FHM 11

[Cas]

Keep in mind that the star ratings you see are what your scouting staff thinks about the players, and not necessarily the truth. I've regularly seen players develop into 4-5 star players when I drafted them as 2.5-3 star potential players (part of that is I have a near-maxed out coaching staff).

In my current FHM7 game (which is up to 2037 now), I have a 4-star forward who I drafted 52nd overall (I don't have a record of what his potential was when I drafted him, but it couldn't have been more than 2.5 stars -I've never seen 3-star potential players go later than the first round). I had a 5-star drafted 21st overall (probably a 3-star when he was drafted).

You can see a player's real potential under the Edit > Attributes screen (I try to avoid looking at this as much as possible, though), just not in star form, just keep in mind that what your scouts think a player's potential is isn't necessarily truth.

 

[KnightAttack]

1,5 star for current ability is fine.

My concern was with potential. If the game places a hard ceiling on a player's development based on his maximum potential (which would be logical), then it certainly makes sense to give to young players more potential then they probably deserve, in order to allow for unexpected development stories, which happen frequently in hockey. Like you said, most of them won't reach that potential anyway, so no harm done. As I indicated in my previous post, I'm perfectly fine with this principle, provided it is beeing applied consistently. If you have Victor Mete and Josh Brook (who's an offensive defenceman, btw) ranked at 4-star potential and Suzuki at 3,5 (or a relatively low potential given to prospects like Norlinder, Harris and Fairbrother), then the principle is not applied consistently.

I don't think I'm speaking with hindsight. The game starts at the start of 2020-21 season, so I'm assuming it was released several months later. The version I'm playing was later still. There was the whole of 2019-20 season sample size, as well as most (I'm assuming) of 2020-21.



Skating was the main issue with Suzuki when he was drafted. Since then, he has improved significantly. His technique is fine, he should have solid balance and agility ratings, however in terms of top speed and acceleration he's probably an NHL average at best. He outsmarts his opponents, not outraces them.

For reference, see his last goal against Calgary. He caught Gudbranson (a towering, sluggish defenceman) flatfooted at the blueline. Still, the opponent forced him to the outside and Suzuki had to bank it off Markstrom's pad from below the goal line.



Thanks for clarification. I thought it was much more staightforward:

5 stars - the stars of the league. A handful of best players at their respective positions
4 stars - #1D, first-line forward, very good starting goaltender
3 stars - top-3D, top-6 forward, starting goaltender
2 stars - bottom-3D, bottom-6 forward, backup goalie
1 star - #6-8D, #12-14F, #3G

Seems like the person responsible for scouting the Habs didn't understand the system, or I've found another oddity. If 2,5 is a low pairing D, then how come Jeff Petry is at 3 stars, a minimum possible increase from 2,5 (half a star)? In "my" system I thought him to be a top-3 D (a #2/3D), which would have been fine (well, the Habs fans think he's a #1D, so they would be unhappy anyway).



This must be the reason. I didn't tinker with any options, but I did select opening night rosters and an early start. But why does it affect player rankings?

So just a couple of things; There isn't a "Hard Ceiling" on the vast majority of players. Players can go past their their potential, although it takes a mixture of playing time, good situations and training. I've had a player got 1.5 stars higher than they were expected to be.

The principle is applied as it can be; but there's always room for disagreements. You're right that Brook had a full season (which I think I mentioned), but as I said, he was a rookie in the AHL and still put up okay numbers for a rookie Defensemen. In the meantime, he essentially doubled his output in the shortened season (as he scored a few more points in half the amount of games). Again; as I stated below and as you pointed out; the star rating system maybe has your vision a little skewed. We want to make it perfectly clear that 5 stars does not equal 100. The biggest issue is that no one is perfect. If we were to use that scale, we'd still get complaints of "How is ________ a 5 star? His defensive ability sucks." or "How can you compare __________ to _______? ______ scores so much more!"

We use the full scale of 0.5 to 5 stars for that reason. Yes, 5 star players are the absolute superstars, but they are essentially those classic players that don't come around that often. It's better to give more flexibility to use all the stars (and half stars) to showcase the league talent - and it's also important for non-NHL leagues as well. As I stated before; you see stars by whatever level you're at. So if you're playing in the Asian League for instance, you're not seeing just a bunch of 0.5 star guys.

Now Petry is a guy who needs a little more explanation. When I wrote those descriptions (A quick check says it was 4 years ago. Woof. Time flies!), was before additional systems were added. Petry is a guy who I'd personally rank somewhere between a 2.5/3 right now regardless, but when he plays in your system and who he plays with can great elevate his game. Player Chemistry will also elevate someone's game (although you won't necessarily see it in the star rating system). Petry is a guy when playing with someone he has high chemistry with probably pushes him up (to being the equivalent of) a 0.5/1 star better as well - which is where his better play can come from. If you remove Petry from Montreal, does he continue to play as well? I'm not sure that's the case.

I used the example on the original post with Michael Grabner at the time. We were doing a pre-expansion Vegas team where we took him and despite him dropping to 1.5 stars by our second season, we kept him in our top 6. Why? Because he had excellent chemistry with Tavares and was scoring ~40 goal a year pace. The pros outweighed the cons.

Opening Night Rosters vs In-Season is different as well because the database changed. We keep the opening night essentially untouched, but further updates (and roster movement) gets adjusted as the season progresses. Some is both, but most is focused on the updated (to trade deadline) roster.

Keep in mind that the star ratings you see are what your scouting staff thinks about the players, and not necessarily the truth. I've regularly seen players develop into 4-5 star players when I drafted them as 2.5-3 star potential players (part of that is I have a near-maxed out coaching staff).

In my current FHM7 game (which is up to 2037 now), I have a 4-star forward who I drafted 52nd overall (I don't have a record of what his potential was when I drafted him, but it couldn't have been more than 2.5 stars -I've never seen 3-star potential players go later than the first round). I had a 5-star drafted 21st overall (probably a 3-star when he was drafted).

You can see a player's real potential under the Edit > Attributes screen (I try to avoid looking at this as much as possible, though), just not in star form, just keep in mind that what your scouts think a player's potential is isn't necessarily truth.

This is also true. Scouts are imperfect. Players can play better; or can play worse. Even at that, reading your scouting report (although it's been changed and improved in 8) can give you tips about whether a player may go past or not get to their potential.

 

[filip85]

I must say game is as stable as ever. In previous games crashes were almost part of the gameplay, I didn't experience single crash this year (and only one during Beta testing). Two things still bugs me, despite improvements UI navigation still has that "one click too many" feel and of course 2D engine is still not on the same level as EHM's one, despite graphically looking very candy.

New financial system is nice addition, especially ability to build new Arena. On-ice decisions are also nice addition.

And I agree with Knight, sometimes player stars don't tell whole story. For example, if I have center who is 3 star and sucks in defensive categories and I have center with 2.5 stars who is strong at his D side of the game, who I will put on first PK unit ? Of course 2,5 stars player will get the PK job.

 

[CasusBelli]

I just don’t get tired of Historical mode. Gretzky didn’t retire within top three all time points. Esposito, Lemieux and Tardiff were the golden boys. Orr was practically a bust. Just love the uncertainty baked into the game.

The game feels like it’s more about clever asset management than anything, which is right up my alley, as that’s my favorite part of the game. In the current game:

 

[KnightAttack]

I just don’t get tired of Historical mode. Gretzky didn’t retire within top three all time points. Esposito, Lemieux and Tardiff were the golden boys. Orr was practically a bust. Just love the uncertainty baked into the game.

The game feels like it’s more about clever asset management than anything, which is right up my alley, as that’s my favorite part of the game. In the current game:

It's not very often that Gretzky isn't at least in the top 10, but there's lots of things that can go into that - most notably - injuries. How much was he injured? Same with Orr. What were the teams like they played on? Who coached them? etc.

If you want perfect career arcs, turn on Stat recalculation. Otherwise, the odd game can surprise!

 

[CasusBelli]

It's not very often that Gretzky isn't at least in the top 10, but there's lots of things that can go into that - most notably - injuries. How much was he injured? Same with Orr. What were the teams like they played on? Who coached them? etc.

If you want perfect career arcs, turn on Stat recalculation. Otherwise, the odd game can surprise!

I love the surprises. And yes, Orr was injured almost incessantly and had just one PPG season despite playing with at least six hall of gamers on 4 Stanley Cup teams (until I traded him). Same for Maurice Richard. Tardiff always seems to surprise; Geordie Howe rarely has PPG seasons. Max Bentley had four 100pt seasons and was the first player to have a 1,000 point career. This is what makes the game so exciting (to me at least). It’s like a hockey version of Hearts of Iron.

Also, I think Gretzky finished 5th or 6th all time in the game I referenced. He was still PPG but eclipsed by guys like Stan Mikita.

 

[filip85]

I love the surprises. And yes, Orr was injured almost incessantly and had just one PPG season despite playing with at least six hall of gamers on 4 Stanley Cup teams (until I traded him). Same for Maurice Richard. Tardiff always seems to surprise; Geordie Howe rarely has PPG seasons. Max Bentley had four 100pt seasons and was the first player to have a 1,000 point career. This is what makes the game so exciting (to me at least). It’s like a hockey version of Hearts of Iron.

Also, I think Gretzky finished 5th or 6th all time in the game I referenced. He was still PPG but eclipsed by guys like Stan Mikita.

Historical mode it's like game itself within the game. They added Olympics, Canada Cup/World Cup last year plus 1972. SS. My hope for future versions are World Championship and NHL tours of Soviet and Czech clubs.

 

[CasusBelli]

Historical mode it's like game itself within the game. They added Olympics, Canada Cup/World Cup last year plus 1972. SS. My hope for future versions are World Championship and NHL tours of Soviet and Czech clubs.

It’s pretty incredible. For hardcore hockey fans who enjoy the nuances or business of the sport, no other game comes close, and this is from someone who’s had EHM since 2003 and most EA NHL games since 99.

 

[Beef Cake]

It’s pretty incredible. For hardcore hockey fans who enjoy the nuances or business of the sport, no other game comes close, and this is from someone who’s had EHM since 2003 and most EA NHL games since 99.

Has historical been stable in FHM8? It was incredibly bugged for me in 7 and I quit attempting play throughs.

 

[CasusBelli]

Has historical been stable in FHM8? It was incredibly bugged for me in 7 and I quit attempting play throughs.

Have had zero crashes. Player progression is accurate. No bugs that I can see.

 

[CANUCKS]

Might have already been asked, but are there any plans to make a mobile version of this game?

 

[KnightAttack]

Has historical been stable in FHM8? It was incredibly bugged for me in 7 and I quit attempting play throughs.

I don't recall there being many issues reported with 7. I ran plenty and never ran into any myself. 8 has been more of the same.

Might have already been asked, but are there any plans to make a mobile version of this game?

It's on the list, but it's a ways down. Our continued and future efforts right now are on our PC/Mac version.

 

[JSn0w93]

I don't recall there being many issues reported with 7. I ran plenty and never ran into any myself. 8 has been more of the same.



It's on the list, but it's a ways down. Our continued and future efforts right now are on our PC/Mac version.

What about a perfect team mode? I would LOVE that, but not sure FHM has the player base to make it thrive like OOTP.

 

[KnightAttack]

What about a perfect team mode? I would LOVE that, but not sure FHM has the player base to make it thrive like OOTP.

It's something we have outlined plans for, but other priorities that remain higher on the list.

 

[Beef Cake]

I don't recall there being many issues reported with 7. I ran plenty and never ran into any myself. 8 has been more of the same.



It's on the list, but it's a ways down. Our continued and future efforts right now are on our PC/Mac version.

That's actually shocking to me. Trying to change lines crashed the game nearly every time, and some players went to the Olympics and never returned to the roster.

 

[KaraLupin]

My friend wants to buy this game after playing mine with me a few times, but is turned off by the price, hope we can get a Christmas discount on Steam

 

[KnightAttack]

That's actually shocking to me. Trying to change lines crashed the game nearly every time, and some players went to the Olympics and never returned to the roster.

I don't recall the former, but the latter was report. It was fixed in an update, and there was a workaround to get the players back if you had the issue.

My friend wants to buy this game after playing mine with me a few times, but is turned off by the price, hope we can get a Christmas discount on Steam

I can neither confirm or deny what may happen.

A new update is now out with the Australian league added, Hockey Card modding is now available, and you can now add National Anthems (I personally put up a mod pack already for that).

 

[KnightAttack]

My friend wants to buy this game after playing mine with me a few times, but is turned off by the price, hope we can get a Christmas discount on Steam

Well, it's official now - Winter sale means 25% off for FHM8. As I said, we released a fairly large update just earlier this week. We're taking the next couple days off for obvious reasons, but hopefully if you've been thinking about buying the game, there's no better time than now!

 

[KaraLupin]

Well, it's official now - Winter sale means 25% off for FHM8. As I said, we released a fairly large update just earlier this week. We're taking the next couple days off for obvious reasons, but hopefully if you've been thinking about buying the game, there's no better time than now!

Thanks, will let him know!!!

 

[silverswimmer]

I've noticed in historical mode that if you play from around 2000, when the salary cap is implemented almost no teams ever come close to spending to the cap and salaries are very deflated. Is there a way to fix this without simply just reseting salaries every July 1st?

 

[KnightAttack]

I've noticed in historical mode that if you play from around 2000, when the salary cap is implemented almost no teams ever come close to spending to the cap and salaries are very deflated. Is there a way to fix this without simply just reseting salaries every July 1st?

Was this with a recently started game? It's already been adjusted in FHM8 once.

 

[silverswimmer]

Was this with a recently started game? It's already been adjusted in FHM8 once.

Yea, I've updated the game since the new fix. I'm simming a historical game right now from 2005 to try and play with it. I'm at 2012 and it seems that most teams are still about 20 million under the cap. I'm wondering if I have a setting that is causing this but almost all of my setting are default.

 

[KnightAttack]

Yea, I've updated the game since the new fix. I'm simming a historical game right now from 2005 to try and play with it. I'm at 2012 and it seems that most teams are still about 20 million under the cap. I'm wondering if I have a setting that is causing this but almost all of my setting are default.

Hm, we'll take a look.

 

[DropKickedMurphy]

I see that there is promotion and relegation in current leagues, but is there an option for custom leagues yet?

 

[kacz]

It's been a minute HF community,

I've created a YouTube channel, RetroHockeySteph, wanting to put my TV broadcasting diploma to good use, so here it is.

Having thought of many historical scenarios for each NHL club, I'm starting off with the 1996-97 Anaheim Mighty Ducks, attempting to lead Paul Kariya & Teemu Selanne to Stanley Cup glory. With one full season in the bag, there is some content to view asap, so it check it out if you're interested. Also, if there are similar channels out there, please let me know, would love to view & connect.