CP's NHL 13 Connected GM Interest Thread

[bspec]

Originally Posted by FlyingDonutz

Well, A while back I was told I could be the commish. I'm not trying to fill anyone elses role, but this is the role I asked for and this is the role I'm trying to fill as best I can. I'm not in charge, I'm not in control, I'm simply trying to get the rules straight as we're approaching release quickly.

You don't have to be so defensive with every criticism said. It's not absolutely crucial that we start this on day 1, so chill a bit. Just wait for Jobo to set up the draft and get the ball rolling, it's not his first rodeo.

[FlyingDonutz]

Originally Posted by bspec

Good point. Should be settled then, I'm onboard with the Superstar on hardcore settings. Like you, I'll probably be simming 90% of my games anyways, as I do with the current BaGM mode already.

The issue with the whole Superstar on hardcore settings is I seriously don't see more than 30 percent of the players being able to compete on that level. Though I don't particularily have a problem with it as I will be simming a lot of my games, I feel as if is will discourage those who typically play on Pro that want to play the games from playing. If we go through with making one league on the Superstar level and another on Pro, I guess we'll not have a problem.

It all comes down to the difficulty setting that differentiates through leagues, I suppose.

[Conman57]

Yea this difficult thing might be a bit difficult to figure out. I personally haven't played the demo yet (not at home) but I'm hearing that the AI is a lot better, people have been telling me that it's really hard to score. If we want people to have an incentive to play then we shouldn't make it so hard that they won't play. I know some people can score tons of goals but I doubt everyone will be that talented. I hope that the commish will be able to adjust the difficulty mid season because it wouldn't be good if people start dropping out due to difficulty issues haha.

[Mitch]

Originally Posted by Conman57

Yea this difficult thing might be a bit difficult to figure out. I personally haven't played the demo yet (not at home) but I'm hearing that the AI is a lot better, people have been telling me that it's really hard to score. If we want people to have an incentive to play then we shouldn't make it so hard that they won't play. I know some people can score tons of goals but I doubt everyone will be that talented. I hope that the commish will be able to adjust the difficulty mid season because it wouldn't be good if people start dropping out due to difficulty issues haha.

It really isn't, I think it's maybe a slight bit better, but EA definitely over-hyped the whole AI brain and all. If you can't handle superstar difficulty on hardcore, then simply, don't play the games and sim them. Play on your All-star or Pro difficulty on HUT, or versus mode, but otherwise sim your games and play a player if given the opportunity.

[3 Justin 3]

Ok, so I've read everyone's opinion and I'll say this (without naming any names because I don't need to get into any personal arguments and more than 1 people share these opinions anyway): some of you are preaching for a compromise since some people don't want to play and some want to sim; so the compromise is to have the AI superstar and hardcore difficulty? How the hell is that a comprise?

Also, just because it is called Be a GM doesn't mean it is a sim league? Like really people, if you are just going to sim everyone of your games then go play offline by yourself. Can you really not devote 2-3 games a week to play? That is literally 1.5 hours at the most a week to play.

I'll say this right now, if half the people are going to be Simming everyone of their games then I'm out and I'll start my own league. I want to play against people, not the computer, that's stupid.

By maxing the AI you are punishing the people for actually wanting to play the game. If you don't want to play then why should we all be at a disadvantage and face the hardest of hard AI (when I'm willing to bet half the people can't even beat it).

[Diemenz]

No need to get all take your ball and go home, we are just discussing it trying to find middle ground here.

I am not trying to argue here but the way your idea of compromise comes across as your way or you don't play, that's not much of a compromise.

What is your suggestion for how it should be? Maybe if we are constructive with our posts about what we want instead of want we don't things will work themselves out easier.

[3 Justin 3]

Originally Posted by Diemenz

No need to get all take your ball and go home, we are just discussing it trying to find middle ground here.

I am not trying to argue here but the way your idea of compromise comes across as your way or you don't play, that's not much of a compromise.

What is your suggestion for how it should be? Maybe if we are constructive with our posts about what we want instead of want we don't things will work themselves out easier.

I'm just saying I'll start my own league if half the people want to SIM. I've seen people try and compromise by suggesting moving the difficult down 1 level to All-Star (still a step up on default), and it gets shot down by 2 or 3 people (those that want to sim every game). I think All-Star is more than fair, like I said though: why do people want to join this league if they aren't even going to play? That is what offline BeAGM is for.

I said I'd quit and start my own league because if half the people want to sim and half don't, then we should find that out now while there is still a few weeks before game release. In my opinion 1 league should be for SIMing and 1 for playing.

[Travis Munroe]

im in it to play other people...not the computer. Perhaps we can get enough interest for a league of people who want to play from CP.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

By maxing the AI you are punishing the people for actually wanting to play the game. If you don't want to play then why should we all be at a disadvantage and face the hardest of hard AI (when I'm willing to bet half the people can't even beat it).

Well for some having the setting any lower will make the CPU games far to easy. You could argue though that makes it more incentive for the human players to challenge head on. But if Superstar is a great challenge for some as well, wouldn't that bring the same result? With either choice it's going to cater to one side more than the other.

For me personally, I think All-Star skill level will be easy for me to take advantage of, but to be fair I would classify my skill level to be in the upper tier of the NHL competition on a global scale based on my online versus experience. For the majority it may be too great of a challenge. However I think overtime with experience, the user skills will develop and All-Star may become to easy of a skill level for those that actively play games.

I say if the setting is set to All-Star skill with hardcore play style, those really good at the game are at a great advantage, which may be a small percentage. But they'll also be at a great advantage over the competition in head-to-head games. With the skill level at Superstar, the same effects basically occur (can handle the strength of the CPU), but also may encourage more simulation rather than head-to-head games.

If the priority is setting the skill level at a modest enough level to encourage more human matchups, is the fact that some players are clearly going to be overmatched by others something that should be put up with? Will it encourage others to become better players so they can compete with the playing field? After all, ultimately this is a game that is meant to be played. Connected GM was developed with the mindset that the gamers want to play their games against others with an league environment that mimic'd offline GM mode.

I know I can help players become better NHL gamers. Perhaps coaching will help resolve this skill discrepancy issue.

I don't think there's gonna be a way of doing this as league(s) with lots of user interaction without alienation to a certain group of people. Best we can do is to find the most ideal compromise which ensures these leagues have a long lifeline and doesn't die quickly like many others do. I think with the size of the CP community that we can pull this off.

[3 Justin 3]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Well for some having the setting any lower will make the CPU games far to easy. You could argue though that makes it more incentive for the human players to challenge head on. But if Superstar is a great challenge for some as well, wouldn't that bring the same result? With either choice it's going to cater to one side more than the other.

For me personally, I think All-Star skill level will be easy for me to take advantage of, but to be fair I would classify my skill level to be in the upper tier of the NHL competition on a global scale based on my online versus experience. For the majority it may be too great of a challenge. However I think overtime with experience, the user skills will develop and All-Star may become to easy of a skill level for those that actively play games.

I say if the setting is set to All-Star skill with hardcore play style, those really good at the game are at a great advantage, which may be a small percentage. But they'll also be at a great advantage over the competition in head-to-head games. With the skill level at Superstar, the same effects basically occur (can handle the strength of the CPU), but also may encourage more simulation rather than head-to-head games.

If the priority is setting the skill level at a modest enough level to encourage more human matchups, is the fact that some players are clearly going to be overmatched by others something that should be put up with? Will it encourage others to become better players so they can compete with the playing field? After all, ultimately this is a game that is meant to be played. Connected GM was developed with the mindset that the gamers want to play their games against others with an league environment that mimic'd offline GM mode.

I know I can help players become better NHL gamers. Perhaps coaching will help resolve this skill discrepancy issue.

I don't think there's gonna be a way of doing this as league(s) with lots of user interaction without alienation to a certain group of people. Best we can do is to find the most ideal compromise which ensures these leagues have a long lifeline and doesn't die quickly like many others do. I think with the size of the CP community that we can pull this off.

I agree, but I don't see how a compromise is for the AI to be max difficulty. There are four(?) settings, Easy, Pro, All-Star, and Superstar (default being Pro). So I don't understand how people can throw the word "compromise" around and then say the AI should be the hardest of hard with a hardcore setting. How is that a compromise? You are punishing the players who can't face that tough of competition. I've been on CP long enough (and have played with enough of them) to know that all 25+ people in the 360 league can't handle that difficult of setting. I may be speaking up too much for the rest of the community, but I don't understand how people A) want to join this league then just SIM every game, B) think it is fair for the AI to be max difficulty when they never play.

My argument is sort of lost on some of you anyway as a majority of the people who want to SIM aren't even in my league anyway (they are in the PS3 one), but alas here I am.

[bspec]

There's no right answer here, and remember the settings can always be changed dynamically. The problem with the AI being too easy for some and a challenge for others (i.e. Pro or All-Star) is that the league will swing heavily in favour of the former group. If they choose to play every game, then they'll win the majority of games and it won't really be fun for anyone, even those being challenged by the AI.

The problem with the AI being a challenge for some and too difficult for others (i.e. Superstar) is that the latter group will be discouraged to play and instead SIM or coach games until they can develop their skills enough to compete at the Superstar level. However, in terms of the league the teams should be more evenly matched and games will depend more on the rosters/strategies rather than the ability to destroy the AI.

Don't get me wrong Justin, I'm likely on your side because the AI on Superstar seems to be out of my reach for 13 (perhaps I'll have to wait until I get used to the changes in gameplay a bit more). And as much as I'd probably bump it down to All-Star initially, it would just be less fun if teams are constantly winning 55+ games every season. So I think that's the compromise we'll have to make for the good of the league.

[Diemenz]

How about:

All-Star/Hardcore for the first season? Then and agreement to re-evaluate it at the end of that first season?

I also call for a reduction in the current revenue sharing plan............

[Joborule]

The con is it could possibly be too rewarding to those that are very good at game, but that may be a small percentage. The pro in doing that is that it would be a skill level that's moderate enough for the majority of users. And those players with experience should naturally have their skills progress.

In general this may encourage more head-to-head human games since users may not want to face the CPU, or not have their CPU team challenged by a human. In general, I think this has to cater to those that want to play their games; at least for the primary league.

[Diemenz]

So does All-Star to start with an opportunity to revisit it after the first season sound like a good compromise?

[likwid888]

If the majority of players aren't at a high skill level, then why don't we just start with All-Star and re-evaluate as the season goes on? If we see that the vast majority of Human vs CPU matches are being won by humans, then we can also adjust the difficulty on the fly. It's a new game and a new mode, so it's really hard to judge without stepping into it yet.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by likwid888

If the majority of players aren't at a high skill level, then why don't we just start with All-Star and re-evaluate as the season goes on? If we see that the vast majority of Human vs CPU matches are being won by humans, then we can also adjust the difficulty on the fly. It's a new game and a new mode, so it's really hard to judge without stepping into it yet.

Great idea thanks for bringing it up.

Great minds think Alike.

[Joborule]

Ya. We always have the ability to adjust the settings and sliders so we can tune the game to an optimal experience.

[Russic]

My god am I ever excited for this mode. I'm sure the first season will be a bit insane and tweaks will be necessary, but it'll get to where we want it eventually.

[3 Justin 3]

What's the protocol on trading with the CPU to avoid trade raping it?

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

What's the protocol on trading with the CPU to avoid trade raping it?

Commissioners discretion on whether they consider the trade fair. Hopefully GM Brain doesn't isn't too easy to manipulate.