Login

akamai · 12-01-2016, 04:05 PM

After a lot of hemming and hawing, here's what I've come up with as a potential suggestion:

Code:
Choose an initial designation (F/D). Then choose a template from the following:

Center (F only): Skating/Scoring 99, Strength AND Face-offs 95, Passing Weak/85

At-Home (F/D): Skating/Puck Handling 99, Passing 95, Scoring Weak/85

Two-Way (F/D): Defense/Endurance 99, Passing 95, Scoring Weak/85

Power (F/D): Defense/Checking 99, Scoring 95, Passing Weak /85

The attributes designated 95 will follow the regular update scale, but be capped. The attributes designated 85 will work as they currently do, where it costs more to improve your weakness.

And here's my reasoning:

1) Having the scoring and passing as both a 95-strength and a weakness ensures that, with a capped build, every player still has a healthy gap in decision-making attributes. (Though Skating is also technically a decision-making attribute, where you put it doesn't make as much difference in the sim, so somewhere between the two is perfectly fine.) This also means you really can't select a "less important" attribute to be your weakness. Level playing field.

2) Pros and cons of the builds:

Centers: Forced to dump points into Faceoffs and Strength, but will have a small boost to them above other players. Will start as only forwards since that's the position they're likely to play best in, but in a pinch the younger centers will be strong enough to play elsewhere on a team with a lot of center depth if a GM requests a position change for them.

Two-ways and At-Homes: Mirrored builds; you'll need some of each but who goes F and who goes D doesn't matter quite as much. Skating is a decision-making attribute, but pretty much matched by defense, which is a good predictor of sim success. Skating and Scoring is the slightly weaker of the pair, so gets the slightly nicer boost to Puck Handling. (Endurance will make all attributes decay slower, but the difference between a 95 and a 90 END player is negligible unless playing top-line minutes.)

Power: Now, you can be a power player/enforcer without TOO too much penalty. Checking still sucks as a top-tier strength since durability is turned off, so you probably won't do well at low TPE levels unless you hold off on putting points there like everyone else, but at the upper levels ten-point Passing/Scoring gap is fine so you can still do well if you earn enough TPE to balance dumping points in checking.

This will work best with the once-per-season allowed positional change.

Thoughts?

***WannabeFinn*** · 12-01-2016, 04:09 PM

So no build can go with passing as a strength? And centers are forced to go with passing as a weakness?

:-?

RomanesEuntDomus · 12-01-2016, 04:20 PM

Not a fan player archetypes whenever they are brought up in any league, all they do is restrict peoples freedom to build their player however they see fit, leading to less diversity overall.

fgh · 12-01-2016, 04:21 PM

I like these first few suggestions, but we definitely need more types in this mold and a few tweaks.

Code:
Choose an initial designation (F/D). Then choose a template from the following:

Center (F only): Skating/Passing/Scoring 99, Strength AND Face-offs 95, Passing/Scoring Weak/85

At-Home (F/D): Defense/Puck Handling 99, Passing AND Any of Your Choice 95, Scoring Weak/85

Two-Way (F/D): Skating/Endurance 99, Passing/Defense AND Any of Your Choice 95, Scoring Weak/85

Power (F/D): Strength/Checking 99, Scoring/Defense AND Any of Your Choice 95, Passing/Puck Handling Weak /85

Scorer (F/D): Scoring 99, Puck Handling/Skating AND Any of Your Choice 95, Defense/Strength Weak/85

Distributor (F/D): Passing 99, Puck Handling/Skating AND Any of Your Choice 95, Defense/Strength Weak/85

Enforcer (F/D): Fighting 99, Checking/Strength AND Any of Your Choice (No Scoring OR Passing) 95, Skating Weak/85

With the Any of Your Choice selections, you can't select the left out selection (e.g: Choose Checking for Enforcer, can't choose Strength as Second 95 attribute).

SabresFan · 12-01-2016, 04:24 PM

Quote:Originally posted by RomanesEuntDomus@Dec 1 2016, 03:20 PM
Not a fan player archetypes whenever they are brought up in any league, all they do is restrict peoples freedom to build their player however they see fit, leading to less diversity overall.

100%

fgh · 12-01-2016, 04:29 PM

Quote:Originally posted by RomanesEuntDomus@Dec 1 2016, 03:20 PM
Not a fan player archetypes whenever they are brought up in any league, all they do is restrict peoples freedom to build their player however they see fit, leading to less diversity overall.

What about equipment like SBA uses to uncap an attribute.

Ballerstorm · 12-01-2016, 04:33 PM

I like that this is begin discussed but binding like he presented ideas.

There was a great archetype discussion I forget how many seasons ago but I really like those ideas. I'll try and dig it up and link it.

Edit - found it - http://theshl.b1.jcink.com/index.php?showtopic=59406

Steelhead77 · 12-01-2016, 04:45 PM

Centers should always be allowed to have 99 passing, 99 face offs and 99 strength as their 3 options if they choose.

Nice presentation, but imo we don't need any big changes, maybe some tweaks, but not a fan of moving toward archetypes. SHL should be about freedom to build the player you want and be unique.

Templates should provide a general guideline but still allow the freedom to choose within it. As long as we have templates that allow for varying combinations of strength/weakness, we'll always have diversity.

---> ParmBorg Highlights <---

#1 All-Time SHL Goal & Point Scorer
- First 2,000 TPE Player in SHL History -
- First 400 Goal Scorer in SHL History -
- Only 500 Goal Scorer in SHL History -
- First GM to Win 5 & 6 Challenge Cups -
Esa Anrikkanen Award - SMJHL ROY - Est. S34
Vidrik Onoprienko Award Winner - S45

Dragonite

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us