Subject: WAAA Why did I lose this match

Damn it, he has gone off line.

Ahh we scared him away

I noticed you two were online so I made my move and then quickly logged off.

I think that we all already know why such kinds of results happen. ratio etc. We have to decide what kind of engine we want. Is it one which gives everybody a chance to win no matter how weak he is or do we want an more realistic engine. It have to exist a "border" which makes this kind of results IMPOSSIBLE (0%). I admit that it isn’t easy to find this point right now. But maybe we can consider that the first lines of these two team have a difference of nearly 90 Points and to think about how much time, money and "work" it needs to get such kind of difference.
i don’t know much about this calculation stuff, but i know that there is no ratio in real hockey. A pretty fast skater with great dekes can carry the puck over the goal line to score, if there is a weak defender against him. The Soviets liked to do it and it worked great against weak teams. Shoots from the blue line were seldom. I mean that a forward with Off 200 Tech 100 Pass 100 and Sho 10 would score more goals than Off 60 Tech 30 Pas 30 and Sho 50, because he doesn’t need a great blue line rocket. he can skate around the defender or he will get a great pass in front of the goal. If he play against an defender with Def 150 pass 75 tech 75 agr 75 so he of course needs more than Sho 10 maybe 120. This is just an example to explain what i mean. Maybe it’s a bit inappropriate.

And consider that this much stronger team plays with high, very high makes it ridiculous. The coach of the stronger team said "go out and destroy these (weak) guys". The weaker team couch said "lets save our energy for the other games" And what happened??? did the stronger players forget their hockey sticks at home??? Did they score with their heads??? 21 Shoots??? Never!

The NHL arguments are pretty weak, inappropriate and ridiculous. The Draft-System makes it possible that nearly every team has one or several WORLD-STARS. PPM has nothing like that. The difference is "huge". And it will be bigger. Till the stronger Teams get the maximum. That’s hard for the manager who will begin later but to reduce the difference with random /luck results isn’t REALISTIC!!!

There is no skating, no dekeng. All ppm skills are nothing but numbers and shooting is just one of them. You can't build a pure sniper, creative passer, stay at home defenseman and such. You have a higher possibility to win with better players and that's about it.

2:1:1 ratio means you don't have four attributes, you have just two: effective offense and shooting. Now if I told you there is a game where you can train a player to only 2 attributes and I had 2 players to choose for my lineup, the first guy had 100-10 ratings the other guy 70-35. Would you go on and sum their attys up to decide which one is better? If you would neither know about primary,secondary, tertiary attributes nor the 2:1:1 ratio, how much technique and agression would you train to wingers compared to passing and how much shot compared to aggression? You see, attributes are just as relative in this game as everything else.

Shooting is just another atty. It is important but it's up to you to decide how much to practise it. There needs to be a balance to all the attributes. And I don' see why it's such a bad thing. I never said I'm happy with the way the engine works. But you cannot compare it to real life.

Come to think of it my last post surprisingly makes some sense.

Well... ye... no.

You forget something important.

2-1-1 is a basic ratio only. Vlady has confirmed that defense is used by forwards, attack is used by defenders, etc. So while a winger may have Offense-Tech-Agg he also uses shooting, passing and defense.

So a realistic attribute ratio might actually be something like:

4-2-2-3-1-1

(Offense-technique-aggression- shooting-passing-defense)

It is no coincidence that many of us find our defenders with good offense and shooting tend to lead the defense in points. My best PK line is always the one with forwards who have higher defense attributes.

It does not have to be a deke or skating skill you can see it as the tech skill.

You explain how the calculation works, train players etc. that’s ok. But as you spoke about Caps and Lightnings you compared this unbelievable result with the REAL LIFE! You contradict yourself!!! Your arguments don’t explain this result.

I don’t want to discuss this problem with somebody who thinks that the engine cant be or shouldn’t be more realistic. my arguments are based on my real hockey experience. If the DEVS would say that they want to have "their own engine" i wouldn’t say any word. But i remember that they spoke about a more realistic engine. In my opinion it’s far away from that. How i already said i don’t know a lot of this calculation but this ratio (Off to Sho) stuff isn’t really realistic. but on the other hand i understand that it should exist in PPM. The "Power difference" should be more considered as it already does. If teams on same level play against each other so you can talk about something like ratio in reality too. (against a good defender its not enough to be a good skater you need a good shot too). But this ratio( Off<->Sho)does not really play any role against weak defenders.

A manager should have the opportunity to understand why he lost/won. There are to many results wich are unexplainable.

@trueblue: The tertiarys surely contribute to performace but at less extent. The analogy between secondary attys and shooting was much more important to stress out and remains untouched by adding tertiarys. People get confused if you start talking about too many attys.

@PavelBure#10:
Look, I critized the engine long ago. I still do that. I was just trying to explain why such a result can happen in this game. I'm aware that in PMM passing is not the ability to pass to puck. As you may remember I brought up ideas on how to implement new attributes to replace the current system not long ago.

It was you who came up with the comparison to real life first. So I gave you a RL example to make clear that the result isn't unrealistic. The engine itself doesn't simulate a hockey game. It's all about stats and numbers. Of course it's not realistic. But I would love to see a a real hockey game simulated here some day just as much as everyone else.

Tell me, what do you actually want? You post links to games every now and then and claim the result to be unrealistic. I played hockey myself and know that a small difference in skill leads to one team ddominating the other so I can see your point. However I don't agree that the weaker team in the match from above shouldn't have a chance to win at all. A 5% chance for a 40 points difference in team strength is fine with me. In fact the chance was probably much lower than that.

Why this results happen i already know. Not since today.

If you say "But you cannot compare it to real life." you shouldn’t bring examples like Caps against Lightnings, no matter what i said. And for somebody who played hockey you should understand how ridiculous your NHL example is. If the Caps first Line is 90 Points stronger than the Bolts first, then who plays against each other if an 120 Points line plays against 110 points line???

I want that every manager, no matter how much he knows about hockey, has the opportunity to understand such kind of results.

That's your 8 losses talking.

Joke aside. If you were a developper, what kind of changes would you make to the game engine? Would it be enough to simply reduce the chance of upset? Or would you like to see a complete new engine developed?

What do you mean when you're talking about "understanding such kind of results"? Is it to have details about the engine so that you can reproduce a result? They won't disclose anything. I tried hard.

"That's your 8 losses talking" ohh.... that’s pretty low!!!!!

My english seems to be really bad. You know exactly what i am talking about. i sent you a mail last year in german language .

just think over your NHL arguments, they confuse the new manager

You're right, I do know.

Thanks PPM that this was not competitive game: hockey.powerplaymanager.c...
is this worst case scenario or thereabouts ?

A quick glance into future ...

Pavel Bure #10: What an upset! That's the kind of upset I'm talking about all the time. The engine is totally broken allowing such upsets. Higher importance, huge difference in team strenght, better tactic. Such upsets should never happen. This has nothing to do with luck this is just embarassing for the ppm developers. I'm talking about upsets here.

Trueblue: Wow, just wow! No way you should ever loose that game. Never. I'm speachless, I'm never speachless, but today .. really never ever.

Taloncarde: Well, think about it, you could have lost even worse. Have you ever thought about the other manager? I know he's inactive, but he's got feelings you know. Once in a lifetime he wins a match vs a stronger opponent, totally deserved. Sh** happens. Live goes on.

brotherke23: I told you it's the shooting ratio. It's all about the shooting ratio. WC Finals, Sweden was the better team, but the Finns definitely with the better shooting ratio. I mean it. This no jokes. Messed up my milkshake today morning, milk-sugar ratio was weak. Ratio everywhere you see.