|
Post by Narcizo on Apr 21, 2006 8:49:47 GMT
Chris Rea you say. Interesting. In the thoroughly uninteresting and bland meaning of the word. That no-one has heard of before.
Did you not stand up and demand that Emu be brought out as well?
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 21, 2006 9:00:51 GMT
Did you not stand up and demand that Emu be brought out as well? Don't be silly, everyone knows he broke his neck in a fall or something. :humb:
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 21, 2006 9:06:46 GMT
Now see what you've done there is confuse a 'puppet' with the bloke whose hand was up its arse. It might come as a shock to you, but Emu was not a living being. Instead he was a cunning hoax created by Rod Hull in order to claim two sets of disability allowance.
It's true, it's true.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 21, 2006 9:31:36 GMT
Are you sure that Rod Hull was a bloke? I mean with the mush 'he' had, I had my doubts that 'he' was human.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Apr 21, 2006 9:46:39 GMT
Having watched 5/6 of the first series of Big Train last night, I am still wetting myself when I think of hens.
Simple, yet effective.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 21, 2006 10:00:33 GMT
Rod Hull was a strange looking fella, I must agree. Not sure if he was alien though. Can we say the "A" word on a Friday?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Apr 21, 2006 11:27:01 GMT
Are you sure that Rod Hull was a bloke? I mean with the mush 'he' had, I had my doubts that 'he' was human. I AM HIM! JELLY! Please ring. [/joke only Hornet will get]
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 21, 2006 11:52:55 GMT
Sounds like something from Futurama.
|
|
|
Post by floplexter on Apr 21, 2006 11:57:27 GMT
Are you sure that Rod Hull was a bloke? I mean with the mush 'he' had, I had my doubts that 'he' was human. I AM HIM! JELLY! Please ring. [/joke only Hornet will get] MY BCG!!!
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 21, 2006 12:42:36 GMT
Errrr...... You are Chalkie White, I claim my £10.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 25, 2006 15:12:11 GMT
So, on Sunday, I was in my local games shop and spotted NHL:Eastside hockey Manager for £2. Bargain, i thought. Anyway, I'm completely clueless about the goings on within hockey, so was wondering if any of you kind sould could give me an overview of what I'm letting myself in for. I know DC and Elth are fans of hockey, so I guess it's mostly those, but I know that s1ugt has played the game too.
I know a team has "lines" which are subbed in and out when the coach feels like they need a change, or when there is a power play or if they're short handed. Different players have attributes that would be better suited to different lines, I guess. Is there an ideal first team squad size for a hockey team? Or is there a max squad size?
I also know that there are "farm" teams, but other than that, I don't know what they do, or how they work. Are they like reserve teams?
I won't ask about tactics, I just want to get into the game first and foremost, but I will ask which league I should begin with. Would it be best to dive straight at the NHL or is there somewhere else that would be a better place to learn.
I'm probably going to start playing this at the weekend, so there's plenty time to get some replies and laughter in.
Ta in advance.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 25, 2006 15:41:46 GMT
Ice Hockey? Isn't that like all-in-wrestling with sticks?
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 25, 2006 16:27:25 GMT
It's a very good game Moo, if you can get into it.
Yes teams have lines, though these technically vary from team to team in the same way everybody has a defensive line in American Football - but it's not always lined up the same way.
Line 1 is typically your "scoring" team. Line 2 is your mix-it up team. Lines 3 and 4 are a mix of grit, thuggery and youth. Lines 3 and 4 can be referred to as "Checking" lines. The players on those lines are role players. The defenders are usually the best at checking (and may be recycled from the top line), the forwards are usually the best at checking also. Scoring is an added bonus. Chk4 is literally Thugsville USA. Usually neanderthals. Chk4 doesn't normally get a look in for more than a few minutes in a game, usually just to mix it up, or close down a game at the end.
You will find that a lot of teams re-use/recycle players. So the starting centre on line1 might also make an appearance on Chk4 (if he's someone such as Sergei Fedorov for instance). Some players are taken purely to play special teams (so wont feature on 5v5 lines, but might be starting men on Power Play or Penalty Kill). Top line defenders often end up playing 25+ minutes on a number of lines.
There's no such thing really as PowerPlay 1 and PowerPlay 2. However in game terms it lets you create 2 special 'units' purely for scoring purposes when you're a man up. Some teams go shooting heavy (bringing in a specialist line) but the vast majority just play their Line1 or Line2 (and may retain the defenders from Line1 on Powerplay1 and Powerplay2 purely because they're "that" much better on offence). With the man advantage you can pass it around and take shots with ease - most PP units average 12 to 15% success rate, 'great' PP sides are up towards 25%
Penalty Kill 1 and 2 are the first time you'll really have to start gauging your best players for a particular role. With any other Line you can simply put in your best players. On Penalty Kill you need to gauge the need to retain the puck, and be capable of still being a threat on the break - whilst ensuring you don't concede. Great PK units have a 91% success rate over the course of a season (average is in the mid 80's).
I think the squads are unlimited in size (averaging 27 on first team duty, but with regards to youngsters etc up to 40 or 50 - Montreal for instance have 8 keepers on our 'squad' but only 3 senior keepers and 2 youth), you can "dress" 22 though (I think, memory isn't great on the numbers since the change of Collective Bargaining). Young players tend to have 2-way contracts, which allows them to freely transfer between your first team and reserve teams. Senior players wont have this clause, which means if you "send them down" then they will have to pass through waivers (at which point anybody can approach to sign them within the NHL). That's not actually as risky as it sounds, and a lot of players spend their time drifting between NHL and AHL/IHL etc (though if you do it with a 'top' player expect to lose him).
There are also drafted, but unsigned players in foreign leagues. These are players who made themselves elligible for selection in the NHL draft, then went undrafted (or were still under contract at their current club and the NHL club didn't want to pay the severance fee). These players you have "first dibs" on to bring them to the US. You also have drafted but unsigned youngsters.
=======================
The NHL is an easy start on the game. It's more detailed and you start off with a good mix of talent. The best teams on the game would probably be Ottawa (pure offence), Detroit (best balanced side), New Jersey (pure defence) and Colorado (good mix, offence heavy). The worst teams would be Columbus, Chicago and New York Islanders, and NYRangers - oh, Florida (who do have some great prospects) and worst of the worst - Pittsburgh. Every other team is a mix of either solid defence, or great offence - few mixing the two particularly well.
If for instance you chose Montreal; you'd have a solid goaltender, 4 key defenders (no marquee players), and maybe 3 forwards worth their salt - the rest of the team would be made up of has-beens, never-beens and a couple of handy looking prospects. By comparison even Ottawa have a stronger defence than ours, yet are primarily known as an offensive team. A couple of the teams have exciting young sides (Carolina, Tampa Bay, San Jose and Florida).
=======================
With regards to tactics - you can set them up to each line individually, tailoring them to the line-up. Unfortunately I can't remember the particular names for the tactics within the game. Will tell you what they (or anything else) means if you ask.
Couple of wierdness things for you though: - Don't bother looking for a scoring centre. It's far easier to get your wingers scoring and an assisting centre (giving you 3 players creating chances C+D+D). - Size/weight makes a difference more than some attributes. Monster wingers playing "crash the net" tactics don't need super skills, their sheer size and ability to blunder their way through a defence more than makes up for it (Todd Bertuzzi/Eric Lindros would be rare incidences of 'power forwards' with far more to their game). - Size weight also effects checking. Lightweight forwards can be battered into submission if you have a pair of complete thugs. If you can muster a true 'checking' line and match them against the oppositions Line1 then you probably wont win many face-offs, but you'll muller them nicely and put most back on the bench pretty pronto (teams don't like to risk premier players against neanderthalic defenders). Conversely - watch out when they do the same. - Face-offs are essential. Having centres who can win them consitently (i.e. 51%+) means you're going to retain the puck even after stoppages. Keeps you off defence. When you're playing with a man down it's well worth putting in a centre who can win the puck first time every time, even if that means he's not the best defensive player. - Plus/Minus (+/-) ratings are thus: a goal scored, when equal in numbers of men on the ice, counts as +1 for whoever was on the ice at the time. Additionally a goal scored when down by a man is worth +1. Goals scored on PP do not garner a +1. Goals conceded when even manned draws a -1. Goals conceded when on PK do not garner a -1. - Handedness is not as big an influence in Ice Hockey as footedness is in football - namely because in Ice Hockey they spend an equal amount of time on either side of the rink and/or with their back to goal. However Left handers on the left side 'assist' more, whilst left handers on the right are predominately scorers. However goals are scored with both sides of the stick. The only time handedness is important to consider is when you have a player whose favoured shot is 'backhand'/'forehand'/'slapshot'. Backhanders require the man to be on the opposite wing from his handedness. Forehand obviously is viceversa. Slapshot is opposite handed also (typically the puck is slid towards centre ice for the player to whack from an off-centre position on their side) the better a player - the less the handedness effects them.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Apr 25, 2006 16:57:31 GMT
A major team will usually have 23 players on it, 18 of whom are "dressed" for each game, with the other five "scratched" - they can't play. The 18 will usually include two goalies and six defencemen, with the other ten roles made up by a mix of offensive players, spread across left and right wingmen and centers. Each team usually has three base lines, the third of which is sometimes the "checking" line, designed to be filled with big fellas who are good at getting in the way. Line one is sometimes called the "scoring" line, but the pure best players may not all be on the same line, (especially if you have two really good centers), as some players may work better with others. Similarly, your best players may not get on the ice at all during penalty killing, as players who can slow the game, keep possession and grind the puck are more important than the 170lb winger with a wicked wristshot. I do remember, on Eastside when I played, I'd drop a defenceman on the Power Play lines and play four forwards on each, sticking the most accurate shooter in in place of a defender. Got some good goals from the blue line from that tactic. EDIT : Or what DC said. Yes, when I started my post he hadn't done anything. Yes it took me more than half an hour to finish my post. Stupid gazebo.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 25, 2006 22:51:12 GMT
Cheers lads, that'll be a great start. I'll choose the NHL, although I'll be shitting myself when the drafting comes along. I wouldn't really know where to start. I think I'll have a trial run with someone like Detroit and then slum it on the second go.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 25, 2006 22:56:06 GMT
Nice one Moo, are you going to tell us of your exploits in GR?
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 26, 2006 0:08:30 GMT
Cheers lads, that'll be a great start. I'll choose the NHL, although I'll be shitting myself when the drafting comes along. I wouldn't really know where to start. I think I'll have a trial run with someone like Detroit and then slum it on the second go. The NHL draft is nowhere near as interesting as the NFL draft simply because most players aren't impact players from day one. The only difference is when you draft Europeans (who tend to have had 3+ years of top flight European hockey under their belt by the time they get to that age). Most Draftees in Hockey spend 2 or 3 years in the Minors, often longer, then get traded, and minor'd before becoming back-ups. There's an amazing number of players who've made careers out of never being first team players. Drafting top prospects is unlikely unless you're extremely lucky as spotting the next 'big thing' is about as likely as sticking a pin in Stu's arse and finding his perineum.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 26, 2006 8:21:12 GMT
Coffers - possibly, I haven't figured out if it is possible. Once I play the trial game with Detroit I'll have a better idea. There aren't many leagues with a promotion/relegation style system, Czech Republic and Sweden are two (there was a nice little league guide in with the game. :humb: ) so it may be that I make myself Canadian or something, have the US, Canada and a couple of other leagues open and make a career out of it. I installed and patched the game last night and chose Detroit, but that was as far as I got. I didn't look at anything else, but will do so next week. The plan was to give it a whirl at the weekend, but I'm in Telford, so won't be able to.
DC - I got that impression from reading a couple of threads over at SpInG. It makes me wonder what the point of drafting anyone is then, as you could probably just trade your drafts away for players who would make an immediate impact or just pick up Free Agency players for line fillers. Or am I being too naive there?
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 26, 2006 9:50:03 GMT
That's exactly what I did. After season 1 I was somewhat stacked with the best players because of my trades and such. Financially on the edge of bankruptcy and unable to trade away much of my dross, but with probably the best of the young players in the league all on my team.
It is possible to find great draft picks - it's just unlikely given the size of the junior leagues and the and elligible draftees. I did the draft all the same - but I can't say I really sat around watching them for development when I already had a team full of 21 year olds farmed out. Looking 5 years into the future was a bit anal...
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 26, 2006 10:50:24 GMT
That's exactly what I did. After season 1 I was somewhat stacked with the best players because of my trades and such. Financially on the edge of bankruptcy and unable to trade away much of my dross, but with probably the best of the young players in the league all on my team. It is possible to find great draft picks - it's just unlikely given the size of the junior leagues and the and elligible draftees. I did the draft all the same - but I can't say I really sat around watching them for development when I already had a team full of 21 year olds farmed out. Looking 5 years into the future was a bit anal... But I thought you liked that. Anyway, I'll give it a bash, fuck up royally and then report back with my severance pay details. But seriously, it's unlikely that anyone in the draft will make an immediate impact? I guess that there would be the odd one or two per draft that could walk into a third or maybe second line at a push, but never the first line. Without having looked at the game yet, I guess the mechanics of the game are different to CM/FM with regards to "reserves". I'm used to 1st team/Reserves/U18s structures, but that will be different in EHM. From memory, you have your main squad, farm teams and Juniors. Can you give me an idea of how these work together? I think I read that Juniors can flit between each team "level" but veterans have to go to waivers for a week before moving between farm teams and first teams or something. It sounds complicated.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 26, 2006 11:42:25 GMT
Well lets put it this way, in real life terms I can probably name the majority of players who have been drafted, then got into the top 3 or so lines of teams in the last 10 or so years (and we're talking under 30 - including 3 keepers off the top of my head, 2 of whom no longer are first teamers). Most who do make the instant transition do so because they're either: A, super talented. B, older than the usual draftee (avg age is 18 in the draft unlike the NFL's 22 ). C, on a really bad team that needs any kind of help it can get.
Defenders are more likely to make an instant transition, but rarely play anything like a full season. Barrett Jackman would be the only one off the top of my head who has. Even so most first round picks take 2 to 3 years to get into the seniors. People like Sidney Crosby, Alexander Ovechkin, Ilya Kovalchuk are rare.
NHL2000 draft, 5 out of the top 6 are regular starters, or first teamers. Only 5 or 6 out of the remaining 24 are in the league, only two on top lines. Only 3 or 4 of those still with the team that drafted them I think.
NHL2001 draft 3 in the entire first round have started over 100 games. A further 5 have played games, but only 2 are regulars. The top 2 picks in that year however are phenomenal (Kovalchuk straight into the league, Spezza spent a year or two farmed out).
NHL2002 draft, the top 5 are all now regulars at their various teams. A couple others have just had their first full season (about 3).
NHL2003 draft, The top 4 went straight into the league. 1 is a bonafide star, one is a goalkeeper at the worst club in the league - the other two are fringe. About 4 of the rest of the first round are in the NHL.
NHL2004, 2 are starters Ovechkin and Andrej Meszaros. Rest are farmed out. They were of course helped into the league because of the 'year out'.
NHL2005, Sidney Crosby.
Under NHL rules it must be said - a player is still a "rookie" and/or elligible for a "rookie" season until they have played 25 games in a single year, 6 or more in two years running (any professional league), and is under the age of 26. Lot of players have multiple "rookie" years.
|
|
|
Post by Moo on Apr 26, 2006 11:57:23 GMT
So basically the NHL is a lot more complicated than it should be.
|
|
|
Post by DC on Apr 26, 2006 12:08:08 GMT
Draft picks are longterm investments, that ultimately you have no control. The fact you can trade draft picks present and future for current players looks a better option to me.
|
|
|
Post by coffers on Apr 26, 2006 12:16:00 GMT
Draft picks are longterm investments, that ultimately you have no control. The fact you can trade draft picks present and future for current players looks a better option to me. It all sounds completely barmy to me, where do I get a cheep copy then?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Bismarck's Electric Donkey on Apr 26, 2006 12:18:53 GMT
Moo would trade all his draft picks for a case of Newcy Brown and a copy of the Gratton catalogue lingerie section.
|
|