主題: Questions & Answers

sorry, trying to understand better. So if i wanted Offense-Tech-Agr to be 100-75-50 I would use 4-3-2 in the boxes?

For me it's easier to work with percentages, 100% for the main skill and then less for the others. I think that's easier, so if you want 100-75-50, then just put in 100-75-50. I think those low numbers are not effective because, there is just not enough variation possibilities, if you have want to put in more accurate numbers like 48% or 69 instead.

4-3-2 would be equal to 100-75-50

If a player gets more ice time do they get more exp?

Yes, and more chem but more energy lost.

When does everyone decide when they should 'part ways' with a rookie? Like when is it that you feel like they will just never make it in the line up? Is it when they hit or just before they hit a certain CL, certain age etc? What is everyones opinion on this?

I'll field this one by way of example.

My team has 5 lines' worth of players that I'm prepared to play during regular season contests. Sometimes the 5th liners are prospects, sometimes they are veterans who have been surpassed on the depth charts. 2 lines of prospects play in friendly games while developing.

Recently, I placed a 16 year old and a 19 year old on the market in order pare the roster down to 40 and avoid the luxury tax.

The 19 year old is 6th on the Centre depth chart. He is not projected to crack the top 5 and I have two younger, higher quality prospects with longer career longevities prospects. While useful for friendlies (and recently as an emergency injury replacement while another starter was at training camp), he was expendable.

The 16 year old is the victim of circumstance. High quality, but the lowest of a group of 4 Left Defencemen pulled over the past 2 seasons. He is 8th on the LD depth chart and would be for the next 2-3 seasons. He wouldn't have ranked higher than 6th on that depth chart for at least 6 seasons and probably longer. He is not a current asset as he doesn't dress for friendlies, and he represents a significant daily cost due to the luxury tax. He'll be good for someone else, but for me, his greatest value is in yielding a return on the market.

To summarize, I drop players:
- to avoid the 41+ player luxury tax; and
- who have dropped out of the top 5 in their depth charts; or
- who are outside of the top 7 in their depth charts and may not break into the top 5 on the depth chart

Point 2 of the above summary should be amended to read:
- who are outside of the top 5, will remain outside the top 5, and are projected to be surpassed by those below him on the depth chart, provided the team can still field 7 full lines.

What's the view on technique for defense men?

I know that they still need it, and my friend said he likes to keep it equal to aggression, but I was just wondering if this is necessary.

I used to keep it equal to aggression, but these days have it at about 75% instead and it works well.

Cool, that's what I was thinking but I wasn't sure.

Thanks!

For staff, is it better to have the 2 atty's even, or have one higher than the other?

EX:

Head: Atty 1: 26 Atty 2: 63
Assistant: Atty1: 58 Atty 2: 22

Or

Head: Atty 1: 44 Atty 2: 45
Assistant: Atty1: 38 Atty 2: 42

Which would be better?

Keep them even if you can, their salary will be much lower

As an addendum, some staff you may only want to train one skill on, such as marketing on managers. For sporting directors, you might want to get youth training high, but since player training isn't used as much, take it up to about 60 or so before it starts to really add to their salary and then stop.

Good points PMullings. And Boba Fett, for your important staff members (coach, physio and SD) if you have the funds and high facilities in those areas, go high. For all others the higher you go the exponentially greater the salary becomes. If you want to train only one of the attys that is ok, but you will see significant increase in salary at about the 60 mark.
An example- a staff member who is a 120 overall with even 60's compared to one with at1-95 at2-25, The latter will have about twice as high a salary