Tárgy: High Importance Broken or Not what we think it is?

So, many of us know that high importance uses a lot of energy.
So we all do our best to conserve energy for the playoffs.
Some of us have laboured under 38 low importance games to make it with the maximum amount of energy, so we can play High importance during the playoffs.

At first I was just disappointed when playing high, losing to teams I might have beat on normal anyway. But I have seen so many losses by better teams playing High importance against worse teams who play normal or low lately that I now believe we are interpreting "High importance" and what it does wrong.

I will compile a list of all the game summary's I have seen where huge upsets occur consistently against the better team when they play High (and they have conserved energy all season).

Before that though, I wanted to share my theory.
I believe that high importance only gives you more shots, but has a side effect of also getting more penalties. I think many have noticed this.

I think it will actually hurt though, if you play high against a team you were likely going to reach the plateau of shots against anyway (30-40 shots seems to be the most shots regardless of how much better you are). So if you play high when you will already get 30-40 shots... you might get 1-2 more shots that game, but 8 penalties, causing you to give up PPGs to the other team, and lose lots of time where you would have had the pressure on them instead.

An exception to this is when both teams play high it doesn't show up as much. But when the worse team plays low or normal, they often win.

Anyone else been noticing this?

Tactics still factor in. But a key some of us saw going back to BETA was playing high on the road it was very ineffective. High at home had reasonably good results. As for the penalties perhaps the theory works like this. High importance enhances the values of your attys/build for your players. Perhaps the corelation has more to do with the Tech:Agro ratio than anything else. As even small agro upside playing high represents a higher chance of a penalty. Just guessing on that. But high on the road not very effective in general.

The list of games I will present later have the loser being
The team with the advantage on team strength
home team
tactics advantage

ALL 3 factors are on their side.. AND they play a higher importance... and they lose.
I can show at least 10 shocking game summaries of this, and that's only because people who conserve energy don't play high much, but the majority of the results have them losing when they do!

Interesting I just played today and I wasn't expecting to win but, felt my result was much worse because of playing high. I was on the road. I just posted this it in my league before you put this up.

I too have felt that high isn't as good as it should be. I don't know why.

Could it take experience of the goalie in High importance game ? I just been own 9-1 by a better team but my goalie is not suppose to be that bad. Just a thought.

I would guess that experience for all players would be important. Players with high experience could fare well in High importance games and players with low experience could do poorly.

In real life, young inexperienced players often play poorly in important games. There's a reason why teams stock up on veterans for playoffs. Since the game is only in season three, it's possible we have yet to see what High importance can truly do.

I played on high and got killed while he played on low WTF!!!

So, I know I've seen more, but its hard to go back and find all of those times you heard others complain about this, and find the exact games..
I did remember where 6 of them were.. and just looking for upsets in the current playoffs you can see a couple... where the better team loses only the games they play higher importance.

Even match up, loser had tactics, and high imp. vs. winners low
Canucks, you might remember this one, you had instructed me on this match way back then - you were baffled after
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =1401085

Another from the same team, much later - I now had a way better team, and tactics, palyed normal vs. his low
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =2610789

Here is one, where tactics were even, but the team mismatch was huge at the time, person playing low won
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =3334235

Check this one out, loser was WAY better team, playing high vs. normal
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =2655003

Winner had slightly better team, but played low vs. High, loser was home team, and had tactics correct
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =3505325

Home team, higher importance, better team... loses
http://hockey.powerplaymanager .com/en/game-summary.html?data =3649067

Game 1: his goalie was better than yours
Game 2: Your team took more penalties, and he scored on the PP
Game 3: Person was playing me, and thus lost. I see no problem here.
Game 4: Losing team took too many penalties.
Game 5: Can't explain that one. Goalies were pretty equal though.

I know you were being facetious, but I will take the bait and reply anyway

There are always some factor in someone's favour, but overwhelming factors against.
I could go through a game someone shouldn't lose, and say "the guy on line 3 got less shots than the same player on the other team"
That doesn't mean they should lose

As far as penalties go, that is an accepted side effect of playing higher importance, which is exactly part of the problem. Sometimes that seems to be all you get.

Which brings me back to my theory that, if you are not the underdog, then playing high importance can hurt you instead of help you.

We need to look at ALL games played on high, not on just some.... To get real data that could be worked with

I played normal to his high today and won, thanks to this thread I decided to do it, since I was up 1:0 and on the road anyway!

You are correct Pat - to see any real trends. Unfortunately its really hard to get all that data.

I have waited an entire season to mention this, because over that time it just seems to have happened too often for me not to say something.

It could be true that this only happens 1/50 games played on high, which would be well within reasonable odds. But considering most of the people in question almost never play High importance games, and they have lost this many - it's just fishy to me.

There is something. A factor that has its biggest influence when playing high. I like what the monkey said about expeirnce. I will have to see more stats though
@IVthDROW : Do you know what your goalie's exp was at when you lost 9:1 and he played horrible?