Alphasim Hockey le jeu de hockey simulé sur le Web

Inscrit : 26/02/2008 14:03:22 Messages : 148 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Bob,

Why are you ruining this simulator with free agents? It is ridiculous how you can buy your team superstars every year. You don't even have to train people, you can just sit back and buy free agents that can be the leading scorer.

Free agents make this league so unrealistic. Where in the NHL can you buy superstar players out of thin air (not from any team) sometimes for cheap prices (ie. Carlos Mortenson - 17.5k - led the league in scoring last year). You should be trying to make this simulator as realistic as possible, but with the current free agent system, that goal is currently impossible. It's completely unfair to GMs that are building teams through training.

I'm not saying get rid of free agents, but no free agent should ever have their total talent points above 500. They are suppose to be support players for the good teams or decent upgrades for the crappy teams.

It really takes the fun out of the game when every year there is an auction to see who will have the best team. You need to put an end to this.

I'm not the only GM that thinks this, if you don't make some sort of change, you will need even more people for your english superstar league. I will probably quit, and some other GMs will probably follow. It's not fun watching people buy superstars every year for 50k, when it costs me 200-300k to build a superstar.

Ryan Vandenberg
Forest City Finesse
International Hockey League

Inscrit : 21/02/2008 17:53:59 Messages : 189 Lieu : laval Hors ligne

Ive been playing this game since season one and i never saw a *superstar* emerge from the free agent batch..The best one are 3-4 liners and 5-6 def..Most of the time theyll be use as subs and adding a bit of depth..Having free agent with 500 and less talent would be totally useless since no players can make the rooster with that amount of talent( exception with the youngster of course)Maybe in the lower league the balance with the f.a. needs some work,but be a bit patient youll see in the long run that theyll have very little impact and training young guys will pay a lot more sooner than later.

Inscrit : 22/02/2008 18:48:29 Messages : 583 Lieu : New Brunswick Hors ligne

In the Bitch hockey league a with mostly 5th years teams, theres a monster UFA 31 years old goalie

256 120 206 30 612 points he is the beat goalie in the league by a mile

Inscrit : 21/02/2008 17:53:59 Messages : 189 Lieu : laval Hors ligne

A monster indeed...Bob will have to look into it caus it can really unbalance a league..

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 09/08/2008 03:41:22

Hi.

I'm in Finesse's league, and the whole idea that our free agents are harshly out of step with reality is ignorant.

The current free agent stats are:
556 W 29y
574 C 32y

While the stats of our league's top four superstars are:
909 D 28y
817 W 26y
753 W 29y
741 D 28y

The free agents released into our league appear to be at or near perfect relation to the NHL's real world scenario. The top available free agents are quality, yet veteran. There's nothing available like a Sid Crosby or Dion Phaneuf, but more like Mats Sundin and Brian Campbell.

Top quality players, to say the least, yet well into their professional careers.

Consider the 2008, NHL free agents:

Offer not yet accepted:
forward Mats Sundin, 2-years, $20 million = 10/y

Offer has been accepted:
forward Marian Hossa, 1-year, $7.4 million = 7.4/y
forward Brian Rolston, 4-year, $20.25 million = 5.06/y
forward Pavol Demitra, 2-year, $8 million = 4/y
forward Markus Naslund, 2-year, $8 million = 4/y
forward Miroslav Satan, 1-year, $3.5 million = 3.5/y
defenceman Brian Campbell, 8-year, $56.8 million = 7.1/y
defenceman Wade Redden, 6-year, $39 million = 6.5/y
goaltender Cristobal Huet, 4-year, $22.4 million = 5.6/y
goaltender Jose Theodore, 2-year, $9 million = 4.5/y

If I were a GM in the NHL and had these players on my team, I'd expect to win the Stanley Cup.

I don't know where Finesse or others get the idea that free agents need to be support players.

In the real world, with the NHL's current system there's the potential for megastars of 27 years and older to become free agent signings for the highest bider - players like Joe Thorton, Dany Heatley and Marian Hossa.

If Mats Sundin accepts the Vancouver offer, he'll be the highest paid player in the league, team captain, and the most talented skater on the Canucks roster.

What this tells us is that teams need to take a balanced approach between free agency and developing prospects.

There's no reasonable argument for concern in our league.

I believe Finesse is confusing his moral-subjective argument for a logical argument, in that he feels the more "honourable" team approach would be to build through the draft.

Unfortunately for Finesse's argument, however, neither the real world nor the Sportegy world operate like this.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 02:18:04 Messages : 391 Lieu : Vancouver Hors ligne

To be clear, I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement with the way free agents are handled at Sportegy, rather only that the whole idea that free agents need to be support players isn't in line with reality, and should not therefore be taken as guidance for adjusting our sim.

I will suggest, however, that it would make more sense to have the free agents made available a week or so before the season starts.

Inscrit : 26/02/2008 14:03:22 Messages : 148 Lieu : London Hors ligne

You are an idiot Sea Monster, clearly every year there are some super stars available for buying. Last year the Gamblers picked up the leading scorer from free agents. If there are no "super stars" as free agents, how can he get one of them and have him win the scoring title? And this year that defensive winger that the Bonecrushers are trading to the Gamblers, he's the best defensive winger in the league at 27...how is that not a superstar?? You can't just look at total points. It's ridiculous.

You just like free agents because it doesn't take skill to buy up all the good players...almost half your team is riddled with free agent pick ups, and they're getting old, about time to pick up some more eh?

Bob has to change this ridiculous system or GMs will be leaving this game leaving the english league a pathetic joke.

On top of all your arguments Sea Monster, when real NHL teams DO sign a good free agent, do you think they get him without giving up any draft picks? Most really good free agents are "restricted" free agents and the team that signs them gives up their first round draft pick. So maybe if the free agent talent isn't decreased, Bob could set it so that whoever signs a free agent looses their first round pick automatically. This would be a really nice feature because it would prevent teams from buying up all the free agents in any given year because you only have 1 first round pick. It would spread it around a bit.

THE FREE AGENT SYSTEM NEEDS TO BE FIXED!!!!!!!!!!! IT'S SO UNBALANCED!!!!!!!!

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Sea tard, what is your major malfunction.... seriously? So you are telling me that to be a "Superstar" you have to be comparable to the top 4 players in the league (overall points-wise)

The 2 Free Agents I bought 2 seasons ago which are the basis of Finesse boy's argument were/are my 2nd and 3rd best players behind only my 900+ D-man and my team won the cup and is always a cup contender. Explain how these players and other Free Agents like them are not Superstars.

I agree with 9999's response in regard to this topic, but that is only because many of those top league's have teams full of 700+ players and not several teams who can pick up a new 1st line every year via Free Agency.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Sea Loser, there is no rebutting that our teams are not good enough to have these Free Agents not make a huge impact. So while taking your foot out of your mouth, attempt to do so without writing a 26 chapter novel that rambles along mostly off topic.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 02:18:04 Messages : 391 Lieu : Vancouver Hors ligne

That's what I call hostile flaming. Have fun at it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 10/08/2008 04:43:20

For the record, wow, you two are not only mean, you're not rational, either.

There's not a single mention in my writing where I suggest these two free agents are not superstars.

To the contrary, I was taking great care to liken them to Sundin and Hossa, who I pointed out as superstars

It was an explanation why free agents need not be support players, as Finesse has proposed.

Why you two are attacking me for saying exactly what I did not, that's just crazy. The board history clearly shows this.

Note that my posts above were made nearly 20 hours before Finesse tripped up in his emotional rant, and then the Gambler fell all over him in his rush to join the bashing.

Low brow, indeed. Not only is your public attack of me uncalled for, but your reasoning is fabricated entirely.

This proves one thing for sure. It doesn't matter how logical and comprehensive an argument is, when it's something that isn't agreeable to a politicized position, people like these two simply can't think rationally. Instead, they find it easier to fabricate a more agreeable reality.

Inscrit : 26/02/2008 14:03:22 Messages : 148 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Sea Monster you're hilarious. Now you're playing the "ooo I'm so hurt by your comments" baby. Give me a break. We are saying you shouldn't be able to get a player that is the best in the league at anything. Mats Sundin (given as your example) is not going to win the scoring title, nor is he best defensive player in the league. There are a lot of players better than him in the league, not 3 or 4. On top of that, all the best young players in the league are better than him...in our league it's the opposite, the free agents are better than the best of the young players. Are there free agents better than the 21 year old Sidney Crosby in the NHL? How is that fair?

Also, you didn't even bother to mention anything about what I had said about restricted free agents and giving up your draft picks. How does that make your comparison of this league to the NHL look? When we sign any free agent, we don't have to give up anything but our money. In the NHL, there are some free agents that are unrestricted, but in this league, every one of them is.

We probably get worked up because your arguments always seem to dodge points that you know you can't argue against. You seem to go on about things that are off topic.

So, taking all I have said in this post into consideration...how can you argue that the current free agent system in our league is fair when it clearly isn't.

Inscrit : 26/02/2008 14:03:22 Messages : 148 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Also Sea Monster, you failed to acknowledge my points in the first paragraph of my 2nd post in this thread. You can't argue that there were no superstars in the first batch of this year's free agent pool. You're funny because you only mention the current batch, which is weaker than the first, on top of that you only mention the total talent points of the players, which makes them look worse than they are. Distribution of talent points determines how good a player really is.

Here are all the free agents this year...

166-155-216-28=565, Age 29, D
125-296-55-25=501, Age 27, W
300-150-141-30=621, Age 32, W
227-160-139-30=556, Age 29, W
295-119-130-30=574, Age 32, C

The 32 year old winger with 621 total talent points that was in the first batch is now the best 32 year old in the league having 48 more talent points than Frolov from my team, and 9 points better than your Kreature of Mamara (who was a free agent in a previous season)...brutal.

The 32 year old centre will be the 3rd best 32 year old in the league, and it's funny because the only players that are better than him are other free agents.

The two 29 year old free agents that have been available this year both have more total talent points than any other 29 year old in the league, except Herenicus of course who was an amazing draft pick along with the fact that you have trained the crap out of him most of his career up to this point.

The 27 year old is the 7th best for his age in the league, however, he is now the best defensive winger in the league for any age, which does make him a superstar because of the good distribution of his talent points and his relative youth.

So as you can see, this year as in any year, the free agents are the best in the league for their age. Free agents should not be this good, they are created out of thin air in this league and they add to the talent of any team without decreasing the talent on any other team. At least in the NHL, that player leaves a team to move to another, making one team better, and one team worse. Restricted free agents that are signed, the team that looses the player at least gets draft picks out of it.

Inscrit : 19/02/2008 11:26:58 Messages : 652 Lieu : Montréal Hors ligne

There are many good points in this discussion. However, I'll appreciate that everyone be more respectful of each other's opinion.

One of the problem is the lack of precision with league levels. Both International and Top 1 leagues are All Star leagues. In reality, the difference between those 2 leagues is important.
The result is that generated free agents may be as good in Top 1 as in International league. The Bitch Hockey league goalie may be (I have to give a closer look) to strong for its league for the same reason.

The idea of giving something when you get a free agent is not bad but I'm not sure it is compatible with the way free agents system works right now.

Currently, there is more work on the game UI. The next phase will be to improve the game itself. League evaluation and Free agents generation are areas that need improvements.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 02:18:04 Messages : 391 Lieu : Vancouver Hors ligne

Dude, what are you talking about when you say I "can't argue that there were no superstars in the first batch of this year's free agent pool"?

I never argued this.

For the second time, in plain English, I did not argue this.

You're crazy. Point out where I argued this.

I can't believe, even after I already pointed this out to you in my last message, you're still complaining to me about it.

I don't want to sound bad here, but how stupid can you be?

And how do you suppose you can even ask me a straight question after basing your complaint on such stupidity?

To say the least, I am confused. Baffled.

Once again, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars, I never said they aren't superstars.

Also again, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars, I argued that they were superstars.

Can you read this? Please figure it out already. Maybe then I'll care to follow you up with a discussion regarding your other points. As it stands, you're still talking stupid talk.