Asunto: Pet Peeves

OK, just one more.

Managers that load up the Q&A forums wondering how the heck they could have possibly lost a game and automatically start looking for someone/thing (other than themselves) to blame. [It's usually "the game engine's" fault (according to them)]

I don't know how often I've followed their links and immediately seen a 1 or two goal game where the complaining manager either played a much lower importance, didn't have the correct counter-tactic (or the other team had the right one), and/or tired their guys out early running three lines to four.

If the game engine is that horribly out of whack; stop freakin' playing!

If you don't think you should EVER lose to a lower quality team; stop freakin' playing!

Real life example- Minnesota beat Dallas in the season finale in the NHL. Should they have "on paper"=no. But they did anyway.

If the game engine went purely on stat vs. stat and the team that SHOULD win DID win then there would be almost NO POINT in doing this at all.

One game is not a large enough sample size to point to something being wrong with the game engine. Let's use some logic guys.

AND, if you are a poor loser then maybe you could save yourself some stress and NEVER put yourself in a position to lose. Don't play games (of any kind). There problem solved.

Why not start a crybaby thread for this purpose?

They have one, but no one uses. Primarily because they don't think they are being cry babys they think it had to be a bug because surely their team couldn't lose...

I hear ya Revangst, I laughed quite hard while reading the Div I thread. I lose games to people who i feel i should beat. but then I remember the 1980 TEAM USA and i get over it.

Thanks, you guys have made me feel a little bit better about my lack luster hockey season.

Out of curiosity, does this thread only apply to hockey, cause I have a few peeves on soccer as well

Unburden yourself.

I don't see why not, I let my soccer team explode, so I can't speak to it I like soccer but I wasn't enjoying it enough to play it on here.

I was going to post the same thing when i saw the thread title. Bidding for 10-15 minutes for a wealthier manager to come on-line and outbid everyone.

rofl, that's exactly what I thought too! That's why I started the waaa waa waaa why did I lose this match thread lol! The funny thing is that I made it to mock the crybabies never expecting anyone to use it. Quite a few pages later at least it took some of the crybaby traffic away from the QnA thread for those who still read it.

Some of you may think I'm whining. I just want realism.

My pet peeve on the hockey side is the tactics/counter tactics. In the NHL or at any level that I know of in North America no team runs any "counter tactics." The team uses the tactics that the coach dictates. Teams don't change the way they play night in and night out based upon what they think the other team will do. This game is basically a more advanced version of rock paper scissors and it takes away from the fun of the game. I did touch on this in another thread. ppm.powerplaymanager.com/...

Well I would agree with you on season 1-6, however season 7 that changed. The game is not really based on tactic anymore, it is very small thing in the engine now.

I'd disagree with that, although they don't stray far from their system teams do take different approaches based on the team they're playing. For example, when teams are playing the flyers, they'll try and shoot more shots from bad angles and just try to get the puck to the net as many times as possible since the shoddy goaltending will likely give up a few. But when teams are playing Vancouver, they try to slow the pace and get traffic to the front of the net as Loungo's going to stop most of the pucks he can see. The game does have the rock/paper/scissors feel but only because its difficult to translate the tactical adjustments that real teams make into a game engine. I suppose maybe if there were ways of knowing which style of play fits your opponent best (not just what they're going to choose) it would add depth to the game and deviate more from the rock/paper/scissors aspect.

They also always match lines if they're the home team or get an icing.

Those are zone specific tactics that we can't control yet. We can only control the basic tactics. Teams stick to their basic tactics, the detailed things are what change between games. I would also point out that Chicago did your Philly tactic and crashed the net and came back nearly winning the series against Vancouver.

The R-P-S feel is there because they put it there, not because it is difficult to do otherwise. Ther are other manager games that do a better job with the tactics but this game is much more deeper in other aspects. So far as I have understood they did nothing to lessen the R-P-S in season 7. They simply added special teams and broadened some other options.

So when the managers of the game said they did change how tactics effect the game, they did it for everyone but you?