Challenge Questions & Feedback Thread

Post by **joehelmer** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:27 pm

It could have been Duchene or O'Reilly, but now some got them in OHL like me and some keep them in NHL.

Post by **batdad** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:31 pm

Must be minimum of 25 games played in season 1. Rookie thing. AFter that should be minimum 40 games played.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:32 pm

I don't think Duchene or O'Reilly would really fit the description of the type of player Manimal was talking about. He said not a star, someone lower on the list. To me that would mean a lower tier prospect, not somebody that's a -8 or -9 PA.

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:33 pm

joehelmer wrote:It could have been Duchene or O'Reilly, but now some got them in OHL like me and some keep them in NHL.

No, they are too good. I was thinking of someone like perhaps Ryan Stoa or Justin Mercier.

And, Batdad. We would definately use the same player and it's over his total NHL career

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:34 pm

batdad wrote:Must be minimum of 25 games played in season 1. Rookie thing. AFter that should be minimum 40 games played.

See I was thinking a higher minimum number of NHL games but no requirement for season 1. They could be played in the AHL or junior in season 1. That would be part of their development.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:39 pm

Manimal wrote:
joehelmer wrote:It could have been Duchene or O'Reilly, but now some got them in OHL like me and some keep them in NHL.
No, they are too good. I was thinking of someone like perhaps Ryan Stoa or Justin Mercier.

And, Batdad. We would definately use the same player and it's over his total NHL career

Yeah, I think you and I are thinking along the same lines, Manimal. Stoa could be good. What about Galiardi? I haven't looked at his PA. Or Lalonde-McNicoll? Or if we wanted to go with defense we could use Cuminsky.

Post by **batdad** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:42 pm

Sorry...I did not mean 1st season of challenge, I meant 1st season in NHL. Other than that all is good.

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:54 pm

bruins72 wrote: Yeah, I think you and I are thinking along the same lines, Manimal. Stoa could be good. What about Galiardi? I haven't looked at his PA. Or Lalonde-McNicoll? Or if we wanted to go with defense we could use Cuminsky.

Yeah, Galiardi would be OK too. How shall we decide?

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:12 pm

I just took a peek at potentials and saw that Stoa has a fixed number. Galiardi has a random potential (-7). Which do you think is more fair?

Post by **joehelmer** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:16 pm

In that way it should be Galiardi as he can turn out differently for different users.

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:28 pm

joehelmer wrote:In that way it should be Galiardi as he can turn out differently for different users.

I agree. It will better show how we develop him

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:29 pm

But would that just make it random who ends up getting the most out of him?

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:32 pm

bruins72 wrote:But would that just make it random who ends up getting the most out of him?

Hmm, good point. Can we get Stoa to better his PA? I mean by developing him or is that a maximum?

Post by **joehelmer** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:34 pm

Manimal wrote:
bruins72 wrote:But would that just make it random who ends up getting the most out of him?
Hmm, good point. Can we get Stoa to better his PA? I mean by developing him or is that a maximum?

If that is a fixed PA I think it's a maximum.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:37 pm

Yes, Stoa has plenty of room to grow into his PA. He's got an 87 CA and a 125 PA. That looks like a project to me. What do you guys think?

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:17 pm

bruins72 wrote:Yes, Stoa has plenty of room to grow into his PA. He's got an 87 CA and a 125 PA. That looks like a project to me. What do you guys think?

He would be my choice, now that I've reconsidered a couple of times

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:27 pm

LOL!

So we end up back with the player you originally suggested!

Okay, so I'm in for this. If you want to run with this, go ahead and start a new thread in the challenge forum called something like "Unofficial Challenge 15 Side-Challenge: Development!" or whatever you want to call it. We can either keep it strictly as proof of what we've done with Stewart, which wouldn't really have us posting anything on it until the end of the challenge, or we can discuss our experiences with Stoa specifically and then at the end of the challenge we can all post our screenshots of his player history. It's up to you to decide.

alexob18 · Post by **alexob18** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:40 pm

So we're attempting to develop Stoa to his max? Sounds fun!

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:45 pm

That's the plan. We'll see how this test run works out and if it does, maybe we can make it a regular part of our challenges.

alexob18 · Post by **alexob18** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:57 pm

Looking forward to it

Reynaldo28 · Post by **Reynaldo28** » Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:55 pm

When I start this, I cannot make any changes to my team? correct?

Post by **CatchUp** » Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:02 pm

Some snippets from the rules that should answer your question:

4.2 In relation to your Challenge team, you must at all times be the only one in charge of player movement, team management and tactics. This means you cannot ever set your challenge team to go on 'vacation'. You must coach all games. You are not allowed to sim through the games with the Head Coach controlling them. This rule does not apply to your affiliate teams, however.

5.0 Trading and draft restrictions (Season 1)

5.1 Season 1 starts as soon as you start the game and finishes on 30 June 2007. Season 2 begins on 1 July 2007.

5.2 No trades, waiver acquisitions or UFA acquisitions may be signed whatsoever during Season 1. You may, however, renew contracts with your own players and staff at any time.

5.3 If a player contracted to your Challenge team becomes an RFA, you may re-sign him at any point after starting the game until 1 October (inclusive). This does not count towards your UFA quota.

5.4 You may sign your unsigned prospects (prospects who have never previously been contracted to your challenge team) at any point after starting the game until 1 October (inclusive). Further, you may also sign your unsigned prospects from 1 May until the following 1 October.

5.5 You may place players on the waivers at any time.

5.6 You may only buy-out or release your own players’ contracts during the month of June if they earn over US$750,000. If the player earns US$750,000 or less, you may buy-out their contract at any time throughout the year.

9.0 Non-playing staff

9.1 The restrictions in this section (i.e. section 9) do not apply to affiliate team staff.

9.2 You may fire no more than one assistant coach and two scouts per season. You may, however, sign as may assistant coaches and scouts per season as you wish. You may hire and fire as many other types of non-playing staff as you like (e.g. physios, assistant GMs, etc).

9.3 You may hire as many non-playing staff as you choose.

9.4 If you wish to sign another Head Coach, you must sign somebody who has been contracted to your team for at least the past six months.

9.5 Player/Coaches must adhere to the rules for signing both players and non-players.

In short:

ZERO player movement (trades, UFA) in season one.
You may fire ONE Asst. Coach and TWO scouts.

Those are the only 'changes' you can make to the squad in the first year.

Post by **Danny** » Sat Nov 21, 2009 4:23 am

Just a question...is there any chance in hell of loosening the trade/signing restrictions ? I know there's a reason for them, but with the way it is set up right now it's more a coaching/talent developing challenge, pretty much completely ignoring the managing part because it's so limited. Just thinking out loud for future challenges. Any possibility to allow people to trade and sign players as they want, but only during one certain period of the year, maybe 2 weeks during the offseason, and with an extremely tight budget ? You could determine the 2 or 3 most overpaid players and assign them virtual no movement clauses to force people to wait till their contracts expire, and make them have at least one pick for each round of the draft so they don't sell the farm. Anyway, just tossing out ideas for future challenges

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:00 pm

It's something we can take into consideration but it's highly unlikely. We've done it that way in the past and it gets to the point where anybody that knows how to play the game will be always winning the Cup and there won't be much of a difference between the person that comes in 1st and the guy that comes in 8th. That's what's lead us to the point we're at now.

Post by **CatchUp** » Sat Nov 21, 2009 7:05 pm

^ What he said.

Plus, the CHALLENGING part of the game is practice settings, tactics and drafting. AKA Player Development. Anybody can make a trade or 17.