The Hybrid Attributes are ruining the League

[mattyIceman 1,213]

1 hour ago, Enorama said:

My thoughts can basically be summed up on a flow chart.

 

Do you think allowing the meta builds was sustainable and healthy? If yes, we change nothing. If no, you have four options.

 

1. Change the sim engine -> no real other options available with the import/export options STHS has.

2. Put different update scales for certain attributes -> this would make it glaringly obvious which attributes are just better and would lead to the same problem you see now of not getting any improvement in a full week of earning, but even a step worse because you don't even get to click the button.

3. Institute limits on gaps -> Definitely an option but once again would make it clear that SC > PA is just better, people hate seeing things locked, and the same concept can be effectively enforced by option 4.

4. Hybrid attribute system -> Can essentially accomplish 2 & 3 in the same go but doing it in almost a hidden way, which can be seen as both a positive and a negative. Some of the same downsides as both 2 & 3 of course.

 

What he said.

 

Step 1.  Goalie Hybrid attributes.

Step 2.  Start STHS stats at 20 instead of 40 and update/re-work the TPE expense scale.  Also remove FG and DI from applying points; change them every game from 20-99 if you want.  Max FG/low DI and vice-versa could be interesting for rivalries.

Step 3. Scrap STHS

Step 4.  Build new engine and put it up on Steam as a simulator.

Step 5.  Profit

[Beketov 9,023]

32 minutes ago, mattyIceman said:

Step 3. Scrap STHS

Step 4.  Build new engine and put it up on Steam as a simulator.

Man if we had the budget to do that…

 

Trust me, we looked into it. We don’t have that kind of bank account.

[Alex 3,198]

1 hour ago, Beketov said:

Trust me, we looked into it. We don’t have that kind of bank account.

Step 0. win lottery

[dlamb 1,326]

[jacobcarson877 2,528]

4 minutes ago, dlamb said:

If only the importing could be done even semi-automatically

[Beketov 9,023]

2 minutes ago, jacobcarson877 said:

If only the importing could be done even semi-automatically

Yup. Player creation, lines, simming, and outputting all need to be able to be automated to match what we’re capable of with STHS. Without that at the very least we lose daily sims that have been a VHL staple from day 1 because simming just becomes too difficult.

 

Not to mention you can ask some SHL members how switching engines went, it’s not always greener on the other side.

[Nykonax 1,564]

4 hours ago, v.2 said:

Discipline are virtually useless

Discipline is OP if your whole team has it around ~60 or 70 with no checking.

But yeah I agree that hybrid hasn't been the greatest for the league, but it is a much much healthier solution. I think it's been unhealthy in the terms of player progression for welfare players, as you'll like never have a good player now whereas pre-hybrid you still could. Which can be argued whether it's good or bad (people contributing more content/work to the league should probably have better players, but should it be impossible for welfare players to have all-star players?).

I think one potential solution is just increasing ratio's by like 1.3x or something small. Would need to look into it more. In terms of build flexibility, it definitely allows for more flexible builds, but it locks people out of insanely off-meta builds (you can't ignore attributes). Wonder if we could allow TPA recalls to just target the STHS attribute instead of the hybrid attribute. Would need rules on it so you can't just recall all of your passing but might open up options.
 

[Grape 676]

2 minutes ago, Nykonax said:

I think one potential solution is just increasing ratio's by like 1.3x or something small.
 

The stat ratios themselves cannot necessarily be changed, since most stats get to or exceed 99, and STHS treats that as the max and doesn't account for anything over that. The ratios can be changed for some stats, and maybe erase some attributes influence altogether (Body Checking is pretty piss poor for boosting defense), but overall it would need a complete overhaul to make it work, and not just small tweaks. Best solution tweaking wise would be to lower the TPE costs per stat increase.

[Nykonax 1,564]

6 minutes ago, Grape said:

The stat ratios themselves cannot necessarily be changed, since most stats get to or exceed 99, and STHS treats that as the max and doesn't account for anything over that. The ratios can be changed for some stats, and maybe erase some attributes influence altogether (Body Checking is pretty piss poor for boosting defense), but overall it would need a complete overhaul to make it work, and not just small tweaks.

Wdym? Surely we can make an attribute increase by 0.38 instead of 0.3?

 

7 minutes ago, Grape said:

Best solution tweaking wise would be to lower the TPE costs per stat increase.

I mean this is just essentially the same thing.

[Grape 676]

2 minutes ago, Nykonax said:

Wdym? Surely we can make an attribute increase by 0.38 instead of 0.3?

I guess the point of it is to maintain relevance for stats upgrading into the 90s. The increase is dependent on the attribute receiving the increase. Some could just eat the increase and be fine, some the increase would make the later attributes irrelevant.

[Pifferfish 512]

21 hours ago, OrbitingDeath said:

I'm with you in not liking the system and really want to go goalie next (but @Lemorse7 has the final say due to the charity auction), i just dont like it's limitations and setup and it already made me consider early retirement multiple times. 

I don't have an immediate solution either I could pitch, but want you to know you are not alone in this.

Issue is that with goalie stats, theydon't actually change playstyle outside of one. The way your skater plays depends on how you apply. Goalies just get better and better and little changes in their tendencies. So naturally this means goalies have one goal... Get better. And how do you do that. Dump as much TPE into 1 of 3 attributes as you can. It's a little stale but that's a STHS issue, not a VHL issue.

[Pifferfish 512]

13 hours ago, v.2 said:

At the end of the day the biggest issue will always be Simon's simulator.  Until (and if ever) we find a proper engine to jump to these arguments will always continue and go in circles.  I think the stupidest and most misleading thing to newer members is that Leadership and Discipline are virtually useless, yet still there and still upgradeable.  Just always going to remain confusing with most users gearing toward a "meta" in the most cost effective way possible.

Discipline is very useful in the system of hybrid stats. In this system, it allows you to take Body Checking to get DF up for cheap without actually hitting more. Very good on that DC and PC get up there.

[Berocka 2,263]

8 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

Discipline is very useful in the system of hybrid stats. In this system, it allows you to take Body Checking to get DF up for cheap without actually hitting more. Very good on that DC and PC get up there.

Not to out Gustav @Gustav  but have a look at this DI means essentially nothing in this sim

 

 

[Gustav 6,406]

5 hours ago, Berocka said:

Not to out Gustav @Gustav  but have a look at this DI means essentially nothing in this sim

 

 

I think the point was that BC is a way to get DF, so you essentially can go for higher DI if you only want the defense and not the checking. 
 

It’s not a strategy I would follow though. BC is very inefficient at upgrading DF as it is and spending even more to cancel out the rest feels like a waste. 

[Daniel Janser 2,167]

22 minutes ago, Gustav said:

It’s not a strategy I would follow though. BC is very inefficient at upgrading DF as it is and spending even more to cancel out the rest feels like a waste. 

BC is indeed not very efficient, but there are points in your progression where it is more efficient than the alternatives (if you are willing to pay the price in form of more PIM). With my last and even more so with my current player, this is a price I am willing to pay.

 

To than backtrack and invest in DI again appears indeed anything but efficient to me.

[Pifferfish 512]

2 hours ago, Gustav said:

I think the point was that BC is a way to get DF, so you essentially can go for higher DI if you only want the defense and not the checking. 
 

It’s not a strategy I would follow though. BC is very inefficient at upgrading DF as it is and spending even more to cancel out the rest feels like a waste. 

You'd need like PC to cost like 8 per. And DC to cost like 6 per and BC and DI to cost 1 per for it to technically be more efficient on TPE. So you'd only be doing this at past 1000 TPE

[Pifferfish 512]

2 hours ago, Daniel Janser said:

BC is indeed not very efficient, but there are points in your progression where it is more efficient than the alternatives (if you are willing to pay the price in form of more PIM). With my last and even more so with my current player, this is a price I am willing to pay.

 

To than backtrack and invest in DI again appears indeed anything but efficient to me.

I mean, as a Dman I probably would just keep the checking. But as a forward there are a couple really good arguments for not checking at all. You can't score when you are in the box for one bc less ice time. Also if you are checking you cannot be the one who picks up the loose pucks, which as a build with that high of a DF rating you'd be one of the most likely players to gather that takeaway. And third, I believe that in the sim really the only person who hits on any line is the one with the MOST checking, but how much you actually hit doesn't change the likelihood of taking penalties. I think I've seen that occur at a consistent rate regardless of the actual hit numbers. I'm no expert in the sim engine but those are my observations. So if someone spent 17 TPE on BC for 1 more DF and then just 2 more on PO to counteract the hitting I wouldn't really blame them. And I also wouldn't really advise it on a per CK basis. You may go up to 70 BC and then go, "oh, my CK at 65 is too much, let me knock that to 55" that's only 20 TPE of PO I think to significantly reduce your PIMS.

[Daniel Janser 2,167]

3 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

I mean, as a Dman I probably would just keep the checking. But as a forward there are a couple really good arguments for not checking at all. You can't score when you are in the box for one bc less ice time. Also if you are checking you cannot be the one who picks up the loose pucks, which as a build with that high of a DF rating you'd be one of the most likely players to gather that takeaway. And third, I believe that in the sim really the only person who hits on any line is the one with the MOST checking, but how much you actually hit doesn't change the likelihood of taking penalties. I think I've seen that occur at a consistent rate regardless of the actual hit numbers. I'm no expert in the sim engine but those are my observations. So if someone spent 17 TPE on BC for 1 more DF and then just 2 more on PO to counteract the hitting I wouldn't really blame them. And I also wouldn't really advise it on a per CK basis. You may go up to 70 BC and then go, "oh, my CK at 65 is too much, let me knock that to 55" that's only 20 TPE of PO I think to significantly reduce your PIMS.

I am no expert on the engine either. I just like physical players and am willing to sacrifice some production. DJ was pretty physical as well and got a HOF career out of it... your argument is still valid though that time in the bin does not help with your production.

 

[Pifferfish 512]

3 minutes ago, Daniel Janser said:

I am no expert on the engine either. I just like physical players and am willing to sacrifice some production. DJ was pretty physical as well and got a HOF career out of it... your argument is still valid though that time in the bin does not help with your production.

 

I will note too that players with high checking get their penalties from checking as a direct result of their attempted hits. Low checking players get their bc Simon is a dick and decided they needed a timeout at that point. Sooo yeah

[Spartan 4,400]

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....?

[Pifferfish 512]

2 hours ago, Spartan said:

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....?

I mean, I'm sure there is room to consider changing the ratios of some of the other attributes, the only thing I see never changing for good reason is OV being a 1:1 ratio as the primary way to gain Scoring. And the secondary method, whatever it is providing that .12 SC. I will say, I'd like to see a world potentially where Slap Shot is not the clear cut best secondary scoring option. Wrist Shot is terrible until SS hits 75. I personally wish instead of Penalty shooting it gave puck handling.

[Pifferfish 512]

Also @Spartan I want to point out my main reason for disliking the WS/SS thing is new players that make forwards assume they want Wrist Shot bc they are forwards and forwards take wrist shots... It's a bit counter intuitive. Idk it's something so many of them do and I understand a learning curve can be good but that one in particular is very confusing. Idk why I'm ranting about this but I am. I think my larger point is minor tweaks of which none have occurred since I joined are a totally worthwhile conversation. But the system is good and needs to continue.

[Beketov 9,023]

19 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

I personally wish instead of Penalty shooting it gave puck handling.

Puck Handling is much more of a “primary attribute” though. Giving it alongside scoring would make it far too easy to acquire.

 

Also not that it makes a huge difference but just from a logical standpoint better shooting makes sense with penalty shot.

[Beketov 9,023]

17 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

Also @Spartan I want to point out my main reason for disliking the WS/SS thing is new players that make forwards assume they want Wrist Shot bc they are forwards and forwards take wrist shots... It's a bit counter intuitive. Idk it's something so many of them do and I understand a learning curve can be good but that one in particular is very confusing. Idk why I'm ranting about this but I am. I think my larger point is minor tweaks of which none have occurred since I joined are a totally worthwhile conversation. But the system is good and needs to continue.

As to this: the toggle ratios button exists and should be pointed out. People choosing things blindly based off the names really should be discouraged at all cost.

 

Technically we could also just flip which one does what but that makes no logical sense since slap shots would require more strength and wrist shots are more often used in penalty shots.

 

This has nothing to do with the statement that tweaks could be had by the way. Just that the argument of “well the names are confusing” doesn’t make much sense to me when you can directly look at what they do. This is my first player with the hybrids and I don’t think I’ve once looked at the actual names, I just look at the ratios.

[JCarson 723]

Experience?