Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About quaranteneuf

  • Rank
  1. 4 out of the 5 were signed the previous off-season to multi-year deals. Maybe if they are planning on retiring at 65, they should sign 1 year deals?
  2. So far, in my first off-season, I have had 5 scouts retire. Seems a bit too many.
  3. Thanks guys! Also works with the newer version of wine.
  4. I just updated to 15.14.0b and can't launch ehm:ea with either the wineskin or crossover... any ideas? Everything worked fine with 15.13.0b, and nothing changed on my machine.
  5. I made a couple of offers to RFAs, 2 signed offer sheets, 1 signed with the team who held his rights, the other just said 'proposed transfer to the Flames has been canceled.' save is uploaded as Cgy_RFA.sav
  6. I don't think its especially difficult to make trades, never has been in the EHM series. I'm more interested in making the process of trade negotiations feel like actual negotiations (I feel the same way about contract negotiations too, but FM does a better job in this area, so maybe EHM will follow). More give and take, some feedback from the ai, anything other than flat rejections or 'we can't think of anything to make this deal work'. When I look at the rosters of potential trading partners, at least 85% of the teams have something I want. Rarely do I see nothing, so when I see that from the ai at the present rate, it tells me that something is off. We agree the ai valuation of players is off, so that may be a good starting point to make changes. Maybe if given a broader scope of values or something it may make trading feel different. Maybe if we see a more clear picture of what the ai values from his own team and how that relates to the trade, if there was some way to see if I add piece x, what does this do to the overall trade value? "We'll need some time to think this over" or "This offer requires some serious thought" don't give any indication of how the negotiation is going. More often then not, either of those responses leads to a rejection and gives zero indication of what might have made the trade work. Give me a counter-offer, please! I don't know enough about how players are rated by the ai and why the ai responds the way it does to offer anything other than what I've suggested. It's difficult to know what anyone's involvement is here other than Riz. I appreciate that you want to contribute to the development, as I think we all do. My professional work is in branding and we think a lot about how people experience a brand. That means that how you interact with the game and how the game interacts with you is something I'm always thinking about and responding to. I think if EHM can get the right feel in the interaction between the human gm and the ai gm right, it will be better than it already is. The negotiation aspect is the one area that I think the game is sorely lacking in. I want to feel like the interaction leaves you feeling satisfied, something that doesn't happen when you don't get feedback from the ai. Don't worry, I have pretty thick skin and don't really take offense to questions. I was merely voicing my concern that people in a wishlist thread may be taking things a bit too seriously.
  7. It was poorly worded on my part then. I think I was just providing an example of how the ai 'negotiates' and what it's starting offers are. OOTP was used as an example of how negotiations could be done differently, and in my opinion, slightly better. Is is flawed? Absolutely, because you still have the ai making value judgements about players based on whatever it's criteria are. The ai is flawed in how it values players and it doesn't just impact trades. Look at the start of a game with teams over the cap. How the ai decides who they move or waive needs to be adjusted in some way. Same with who they resign vs not. How many times have you seen Stamkos, Toews, or Kane end up as UFAs, having been on teams that are good (PO success, other good players, etc) and have the cap space to resign them? That was every save for me until I started using the newest TBL rosters where Toews and Kane are already signed. Stamkos still goes UFA every single time. I'm not asking for options, just to be able to negotiate a trade. As I said before, a negotiation isn't 'I make an offer for player x, ai says yes/no, the end. I honestly am not trying to convince other players in this, a wishlist thread, of what I think. Frankly, I think its absurd that I even have to defend a suggestion I made to this extent, to other people who can't make any meaningful change to something they didn't create and don't work on. SI, yes, but I'm not so naive to think that just because it was suggested, they jump at it. It would have to make sense within the framework of the existing game and since I don't know the first thing about programming games, I leave it as a suggestion and only that. I don't think that a negotiation process would make anything easier. How could it? It doesn't change the way the ai values players. It may show a player who the ai values, but we have that to a small extent now anyway with the clunky * system.
  8. I was wrong about how the * system works in the trade screen, but it still doesn't make sense to me because you can offer/receive 2 3* players for 1 4*. Add to the fact that you have no idea what the ai values draft picks at and I still think it needs to be made clearer.
  9. I doubt we will agree on any of this, especially what constitutes wanting a player out vs. shopping one and that's fine, this is the wishlist thread after all. I did this test with Doughty just to see what the offers would be, did the same with Ovechkin with the same results, just fewer teams interested because of $$$. Again, I don't think that gauging a player's value should make his value tank. You seem to think that 'shopping' a player is the same as 'I have to move him' vs finding out what you might be able to get for him and maybe I move, maybe I don't. NHL teams talk about players all the time, regardless of wanting to move them or not. Do you think that negatively impacts a player's value? I don't and I don't think it should in the game either. What I am saying, and have been saying, is that the 'trade block' and 'offer to all' should function differently. One should impact value negatively, and one shouldn't. I have not had that experience with OOTP (baseball, right?). In my experience the 'make this deal work now' options are better, value wise, than what I am seeing from EHM. In my test with Doughty, Jacob Truba is a 4* player for his team vs Doughty as a 5* player (also valued by his team). As I said above, I get "This offer isn't too appealing" for Doughty for Truba, straight up. If the * mechanic works the way you are thinking it does, why do draft picks not have a * value? If it worked in the way you describe, the *s should change with each added or subtracted piece. I think its more of a guide to see how easy it is to acquire a player, less of a value judgement for a player. I saw someone, Riz maybe, explain exactly how the * thing worked a while ago, but I can't find it. I may well be wrong in this case about what the *s mean. It isn't just one specific player, its any of those 4*/5* players. And yes, the initial offers are terrible, but the 'negotiation' isn't negotiation, as I've said repeatedly. Which makes 'my job to get a better deal' rather more difficult than it needs to be. Especially since I have no real indication of what the other team would offer, other than to low-ball me. I'm not looking to convince you of anything, I am only looking to make suggestions on the way the ai handles trade negotiations. Maybe to actually negotiate, rather than low-ball and reject.
  10. That, exactly, has been my experience with reading about people playing this (and other) games. Everyone plays differently, obviously. My point is that the tools should be there to make it work in an equitable way. Maybe thats more than this, or any, game can offer?
  11. I'm not ignoring negotiation, that's exactly what I want to have improved. Negotiation takes more than 'I offer you this, you say yes/no', which is where the game is. There is only negotiation on the human side, the ai never couners, it only accepts or rejects. As I stated before, OOTP has a better counter offer system in place, if you've ever played that series. To offer a player around to gauge value doesn't mean you don't want the player, it means that you'd like to see what his value is. The game also thinks that to offer a player around means you don't want him, which is what I'm arguing against.
  12. Right, one should have impact on a players value and one shouldn't. Right now, they both do. As I posted above, you see the results of the negotiation. Its all one-for-one for a slightly younger, not as developed player. Yes, I got one offer of two firsts, but I got more for lesser packages. As above, I would think that Doughty could get an A prospect + or an A young player +. Especially since he's only 24. My team needs were set at 'favor younger players'. The problem with thinking either the ai or the human should 'win' a trade is that that isn't how trading works in the 'real world'. Years of EA Sports and gm sim games have taught us that only one team can win, and it always has to try to rip off the opposition. In the real world, a trade has to benefit both sides. A gm would run out of trade partners quickly if they only ever tried to rip off the other team or only offered players of little value. Maybe a gm reputation would be interesting to implement?
  13. Dougie Hamilton and Tyler Seguin were moved, that is as close to Doughty as we've seen in recent memory. In Hamilton's case, there were gms who didn't even know he could be had. I suspect the 'offer to all' concept is, in itself, unrealistic. I'm not looking for exact realism, we can't have that anyway. I just think that the way players are offered around should make more sense. Why is there a 'trade block' and an 'offer to all'? Why do they both tank the value of a player? In certain cases, yes, every team knows a team has to move a player out. Be it cap or contract or whatever. In those cases, the value can drop a bit, yes, but not to the extent of offering a 2015 2nd, 2015 3rd, and 2015 3rd for Drew Doughty. One of the options should have little to no impact on a players value. I think the problem with 'offer to all' is that it has more of an impact on the player value for the human gm than when the ai offers a player out. If you look at what the ai gm gets for players they put on the block, the value they get, seems to me, to be better than what I would get for a similar player. Look at what was offered above for Doughty. The value seems closer with lower tier types of players, players who you would expect to get a 3rd or a 4th. I don't know what the answer is. I've played EHM since the shareware and this is the one thing that has always frustrated me about the game, well that and the lack of immediate response on trade deadline day.
  14. My issue, as I stated above somewhere, is that there isn't any real negotiation. It's just easier to illustrate with Doughty. A player like him, who should have value to every team in the league, surely would not garner offers of 2015 2nd, 2015 3rd, 2015 3rd or picks plus C prospects in the real world. The problem I have with the trade ai is that it either over values its own players or undervalues the human gm's players when they are offered for trade. I'm not sure which, really. So if I ask for Olli Maattaa, plus an A/B prospect, plus a pick or 2, I get turned down flat. Even if it's Maattaa plus the A/B prospect, I get turned down. As good as Olli Maattaa can be, he isn't in the same class as Doughty. We can't ever say what realistic would be because a real world gm would make room for a player like Doughty, and conversely, a player like him wouldn't be moved at 24 with 5 years left on his contract. If you've ever played the OOTP baseball games, they have a decent system to offer players to all the teams without it impacting the players value. There is a way to say, ok, player x is available and a way to 'shop' a player quietly. Also, the negotiation thing is what I'd really like to see improved. Instead of a straight rejection, how about a team tells us what would work for them? Again, OOTP has a list of players you could add to make a trade work.
  15. Fair point about what they have on D, I haven't really looked. Cap wasn't an issue for any of the teams listed here, everyone had $2-$3million in space even after they added Doughty's money.
  • Create New...