The Hybrid Attributes are ruining the League

[Spartan 4,002]

33 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

I mean, I'm sure there is room to consider changing the ratios of some of the other attributes

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.

 

35 minutes ago, Pifferfish said:

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.

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.

 

32 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.

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.

[Pifferfish 345]

2 hours ago, Beketov said:

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.

I just think more so the issue is for a newer player the realization that 1 TPE into WS doesn't equate to anything isn't actually tangible until you contact your GM or until you ask question on the discord but you have access to spending TPE The nanosecond you click that create player button. Like also, if you come from SHL let's say, well there Wrist Shots do equal Wrist Shots I believe (I'm not very versed in SHL, so forgive me if I'm wrong) idk... I think that one I just see so many new players do, and it's also tough to be like "hey, you need to reroll everything bc you fucked it up noob." Sometimes it's tough to hear that. Idk I'm taking my experiences as a guy coming off my first gen player who created 8 seasons ago and then being a VHLM GM and seeing how new players take in this info.  

[Pifferfish 345]

2 hours ago, Spartan said:

 

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 think to this point though, WS and SS don't have to give the same amount of Scoring ability, and WS wouldn't need to give the same amount of Puck Handling as SS gives Strength. Like you could argue that WS should if given access to Puck Handling at a clip of .18 or .12 per click (spitballing) then it needs .06 scoring. I'm not expert and I have not done the math. I'm not sure. I'm just saying the room for changes like this could exist. Maybe not immediately but over time it would allow a new journey to find, what is a "meta" "optimal" build. And I think that would be cool.

[Pifferfish 345]

2 hours ago, Beketov said:

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.

I mean that is fair. But is it not also true that Puck Handling and Penalty shooting far and away go better together. Not to mention how we don't have a stat that gives Strength and Checking? Also I think of PH as the 4th/5th stat people want generally. And Strength slots in right behind it. So they aren't so far off. And like I said, you balance that via the ratios. You could make WS a less effective method to increase scoring or make it the 3rd best way to improve PH. That's what the ratios do. If SS gave .3 ST and .12 SC and WS gave .1 SC and .1 PH that is a hardly obvious choice in my opinion. Even that may be too aggressively low. But it would still be more viable than it currently is to take.

[Pifferfish 345]

7 hours 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.

 

Oh I also forgot about another factor that Gustav's article did not factor in. Height and weight. Not sure how these affect the math but they probably lead to the variance at each CK/DI total in hits or PIMs in the article

[Spartan 4,002]

1 hour ago, Pifferfish said:

I think to this point though, WS and SS don't have to give the same amount of Scoring ability, and WS wouldn't need to give the same amount of Puck Handling as SS gives Strength. Like you could argue that WS should if given access to Puck Handling at a clip of .18 or .12 per click (spitballing) then it needs .06 scoring. I'm not expert and I have not done the math. I'm not sure. I'm just saying the room for changes like this could exist. Maybe not immediately but over time it would allow a new journey to find, what is a "meta" "optimal" build. And I think that would be cool.

 

1 hour ago, Pifferfish said:

I mean that is fair. But is it not also true that Puck Handling and Penalty shooting far and away go better together. Not to mention how we don't have a stat that gives Strength and Checking? Also I think of PH as the 4th/5th stat people want generally. And Strength slots in right behind it. So they aren't so far off. And like I said, you balance that via the ratios. You could make WS a less effective method to increase scoring or make it the 3rd best way to improve PH. That's what the ratios do. If SS gave .3 ST and .12 SC and WS gave .1 SC and .1 PH that is a hardly obvious choice in my opinion. Even that may be too aggressively low. But it would still be more viable than it currently is to take.

 

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.

[Pifferfish 345]

@Spartan yeah I get all that. As stated, part of me wonders is there a better way? And with nothing to compare what we have now to, it's tough to say this is best. But I know it's better than pre-hybrid, and I'm thankful for that. 

[Spartan 4,002]

Just now, Pifferfish said:

@Spartan yeah I get all that. As stated, part of me wonders is there a better way? And with nothing to compare what we have now to, it's tough to say this is best. But I know it's better than pre-hybrid, and I'm thankful for that. 

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.

[Pifferfish 345]

58 minutes ago, Spartan said:

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.

Maybe in the future I'll look into it more.