|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2012 17:37:35 GMT -5
Ok (here we go again ), so in the new sim is an option for long term injury %. The setting is 0-200, but 100 is the base number used in the formula for "normal" amount of long term injuries. So if it was set at 100 then the frequency of long term injuries would be the same as it always has been. If I was to make the new setting say 150, then long term injuries would happen 50% more than the "normal formula" but NOT meaning 50% of injuries would be long term. I hope that made sense. With that being said, between 100-200 where do you think the number should be?
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Oct 16, 2012 17:46:35 GMT -5
100 sounds good
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Oct 16, 2012 18:15:11 GMT -5
The default setting sounds good to me... it is hard to gauge. I guess if it is too much, we can reduce it.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2012 18:57:13 GMT -5
So basically you two want to leave it as is, how it's always been since we switched to STHS?
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Oct 16, 2012 19:03:28 GMT -5
125 sounds good to me, there have been too few injuries to the pro roster, needs to be cranked up a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Oct 16, 2012 19:05:36 GMT -5
100% for this year seems fine to me, with maybe having an increase later this year or next year. I'd like to see some simulation results before a final decision is made.
I assume injury frequency is determined by DU with input from the CON number?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2012 19:09:34 GMT -5
So basically you two want to leave it as is, how it's always been since we switched to STHS? I too say yes, I trust your better judgment when comes to the SIM settings. If this is the way you had it then...let it be...oohhh let it be...whisper words of wisdom...let it be....
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2012 19:11:48 GMT -5
100% for this year seems fine to me, with maybe having an increase later this year or next year. I'd like to see some simulation results before a final decision is made. The results will be the same as they were last season, the season before etc... since 100 is the "normal formula" always used in STHS to determine if an injury is long term. Injury slider and DU. But the injury slider only dtermines the frequency of injuries, not if they're long term.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Oct 16, 2012 19:13:07 GMT -5
If this is the way you had it then...let it be So basically non-existent?
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Oct 16, 2012 19:15:22 GMT -5
So basically you two want to leave it as is, how it's always been since we switched to STHS? I misunderstood. I thought this was a new feature of the new STHS sim we are using for the first time. There have been no long term injuries over the last several seasons... I would support an increase to 125.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Oct 16, 2012 19:23:08 GMT -5
Why dont we set it at 150 for the first 30 days of the season and re-evaluate?
Ive always been for less injuries (aka status quo), but im willing to see where this takes us
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2012 19:44:58 GMT -5
0 for TB and 200 for rest of the league is my preference.
Not sure if you can change it for individual teams but if you can I think that is the best (and most fair) way to go.
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Oct 16, 2012 19:48:59 GMT -5
I think we should set it so there is a more realistic frequency of injury. So if it was set at 100 before it should be raised. I would support setting it at 125 as a trial and seeing how that works and re-evaluate it as we go along. If there are still no injuries we could look at bumping it up again.
I don't want an injury to a key player anymore than anyone else, but I think it's unrealistic to go through a whole season and not have one injury to a player on your pro roster. Adapting to injuries and making the moves to respond to them is one key skill of an NHL GM. It could also heat up the trade market if GMs have to make deals to replace injured players
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Oct 16, 2012 20:00:39 GMT -5
I would agree, it was incredibly rare to see an injury in the past. A small increase wouldn't be a bad thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2012 20:37:26 GMT -5
I'm in favour of 125. Could be a little more interesting having to use more of your players when someone else is injured.
|
|