? Have we gone too far? I know that the workload on the Committee is a nightmare and we're asking a lot of you guys for something that's supposed to be a fun exercise without a major time commitment. You'll always have varying levels of activity, but I can't help but wonder if waning activity for some guys and outright abandonment from others is my fault.

We've made it entirely too hard to make transactions with pro-ration and call-ups and send downs and all of these sorts of things. At some point, enough is enough, and I think we crossed that point a long time ago. We've had so many teams in salary cap hell, buyouts aren't as helpful as they should be, and the logistics of trades have too many layers.

There's gotta be a happy medium somewhere.

[Parker]

I'm not going to lie, it's less fun than it used to be. I know exactly what Femur is saying, when things aren't working but there's very little you can do to shake up your lineup. Because of all the rules.

I don't know if the rules are to blame for people quitting or abandoning the league. For us long-term GM's, a lot of the rule additions have been brought in gradually so we're used to them, but I could see how a new GM could be overwhelmed.

We've got a couple of active new GM's, what do you guys think?

[TorontoGM]

Other teams are winning? BORING.

[Virtual Jarmo]

I'm not going to lie, it's less fun than it used to be. I know exactly what Femur is saying, when things aren't working but there's very little you can do to shake up your lineup. Because of all the rules.

I certainly don't want to change course in the middle of a season, but I understand. It's not as much fun for me either.

[Montreal Canadiens]

Which rule changes in particular? The only change we made was not allowing NZT on the 1st line wasn't it?

The pro-ration definitely makes trades very complicated, my suggestion would to be to only have that kick-in at trade deadline or not at all.

[Penguin]

I don't see any problem. Salary cap has made everything so much more challenging. I had to give away Armia for someone worse, 10 years older. Part of the game. Ryder for Cole, etc.

As for line tactics, I wouldn't limit NZT and H&G to 50sec. 70sec total, but one line can be 70sec. It would give more options.

[Femur]

The only change we made was not allowing NZT on the 1st line wasn't it?

and H&G is not allowed on first line, too, right?

those were what i was talking about. i argued about them at the time by saying that of course you are not going to trap in real hockey with your first line, but this sim is a simplification anyway. NZT is just a catch-all to try to slow up the game if need be, was my argument. it was rejected, and that is fine. i am just asking if others are finding it the way i have. i am not going to bitch (well, further) because we are all playing by the same rules. just wondering.

and yes, even Walters is right (ring the bell on that one! who knew?) that much of my frustration is that i blow. i will correct him on one thing: i have nothing against the former "have-nots" that are rising up. i am just unhappy that this former "have" is going down. felling sorry for myself is something i make time for!

[GM Office Q]

This was the point I was trying to make when all these rule changes were being voted on. The more rules on lines we have, the less we can do and everyone will eventually converge to the 'correct' line combinations of 70 sec PP - 50 sec HG - etc. These rule changes essentially takes away the coaching aspect of EHM. Take a look at all 30 teams and you'll probably see most of them with very similar tactics setup.

That said, I've been trying to build my team to suit these new rules and it seems to be paying off so far. Early, but it is easily my strongest team since the beginning of EHEC. I am definitely not in favour of changing it back, even though my vote went against the rule changes in the first place.

[Montreal Canadiens]

oh, I thought we always had H&G not allowed on the top line. We might all have similar line tactics right now, but even with NZT allowed on the top line, we all had similar ones as well, all of us were trapping non-stop. It was all a bunch of 2-1 scores and what not, which nobody in real life is gonna send out their top guys in a trap in a tie hockey game or a close game, etc.

I wouldn't really care about allowing H&G on the top line personally but I'm in favor of keeping out the trap.

[Jets GM]

I have been waiting for the chance to coherently reply to this thread!

First, the financial system. I think the current system has some mechanical issues that can either be worked out or simplified. Parker points out the issue of AHL salaries; since NHL salaries are prorated, shouldn't AHL salaries be as well? For example, the same formula should apply (not sure if based of GP, or days spent on roster) when a player is recalled. This would solve the problem of trading away a player, and then recalling someone resulting in both the pro-rated former players salary plus the 100% of the new player salary who has been recalled ending up on the books. Furthermore, the UFA system should also reflect the pro-rated ideology imo. If you were to sign a player 1/2 or 2/3 of the way through the season at $2,500,000, he current gets 2.5m to play a third or half of the year and the team gets the full cap hit. Shouldn't pro-rated contracts for UFA signed mid-season also reflect the pro-rated financial system like they do irl? This would get the quality UFA's we have sitting on the sidelines back into the game, and able to re-negotiate realistic longer-term contracts through arbitration instead of them sitting on the sidelines. I liked it much better when it was the 25%, 50%, and 75% deadlines for pro-ration. It encouraged trading.

Second, tactic rules. I was really upset when we brought in restrictions for NZT. Like Quinn said, it`s incredibly frustrating to build a team with a certain makeup in mind, to only have it squashed when its announced you can`t play the way you envisioned. I heard Brad`s argument that even with less restrictions, all teams would gravitate toward the same strategy. With more combinations for strategies and shift lengths, plus more unique draftee`s created by Adam, the idea that more freedom to run your team would lead to the same results we have now is illogical. The more restrictions, the more close we get to an optimum "strategy" or "team". Once it's solved, everyone will just try to replicate the solution. I would be in favor of immediate, or grandfathering in, the full removal of all line tactic restrictions. This opens up GMs to use their imagination and creates more depth playoff time to the strategy involved. Restrictions leads to simplification, freedom leads to creativity.

i <3 EHEC

[SharksGM]

I like the restrictions and think they're reasonable. Full NZT on 4 lines is just lame, unfun and unrealistic.

It's probably less fun than it used to be because the novelty has worn off and most of us vets understand how the game works pretty well. There aren't many surprises left to be had. Having said that, part of it is EHM itself. You don't really get a lot of feedback on how individual players are doing or whether your tactics are actually achieving anything or not. There's nothing much to be done about that now.

[Virtual Jarmo]

One of my thoughts would be to require use of four of the five tactics to be used on a nightly basis. Anybody for/against that?

[Montreal Canadiens]

I like the restrictions and think they're reasonable. Full NZT on 4 lines is just lame, unfun and unrealistic.

I remember the playoff series vs WPG it was like 4 trap lines vs 4 trap lines.

I'd be against that as I specifically picked up players for my 2nd hitting line. If you are going to use that rule, I would say then get rid of the rule allowing more than 1 H&G line.

[Calgary.Flames]

One of my thoughts would be to require use of four of the five tactics to be used on a nightly basis. Anybody for/against that?

No one plays the Run and Gun or so...
I personnally don't know what kind of players thrive on Dump and Chase so I don't use it.

I don't like this idea, sorry.
There's no shame trying to build your team like PIT or PHX who both won EHEC championships.

To me, our financial policy is our biggest enemy going forward.

[Jets GM]

One of my thoughts would be to require use of four of the five tactics to be used on a nightly basis. Anybody for/against that?

No one plays the Run and Gun or so...
I personnally don't know what kind of players thrive on Dump and Chase so I don't use it.

I don't like this idea, sorry.
There's no shame trying to build your team like PIT or PHX who both won EHEC championships.

To me, our financial policy is our biggest enemy going forward.

I agree that making teams use strategies they don't like isn't a good solution.

I think developing regulations that prohibit the extended use one 1 tactic for a extended period of time is the best idea, but I think things are to restricted right now. For example, no tactic can be used for more then 150 seconds or be more then 50% of the teams 5 on 5 tactic length. Something like that.

[Penguin]

Pro-ration should be scrapped, pain in the ass to keep track and nobody cares!

[Virtual Jarmo]

Pro-ration should be scrapped, pain in the ass to keep track and nobody cares!

This is a growing sentiment. But, the point was to be able to make deals and stay within the cap, especially down the stretch.

Our entire financial policy needs an overhaul, mostly with this at the forefront. There are too many things to cover with pro-ration (UFAs, call-ups, trades). It's too much work for Tim, who doesn't really have the time to do it.

[Calgary.Flames]

Pro-ration should be scrapped, pain in the ass to keep track and nobody cares!

I know we look for realism but I'm with Bern on this one. I wouldn't mind at all if we scrapped that completely.
Maybe like for the trade deadline week or so you could put it at 50% or something.
Encourages activity around that time of year.

I hate the fact that it's giving you guys headaches. I'd rather see you put time into draft classes, Olympics and other possible rule changes to come instead of working numbers day in, night out.

Parker and Bern already said that they are done trading for this season because they find this pro-ration thing to be a pain.
I can only speak for myself, but trading is like 10x more fun than crunching numbers.

[VancouverCanucksGM]

I agree with Calgary....ewww....I'm gonna go wash that off now.

[Penguin]

I don't think anyone made moves based on pro-ration this year, not even too late to scrap it right now.

And, CGY, I'm not making anymore trades cause I think my team is set for a REPEAT and 4 trades in a week is a bit pushing it.