Spartan

Isn't that the same thing you said about Voss before we gave you time to earn TPE and a solid build

Has this ever been a thing?

If you want to look into it and come back with a media spot or a DM to a BoG member with your math or details on what it'd look like, I'm sure it'd be evaluated for validity. I just don't think you're going to get the BoG to start looking into attribute changes with just a "I wonder if we can do better" when what we have right now is meeting the goals we had for it. We definitely need some baseline to be going off of.

Welcome @ffial!

Welcome @Bazeus!

I promise you, people would always take the option that gives them more SC in the fastest manner. It's only because we have them as equal right now that people are taking the ST attribute first over the long run because its relatively more valuable with faceoffs and defending against getting hit than penalty shooting. But the point goes back to the fact that spending on WS as a new user does not mess up their builds whatsoever unless they dump like 150 TPE into it - which would be equally bad if done with SS. Realistically could we swap the Penalty Shot with Puckhandling and make it like 0.08 PH and move PS to like, Deking? But then you'll have people complaining that one of the two main DF providing attributes also gives you penalty shooting. and you lose a significantly efficient PH avenue. Just doesn't seem like a worthwhile change to make. If your desire is to redefine the meta hybrid build, I will say it jokingly here, we genuinely could just hit shuffle on the attributes every 6-7 seasons and see what the new set looks like. But unfortunately, when designing our current ones, we had to keep in mind which attributes are valued most by users building players in STHS and set attributes in a way that didn't make anything overly efficient or clearly meta. As I said before, most players will get around 7-8 attributes over 70 to have a decent player. That used to be just 4. And there's still quite a lot of wiggle room in what attributes you improve upon based on the type of player you want to be at the VHL level. In the M/E, the overall TPE is just way too low to have anything clearly defined.

Nothing wrong with it, I think it's probably for the best if you're trying not to burn out writing this sort of thing every week. Just might have to pick and choose a tad bit better or even not be scared of criticizing more! I think a little more spice can never hurt if done well

There probably is, I just haven't seen anything since we released attributes (and then maybe after the immediate adjustments post-release to fix blatant issues) that makes me want to go to the BoG and say "hey, here's something that is a valid issue, and this is what I think we should do about it." And I think that's a pretty important threshold that needs to be crossed, for any BoG member to look at something proposed and decide to take it into the BoG. So far I haven't seen any proposals or suggestions with the math behind it to convince me that the current attributes are anything more than an annoyance to people who are still expecting the simplicity and ease of upgrading the old attributes. Bek kinda covered it, it'd probably become the clear cut secondary option in that case with an even better secondary attribute than Strength. We'd just flip situations from SS being the "prioritized" secondary scoring attribute to WS. I don't think there's a problem with newbies investing in WS over SS. The benefit strength provides is not that massive that it messes up a new player's development. I don't think it comes close at all. I'm pretty sure my past forward, Nico Pearce, got both to 70 before incrementally increasing each one based on cost efficiencies. I also wasn't a center to need the ST investment immediately. Plus, not all attributes are going to make perfect sense with STHS and the real world comparisons, we just tried to come close without having meta hybrid attributes. The fact that most people will get at least 6-8 attributes into the 80's for their core build is a significant difference in the "core 4" that everyone would pump to 99 before hybrid and then become an elite player.

Surely we're not asking to make attributes more efficient and cost friendly when that was the reason we had to change attributes in the first place, right....?

Realistically could every goalie have just been name-dropped as I had pointed out (defense led by "insert defenseman and goalie") with the generic statement, sure. Is it a snub, I don't think so really. Seems like the writeup for every team followed more of a template/standard format which is fair for a weekly article that needs to meet VSN standards of higher word count and formatting. Some mild differences from team to team which would explain a couple goalies not being brought up. Personally I don't think my goalie should have been mentioned at all as a leader defensively, he's playing pretty poorly. And sure, the offense hasn't been carrying the team, you guys aren't doing the best there. But as I had mentioned, 2nd fewest shots faced (yet only 4th fewest GA) would make me personally praise the shit out of your defense. If I was writing 50 words about each VHL team, that's where mine would go for Malmo, especially with Stone and McFleury in the top 4 for team scoring.

Probably because he's 7th out of 16 starting goalies in save percentage and has seen the 2nd fewest shots against in the league. Not much to say in these lengthy articles about a goalie who isn't carrying the team. Seems like every other goalie mentioned was just included with a young defenseman to say "they're leading the defense." Doesn't seem like anyone in specific was praised in here anyways with Wallob also being told to step it up with Warsaw.

At this rate with Sully and the Pens, I'm gonna have to move on from him myself and get a new GM render

Play in the NA where playoffs are free....or should be at least

Can't believe I got Torts smh

@LastOneUp come back

Imagine letting Moscow have a playoff spot, EU snoozin

1. I think we can't get complacent and have to keep earning to maintain our growth. 2. Fire the GM tbh 3. I think they're good as is, you do a great job! 4. My fingers and brain are too frozen to figure this out. 5. Both seasons provided a lot of value. Last season let us grow and develop with more draft picks. Winning shows us what we do right and wrong. 6. I'll keep all of that a secret for now!

I think we fared a tad bit better than y'all in those conference finals . Just not in the finals

I won't say we're back, but we're certainly present in the moment

Dislike

I am only at 4,279

Sooooo I can't have [redacted] ???

Obuz certainly won't even have a card at that rate then. Tough crowd to please with the cardmakers huh?