EHM The Blue Line

Hello guys,
I just started play EHM:EA (1?), but i really don't know how to develop my players right - like I finish one season as Sabers GM - Eichel win Calder Trophy, end with 30 goals, no injury in season and play-off = but his stats are same, maybe a little worse at start of new season. So, I don't know what i am doing bad - anyone some tips for amateur like me? Thanks for anythink!

Had the same issues with not changing stats, too. First, I put every training area on "intensive", but this doesn't seem like a good idea and the community starts to notice that. Then I let my coach do it, who is a real pro in almost every area, and he totally failed. He put most of the training on "general" and it didn't chance a thing. I didn't get the point, how he organized my coaching staff, neither, there was one coach doing 4/5 of all training areas and some did almost nothing.

Then I started my own training. I kept the names for the schedules like "Shooting", "Skating" and so on, but changed them in a way that I put 2-3 areas (that fit to the schedule description), on "intensive" and the rest on "normal", maybe "light". Then, I hired an army of about 6 good coaches, real specialists. Two for every area, two defensive pros, two fitness... I only checked they all were good in Man Management, that's a key attribute, and Working With Youngsters, because I run a WHL team. Very important, I read that in a different guide, is that the two coaches assigned for an area don't have "complementary" attributes, like one is very good in man management but sucks in tactical skills, while the other one is a tactic pro and unable to man-manage. They don't complement in this case, but the weaker coach drags the other one down to his level, so you get bad man management AND bad tactics training.

Right now, I am pretty content, while not totally overwhelmed, with this training. It works better than any other before, while you have to keep in mind that player development seems to be slower than in previous versions (don't know by own experience, but this seems to be concensus in the community). Only one player has become worse, everyone else has become at least a little better in several skills after 6 months of training, some made a real "jump". Still, I have to check better if some schedules are more effective than others and I haven't compared how AI players develop, either. And, this is training for a junior hockey team, I don't know if it works for NHL (but shouldn't know why not).

DrEvil wrote:Had the same issues with not changing stats, too. First, I put every training area on "intensive", but this doesn't seem like a good idea and the community starts to notice that. Then I let my coach do it, who is a real pro in almost every area, and he totally failed. He put most of the training on "general" and it didn't chance a thing. I didn't get the point, how he organized my coaching staff, neither, there was one coach doing 4/5 of all training areas and some did almost nothing.

Then I started my own training. I kept the names for the schedules like "Shooting", "Skating" and so on, but changed them in a way that I put 2-3 areas (that fit to the schedule description), on "intensive" and the rest on "normal", maybe "light". Then, I hired an army of about 6 good coaches, real specialists. Two for every area, two defensive pros, two fitness... I only checked they all were good in Man Management, that's a key attribute, and Working With Youngsters, because I run a WHL team. Very important, I read that in a different guide, is that the two coaches assigned for an area don't have "complementary" attributes, like one is very good in man management but sucks in tactical skills, while the other one is a tactic pro and unable to man-manage. They don't complement in this case, but the weaker coach drags the other one down to his level, so you get bad man management AND bad tactics training.

Right now, I am pretty content, while not totally overwhelmed, with this training. It works better than any other before, while you have to keep in mind that player development seems to be slower than in previous versions (don't know by own experience, but this seems to be concensus in the community). Only one player has become worse, everyone else has become at least a little better in several skills after 6 months of training, some made a real "jump". Still, I have to check better if some schedules are more effective than others and I haven't compared how AI players develop, either. And, this is training for a junior hockey team, I don't know if it works for NHL (but shouldn't know why not).

Please don't post the same post twice.