Subject: Questions & Answers

Hmmm that's a good question. I'm not too sure.

No, he won't. He'll take less.

I have 5 new members in team (perfect new line) and I thought I will play something like 4/3/3 ...to gain chemistry for those players, and to have very good rating in last 2 periods...

But after what u said ... i will make 4 lines with same chemistry on each...

Today we got to see a great example of why not to play on high. It will cause your players to commit A LOT more penalties and more times than not is the deciding factor on a loss not a win. This is a really good team getting upset by a managerless team. The PP goals more than made up the difference.
hockey.powerplaymanager.c...

I heard that a new feature will be implemented soon. We will be able to select how much time (in % from total time) a line will stay on ice. Is this true ?

I've heard*

Sorry for my poor english..

It's just that we don't know when.

Soon is close enough. Great implementation planed, I'm curious.

Me too. Love that feature. Wish you could line match if you were at home. I'd develop the best 2-way forwards then. Pure offensive line and pure defensive line. But I am game with adding this new feature. Expect my 4 lines are all positive contributors each night...

I'm not really playing with the goal of not promoting. It's more that I'm focused on finishing well in the regular season, at the expense of playoff success if needed. I'm going to be playing my best players in the playoffs and I'm going to be playing on high. I want my OR to increase as much as possible and going deep in the playoffs is a good way to do that. It just doesn't make sense for anyone to keep playing on low if they're just outside the playoffs and could make it if they played on high instead... and that's exactly what I did.

I do still think that it would be in my best interest to stay in this league for another season, but I'm sure not going to give up in the playoffs in order to make that happen.

I'm curious too. Would it be better to have all 4 lines with 7 pucks and the same time on ice, or first line with 9 pucks, second with 8, third with 7... with unproportional time on ice... maybe their strength will be the same.

That's an interesting thought. Of course I dont have a definitive proof on this, but can bandy about speculation with the best of them, so here it is.
-From the standpoint of pucks it seems that it would have to be better to focus the strength to the lines getting the most ice time. This, as long as it isn't creating too weak of a gap in any of the remaining lines. The thought behind this is something like an average pucks per minute rating or something. If you make it so the 9 and 8 puck lines have twice the TOI then the 7 and 6 pnt lines you're better then 7 rating all the time.
-From the standpoint of the future it seems best to have the players you predict to be up and coming getting as much positive ice time as possible. This so they get more exp as long as it's not costing the team too much in chemistry or overall performance.

Yes and we have to figure it out, when the first line will come to the threshold point. How much ice time is healthy ?

I would love a line match. With like 100 chance of it working at home and 50% chance of it working on away games. It could change aspects of the game so, that the more skilled team could get shutdown. A manager creates there 3rd line as shutdown and matchs it would make a differnce. Match your 1st against your oppoents 2nd etc.

It is not possible to have it work 100% of the time at home and 50% of the time on the road. If both teams are trying to match lines, then the percentages have to sum to 100. If the home team always gets the matchup it wants, then by definition the road team never does (unless of course they want the same matchup).

But your general point about line matching is taken (it would be nice to do, and it should work better at home than on the road).