Spartan

https://forms.gle/SDBpAap3kJqfPnh46 fill it out

*cracks knuckles* I've already commented on a decent amount of points that have come up in this thread, and I'm generally ignoring the stupid quabbling that happened in here. Some other points that I saw and went "oooh this could be fun to respond to" are what I cover below. I tried to group them up when applicable but probably failed a bit because I multi-quoted 8 posts and tried to group them into a single quote.....this'll go well eh? Edit before posting: I've royally fucked up quotes so here are tags for everyone whose words I yoinked. @Horcrux @fromtheinside @a_Ferk @Moon @Beketov @Daniel Janser Out of curiosity, what pre-existing issues are you referring to that are getting applied specifically to the VHLE? The main arguments against the E that I've seen is lower PF that is significant to a max earner, an extra season en route to the VHL, and a higher IA % than any other league. I'm a clear proponent of the E and have expressed skepticism of the anti-E sentiment as well, but I don't get this "blaming for pre-VHLE issues" argument against the people who don't like the E. Yeah this is an odd gray area here, where I think that people are allowed to have opinions without needing to explain them - except if they're a decision maker and need to back up an action. I also think that an opinion of "this adds an extra season between me and the VHL" isn't something you can demand evidence for. It's literally just an "I don't like this" and that is perfectly valid for someone to say. Ferk's comment here about inactive players is an opinion that also provides some statistic. Whether it's 100% accurate or not, I don't know, but I have seen inactivity numbers in the VHLE and they are more significant in number than in the VHLM or VHL. Just an overall word of caution that just because you don't necessarily agree with an opinion doesn't mean you get to invalidate it if it isn't presented to your standards, especially when you're asking for discussion and opinions. More of an aside, but I just found this funny. When change occurs, people ask tough questions. It seems those tough questions aren't welcome though. Only the "tough" questions asked that lead to change you're in favor with seem to be acceptable. I've seen you try to shut down a lot of CoC questions in the past simply because you didn't like the questions being asked, or that you didn't agree with where they were coming from. Change is a two-sided coin, there will be proponents and dissonance to any change. People not liking specific changes does not mean the league as a whole does not "handle change well," it just means that people have opinions and that's perfectly natural. I don't know why you needed this odd jab in a post that otherwise was in good taste and presented with good intentions. I actually didn't know BOG "needed/is strongly suggested" to publicly support league initiatives, but I guess that's pretty cool to see. I do think that dissonance should also be presented, but in a constructive manner instead of just ripping shit apart for the sake of it. Cool little insight here Scotty. But also yeah, of all the people you'd expect to support the E, it'd be: Admin - approved the E's existence Mod - literally just keeping the peace in the community, not going to tear apart a controversial topic and add fuel BOG - overall also approved the E's existence VHL GM - generally have benefited from the E existing since 250-400 players no longer clutter up rosters if the GM's don't want them there VHLE GM - this is their job! The only job group you mentioned I'd expect to gripe about it (and seemingly, they have) is the VHLM GM since the E has handcuffed their competitive inclinations , dropped the TPA of players available to them, and cycled their rosters faster than before. General members are a coin flip, veterans already didn't like being in the M because they only care about the VHL. First-gens will hold whatever opinion they're told to hold before they take the time to do their own research. Something something biased post something something not random sampling something something. Writing off people who care about their earning is definitely not the proper look. 1 tpe per week over the course of the entire season adds up. It's more than a doubles week, and you don't even lose any contract money for it. Granted, I won't say that the VHLE "sucks" because PF drops from 2 to 1. If that's your logic, you're not going to like the VHL either . But to Bek's counterargument, I will also counter-argue. If I'm going to drop down to 1 TPE in my first post-draft season regardless of if I'm in the VHLE or the VHL, and if I have the choice to play in either the E or the VHL, I 100% will be choosing to play 9 VHL seasons. Though I would also fully support dropping PF in the M to 1 TPE again since we have lower caps now anyways, and as you said, there's an extra season on everyone's career that would make up the lost 1 TPE. As a max earner, I would just hate to lose out on 8-9 uncapped TPE while others in my draft class who didn't earn as well from recreation-next season benefit from it. It's like a punishment for earning too well.

Been seeing Davos in the rear view mirror, getting a bit too close for comfort. Whatever you're doing is working, it's nice to see after a long stint of unsuccessful seasons. Cheers bud.

I mean everyone would love to be a top pick. At a level every person cares about their draft pedigree as well. When you roleplay hockey, anyone can be a first overall pick right? But the first two HOF inductees from the S72 draft class were second round picks. I had a player be named MVP after being picked 11th overall. As you said, it doesn't matter where you get picked in the grand scheme of things, it's just a stress point before it happens. People will get drafted for more than their build. Do not worry, as long as you aren't intentionally memeing your build away, you will have a respectable career. I get the cause for concern, but hopefully this has assuaged it a bit.

No, that'd set up the potential for a lot of shady shit lol

Byron?!

brother this article was from July lol

Why are we firing GM's when it is the responsibility of staff and the BOG to come up with rules to address league issues? Our current structure and 81 seasons of using STHS have brought us to this point. GM's are simply using the tools at their disposal to build their teams in accordance with the rules. We never had a team openly embrace the meta to the extent that occurred in S80, but the meta was known and folks catered to it. As someone said, you can find many examples since S70 of teams pursuing a meta inclined team comp. The issue has only flared because of what happened last season. At that point, it's no longer on us as GM's to be upholding an unwritten rule, it's on the people who influence and make rules to find a solution. Also every single active player has been drafted and rostered. There is 0 instance of anything different occurring. There are no active FA's left in any league, every active prospect will get drafted. I don't know where this fear of not getting drafted is coming from, but it's completely unbased and is simply not true. A vocal anti-meta player went 2oa and got traded for another first round pick plus more. There are plenty of teams who roster non-meta players, and who will select them in the draft because as you said, players at high tpe *should* end up playing to that skill level. Do they? Not always, but that's more a byproduct of bad sim luck than getting neglected by a GM.

Yeah I was about to say that you should probably read how salary works once you get to the VHL. It's in the VHL rulebook, section 2 I believe. That should help you get a proper idea of how you would get money in this league once you go pro. It's not dependent on performance in the sim, but rather on how much TPA+Banked you have.

To an extent. You can try and project your career earnings to see how much you'd make. Take out the regression fighters you'd buy, the remaining can go to doubles weeks or other stuff. It's a very individual dependent question and relies heavily on the type of earner you are and the build you plan to maintain through your prime.

No timestamps for this one, it was pretty fluid in regards to topics. I didn't even bother relistening for any issues so.....you're getting this completely raw. Good luck!

fantastic song, great choice

Congrats on the one year bud. Had a blast playing minecraft with you! Hope we can do it again soon

What team is Bo on? And also it sort of makes sense that you went from no TPE to some TPE and therefore put up points. I also think PA may give you a false sense of optimism in the VHLM where folks are such low TPE. My old player, Alex Letang, was 80 PA when he was capped in the M and led the league in assists. He also had 70 SC, and played on a team that was pretty top heavy and those top forwards scored a lot of goals. I really think that it was mostly just relative to the talent on the team, and a byproduct of being the best defenseman on the team as well from a TPA perspective. Lastly as much as I'd love to believe that giveaways and takeaways matter in this sim engine, the overall "meta" right now implies that it doesn't. Feel free to look at the VHL teams that have won the cup in the past few seasons and let me know what data you can pull from it, because I wouldn't think Vancouver with their nonexistent passing would be generating more takeaways than giveaways. At the end of the day, they just shoot the puck at the net whenever they can instead of deferring to teammates. More volume = more goals. That seems to be all that our engine really cares about.

Idk if anyone has told you this but PA doesn't correlate with assists. SC drives scoring of both goals and assists, but the largest factor for assists comes simply from the situation a player is in. Take Phil Stein on Moscow last season, a pass first player. He played on the first line alongside Paul Atreides and Duncan Idaho, the latter became co-MVP. Aurelian Moreau was also a solid point better as a first pairing defenseman. When you put a player with exceptionally good players, their stats will essentially get padded and they will get more assists. My 40 PA player has 18 assists as a rookie just from touching the puck before someone else scored. I also wouldnt put the most stock into the STHS generated play by play. I think it's just a lot of turnovers to fill the time and generally all made up and not really accurate. I think Dil tried to track it a season or two ago and noted that the amounts were absurdly high, for both giveaways and takeaways. Also don't put much stock into the user manual either regarding how the engine works. When you have four defense pairings, you can't really trust that the developer actually knows how hockey works lol.

wheres theme week???

Claim 4/4

Linking to player pages . Underrated level of effort, love it!

MOSCOW MOSCOW MOSCOW

nice

good morning

donation made here, $20 coming to the raffle for 10 entries slots: 6, 12, 21, 23, 35, 40, 50, 59, 71, 66 @Baozi

don't kill strays Edit: Covering for @Agito! Happy holidays

For what it's worth I did say that overly successful recruitment is harmful on my podcast, specifically over-recruiting when we already have teams mildly filled up. I don't know if that's along the same lines of what you're inferring to though. That we need to have more coordination and intentional targeting when recruiting with an eye on current league state to avoid expanding our user base before we have the potential to keep up with all of them.