I didn’t see anything in the forums as to the new info being released as to Q&A for NHL 16. EA_Dev has been clearing up the air in the EA Forums, especially under the thread that recently debuted NHL 16 gameplay; I haven’t seen it if anyone has a new link because the one that I tried was pulled due to C/R infringement. Anyways, just thought I collaborate the responses and post. I’m not sure why EA hasn’t seeded these in the “Ask NHL” section. A good read for a lunch break or on the porcelain throne… Comments from EA_Dev – NHL 16 Hey guys - When we heard a video from the show floor at E3 went up, I knew there would be a topic here so wanted to jump in and answer some of your questions and/or respond to some of your concerns/assumptions. The video you are looking at is default settings (Pro/Simulation). There weren't many people that went in and played on All Star/Hardcore (the online default) other than some people from Operation Sports, Game Informer and a few others that selectively asked us if they could go in and change the settings. Other than that, the majority of people were playing on default settings at E3. Default settings have the same core models in place for skating, shooting, passing, checking, etc. but the tuning and/or effect of the weights on the different factors that effect each of them can and do in many cases vary quite a bit. As an example, on default settings, it will still be harder to pickup a hard passed puck on your backhand while skating away at full speed compared to a softer pass to your forehand when standing still but the range is reduced to the point where that difference is much more slight. With Hardcore settings, you are much more accountable for your actions and the weights against each of those factors are much higher which allows them to have a bigger impact on the end results (shooting wide, bobbling a pass, getting bumped off a puck, etc.). Overall Game Speed is higher on default whereas on Hardcore it is tuned to be authentic. Hitting on Default has more to do with the speed of the collision than the individual ratings of the players involved like it does on Hardcore and hit assistance itself is higher on Default vs Hardcore. I'd also like to point out, since it is a big topic here, that incidental stick on stick contact isn't on for Default settings like it is in Hardcore and even stick on body collisions in Default won't dislodge the puck in some cases (such as when you are just in the act of picking up the puck) whereas on Hardcore it is on all the time. There are actually some decent interactions with physics in this video that some of you have called out as 'in the right direction' as far as a player not being able to make themselves 'immune to physics' but I also saw the comments that they look odd. That is because on default settings, there is more hit assist and the collisions themselves are bigger than what would be deemed realistic/authentic. Players protecting pucks and getting nudged off pucks at the right time is a big part of Hardcore gameplay but the effects on that style are more subtle than what is seen in this video since the speeds are more realistic and we take the weights of the players and their physical abilities that much more into account. I saw the interaction at 37 seconds called out that the player skated through and kept the puck. He actually did lose the puck due to stick on body contact but regained control after. This may play out better on Hardcore settings but overall it is behaving as expected -- the puck comes loose at the speed it was at when the stick collides and it is free for anyone to pick back up. It just so happens in this case it went through and the original puck carrier picked it back up. The On-Ice Trainer visualizations that some of you have called out are customizable as far as what is shown on screen by type and are all off regardless of your settings for competitive online play. Some of you may surprise yourselves that you actually like using some of them when practicing or playing certain modes like Be a Pro but we will get into how all that works later on. On a similar topic, the NBC scoreclock, even though it has been moved to the top corner to match their current look, still has an option to set it to a smaller size if you are less concerned about authenticity and would prefer it more out of the way. I saw a comment regarding the passing visualizations and an assumption that it meant that we still had 'auto' passing. They are actually two different systems. The visualization shows both who we deem as the best pass option and also who you appear to be targeting with your pass (when we do that, we draw a line from where you are aiming to their stick blade but that doesn't mean that is exactly where the pass will go). The different game styles have different levels of assist for passing and Hardcore has been tuned so that you can both be creative with the puck (such as leading players or banking passes) and also target players you expect to. For us, both gameplay where you are playing with real world players (i.e. NHL teams) and in the EASHL (i.e. Player Classes), our intention is for player ratings to matter -- so that all plays into the pass error and ability to overcome certain variables (i.e. passing on your backhand or passing in stride instead of out of a glide) after you aim your pass with your left stick and set the power with how long you hold down pass. Just because you aim it perfect, if your player has a poor passing rating or you try to do something physically more difficult on the ice, they may not get the full speed you request or the best accuracy. After seeing a bit more on attributes in the thread, I will add one more thing that first and foremost our intention with Gameplay this year is to have a really well balanced gameplay experience and that what you expect is what you get. We want to give you full control over what you intend to do. If you want to bank a pass vs pass directly to a player, that should be in your control. However, attributes come into play after the User has input their intention. This allows us to differentiate how well different players execute against the action you have asked for and that is why a Playmaker will make a better final pass than a Grinder and why even though you are protecting the puck and skating at the right angle that a Power Forward will shrug off a check much better than a Sniper. The same goes for defense. We have made positioning matter much more now so most players standing in a lane will be able to deflect pucks, but those with better attributes will be able to pick them off more cleanly or possibly get sticks on pucks when they aren't in as much control or are at worse angles. I hope this clears up some of your assumptions but I know that getting your hands on the game will always do more justice than reading about it or watching and speculating how it feels from a video regardless of the Users playing (give those guys a break) and the settings being used. Due to that, I am really looking forward to when you get a chance to actually get your hands on it and wish we could do that sooner than later. In the meantime though, over the next couple of weeks, we will be doing some deep dives into Gameplay to give you even more insight into some of the specific improvements and how they help balance the game. [HR][/HR] Q. Defensive positioning matters, that sounds great and everything, I really like it... But what about True Vision Control? Is it possible to square up to the puck by holding LT/L2? I've heard mixed responses from your demo'ers. A. You will have to take my word for it at this point but I feel that vision control is the best it has been since we added in True Performance Skating. Vision control before that isn't really valid because we allowed you to slide sideways across your skate blades, and did not really respect the need to pivot and turn your hips. If you hold down Vision Control and move your skater in a circle, they will remain open with their forehand side to the puck as much as physically possible. The moments they pivot feel very intuitive. This example is best when talking about an off puck offensive player looking to get open for a pass or one timer but it works very similar on defense as well. The only difference is what you want your Vision Control Target to be. On offense it has to do with the puck and the offensive net, where on defense it is more to do with the puck and being able to face up ice. [HR][/HR] Q. One question have the tripping penalties been fixed ? Meaning when a one a 1-on-1 and you go to poke check a guy skating backwards you dont take a tripping penalty ? Yea people can spam the poke check, but your not giving us full control of the defensemen, so what do you expect people to do ? Maybe fix the poke check so when a player is within stick distance to the defender hes gonna lose the puck. Because lets be honest, how many tripping penalties do you see on a 1-on-1 ? Unless of course the guy pulls off a dangle but in reality this doesnt happen often. Most forwards will get tangled up or just dump the puck in the corner. A. We have done a lot of work to pokechecks and stick on stick contact from the front will dislodge the puck as well. I think you will find that pokechecks work much better for those that do not spam and worse for those that do. It is an interesting thought about the penalty frequency from the front but so far we do not handle a stick into skates different from one angle than another. With our increase in pokechecking control on your first attempted pokecheck, you should have a lot more success without fear of taking penalties if done in control and correctly. Personally I play much more of a positional defensive game with a lot less hitting, have pretty good success with stick checking and get out of many games without taking penalties. That being said, it is not just because we have less penalties or something. Some people in our office are getting 6 tripping penalties a game by being more careless. Hopefully it is further towards what you expect but definitely get us feedback after you play and we can look further into your concept for front vs back chance of a trip. [HR][/HR] Q. Was the first Poke Check increased in NHL 15 or prior, or is this entirely new? Also, how long is the cooldown before its a "Quality poke" if you will. Because I'll be the first to say, I poke spam. I spam the RB as if it was a QTE Button Masher. I do it mostly because defensemen only have 3 tools at their disposal. 1.) Poke. 2.) Stick Lift 3.) Hit And as a player who isn't a hitter, the poke check is almost ALWAYS the most logical choice. Anytime I could lift a stick, or hit someone, I'm probably close enough to poke it. And not only that, I can jab much more quickly then a stick lift that will slow me down should I miss. And even when I do correctly lift my opponents stick, it's very very likely they will still get the puck back and blow past me. A. This is new to NHL 16. We wanted to look at the issue of spamming pokecheck and handle it in a realistic way understanding why the method wouldn't be possible and/or successful in real life. Physically you won't be as accurate if your are stabbing again and again at the puck vs taking one good attempt at it. Thus we looked at your ability to make contact with the puck on your first poke attempt and that is based on a number of factors (relative speed of the puck to your player, the angle to your player the puck is in (better out front, worse to the sides and even worse behind) and your players stick checking rating). From there, in the spamming case, every poke after that has more possible error applied to it to simulate being out of control. If you wait until you are done the first pokecheck and back in control before poking again, that is pretty much the window (again to be realistic rather than just a game mechanic). Since stick on stick and stick on body contact can dislodge the puck, positioning alone is much more stifling, (especially with more control while skating), so I think you will find beyond your ability to perform an action (poke, stick lift or hit), just holding your ground can stand a player up and the puck will come loose if a player doesn't try and switch up the lane they are attacking from. As a side note, we also refined pokechecks to look more at the angle of the 2 sticks to give you more success when you have leverage (so you will be better coming up from behind when your stick is perpendicular to the player that is holding it out to that side vs from the dead front when the two stick are more parallel with one another and you can't get leverage -- this all gets weighed into attributes of the players as well but that's the base mechanic). Each of the changes makes playing defense more predictable and it also allows the offensive player to know when they are actually vulnerable or what they should be doing to protect the puck better as well. [HR][/HR] Q. Next up, the affectivness on auto dekes and holding the puck out on your backhand, I'm sure you have seen some issues in 15, with being unable to hit a player in these animations, almost a force field ? I'm curious what your thoughts are on auto dekes and holding the puck out on your backhand and what adjustments have been made to them if any at all ? Lose the puck easier when holding the puck of your skating stride, or lose balance easier ? You seemed to have covered this a bit in your previous post, with regards to poke checks, I'm assuming with body contact as well when a player holds the puck out on his back hand (not protecting the puck) ? A. Even though those are technically just two questions, there are a lot of answers/pieces to cover in a full response. I won't be able to get into all of them right now but can definitely give you an idea on our thought process around advancing forward and making deking, puck control and the physicality of the game more realistic. When it comes to the physical side of the game, we look at the collision itself (the physical side of the collision - relative speed, how direct the hit is through the center of mass of the player being checked, etc. and that all happens through the core physics system), the players involved (for physical attributes like height and weight, ratings such as balance and checking ability), their intent (are they checking or is this just incidental contact) and then how prepared they are (are they protecting the puck, are they gliding vs in full stride, in the middle of an action such as a deke, pass, shot, etc.). With that background, you can maybe see that depending on how important we make these factors or how the weights of each are balanced against one another, the result can change a lot. Last year, because we didn't have the full range of physical reactions in and working (a big lack on the bottom end for different stumble reactions) players holding the puck out to the side became too powerful. In many cases, they were controlled enough that they shouldn't have gone into a big stumble fall or full fall so that was correct but they probably should have in many cases been at least bumped off the puck. This year, we have the full range of reactions in and working and this has helped a lot. We can now still have players more in control and prepared if they are in a glide vs in stride but a player that is strong enough and/or comes in with enough relative speed to produce the right amount of force can bump a player off the puck. I should note here that so far for NHL 16, the tuning for a player holding the puck out is that they are as physically prepared as someone in a glide. The only difference in advantage/disadvantage here is the ability to have the puck more protected from where a player can physically get to it. We actually now have more stumble reactions than we had on last gen. We have added little shrugs where players have a bigger chance to keep the puck, and slightly bigger stumbles where a player can get bumped more cleanly off the puck. This has also allowed us to tune the physical interactions of when you lose the puck much more realistically. Since we don't have some of the more subtle stick and puck interactions that you would need in the many situations that come out of physics driven reactions, we can also look at the distance the puck is from the stick and ensure it comes loose if it is too far away, even if the original stumble was intending to keep the puck (hope that makes sense). The end result is that it feels much more organic and matches the expectation you have for the result more often. The last thing I will say is that all of this is very important in the way we tune the sub factors on actions like shooting and passing. Since we make you more accountable for being in control, even subtle losses of the puck have an impact to the end result of all of these actions. Just because you lose the puck for a slight moment doesn't mean that the offensive player isn't the one that will pick it back up. However, what it does mean is that if they do pick it back up and shoot right after, they will have less accuracy and control in what they were doing than if they had just kept control of the puck that whole time. These losses of the puck can come from incidental contacts from stick on stick, stick on body, a result of a more subtle collision, etc.. Again, in the end, it makes the offensive player more accountable for their actions, the need for moving the puck, protecting the puck, controlling their speeds and not just driving through traffic and expecting the same result as if they had a clear lane. It also gives defense a much better ability to make their positioning and actions matter. [HR][/HR]Q. Your interesting insides and detailed explanation means so much. It also help the atmosphere around here, thats for sure As I know U are also big presentation and authenticity fan as me, I would love to ask U this too. Is the "realtime presentation" system finished in Nhl 16? This probably needs improved Ai off the ice, so there are no fade outs and black frames. A. This is a tough one. It is partly the effort to do it all but also almost more importantly a balance of how much the majority of people want to see in an experience where they are actively involved. I know that you personally would want all of the events to happen in real time and wait for players to get to the next faceoff, etc. (and I am a fan of going after that realism as well) but in some cases we are taking liberties because we can and pick those spots wisely to match up with not having to spend time there when we could spend it on core gameplay. We try to build enough atmosphere and offplay moments where you get some of that but keep the pace moving so that the majority of people won't want to skip it. Our goal scenarios are probably shorter by at least 10 seconds from the real world and some people still want them sped up but that is a moment where we understand the emotion and importance of showing the celebration, the other goaltender, the effects in the arenas, the horns and songs, etc. and allow that to be much closer to the real world pacing. The argument here is that people can just skip it but then they miss out on some of that emotion that we feel they would benefit from if we could find a pacing that they are willing to take in. As you mentioned, I am a big fan of the atmosphere, realism and recreating what we see on a broadcast and at the rink live. Our goals for the product have been to create a nice hybrid where it feels just as though you are watching an NBC broadcast but also matches some of the immersion you have when at the rink live (which works better in an active experience like a video game as opposed to a passive one like watching a broadcast on tv). We have continued to add to our model where you will see a few more shots of players going to the bench and changing lines and have spent time on those animations to look more realistic (rather than having post whistle line changes off visually) but we still use fade to black transitions to get us to the next play faster. We have also added in the tunnel walks for the players on both teams at the end of a period. Last year, our artists did a great job replicating the authenticity of each of the arenas and put all the tunnels in the correct locations so this year for end of period, game misconducts, injuries, etc. you will see the players from both teams use all of the correct tunnels in each of the arenas and all of the doors open up as well. As we move forward, all of this will continue to be a big topic for us in design discussions for how we can get the best of both worlds. We will continue to listen to what people want and see what is possible as we balance all the feedback. [HR][/HR]Q. 1.) Will Two-Way Forwards have higher Stick Checking and Def Awareness than a Two-Way Defensemen? (I think this was an oversight in previous iterations.) 2.) Can we change our height/weight in EASHL? 3.) Will all player types have the same Faceoff rating, or will Centers only have 1 or 2 options again for competitive play? 4.) Can human goalies change their equipment colors this year? (It's missing from NHL 15) A. I actually can't answer all of that yet as we are still balancing, especially when it comes to player classes. The Game Changers will be helping us a lot with that tuning as well in terms of what the community expects from certain builds. Saying that all centers would have to pick one build isn't exactly true. We haven't finalized faceoff ratings yet either but from a theory perspective, I get both sides. You have to decide what skills will be the most important to take on the ice. You can also see what center you are matching up against and decide if they are going after a faceoff advantage or something else. The player with a faceoff advantage could very well lack in all other offensive categories so it will be a choice of what is most important. The main goal is that people are thinking about all those pros on cons individually and as a team to decide what the best unit is to have on the ice each time you face a new opponent. Plans for Height and Weight are to tie them to the player classes themselves since both height and weight can effect speed and physical interactions. If we want a really well balanced game, it is best for the height and weight to match the different personas/styles of the player classes rather than have external factors that help skew where we think that build should sit in terms of certain abilities. We will continue to listen to the community as you get your hands on it and if there is a better way to balance things and give more control over customization, we will be all ears as we have been so far. And yes, goalies will have full control over not only their gear selection but the colours of each of the zones as well. [HR][/HR]Q. I really appreciate you coming on here to talk about this, but I'm definitely against the approach of having faceoffs be a variable stat between builds. I just don't see why it's being treated any differently from speed and acceleration being equal across all builds. I think there will be few people choosing anything other than TWF or GRN for center, assuming they still have the highest faceoff rating, because faceoffs so often lead to scoring chances. It's a much of an offensive stat as defensive, but you seem to be balancing it as if it were only a defensive stat. Do you have plans to at least revisit this decision a month or two after release so that if you see 75% or more of games have a TWF or GRN at center that you would rework things so that faceoffs are equalized? One other question that I had was how player builds will be chosen for AI players, and if they will have the same attributes as their human counterparts. Is it just going to be random, so if I played a game of 2's and had two human playmakers, I might end up with another playmaker and two offensive D-men? My hope would be that they could choose complementary players to the ones you already have, and also give you a way to see what player type they were before the game starts. A. I can't get into all the ratings at this time but keep in mind it may not be that one player has a 90 faceoff rating and the other has 50, even if there is an advantage at all (which hasn't been finalized yet). The difference could very well be 85 over 83 and mean the difference in 1 or 2 out of 10 faceoffs or more. This may or may not be worth giving up other skills for. That being said, the same argument could be used if we give everyone the same faceoff rating. Every center would then possibly pick a power forward or sniper if that best complimented the wingers being chosen. If there are differences (even if slight) in each category, you have to decide if you want advantages to win faceoffs more often, play better defensively, be the setup man with great passing, or, or, or. What you know of the EASHL in the past can't really be used to predict how the current model will play out. The way the old model played out where people could find massive advantages in certain categories and overcome negatives of certain builds by putting attributes into those categories manually was part of the reason to change the system to what the community was after -- something a lot more balanced. AI builds are still being balanced as well but the goal is to have well rounded players that won't overly dictate the outcomes of games. We understand that people can't always get full 6 on 6 gameplay so we don't want the AI players to be a detriment on the ice but we want to encourage human players as much as possible. [HR][/HR]Q. I don't think you intended it, but winning 1 or 2 more out of 10 faceoffs would be a huge difference (10-20%). If there are going to be differences between builds, I don't think it should be much more than a 5% gap between the best and worst builds, maybe 10% if the sniper would be awful and the grinder is the absolute best. I think there's plenty of skill with the controller already and it shouldn't become too based on the attributes. Are there going to be more than 1 AI build for offense and D, and are they going to be chosen at random? Can you also go into detail about how you'll use them to encourage people to play 6's? Does this mean that their attributes will be lower, or will they otherwise be handicapped? What level of human player are you trying to replicate with the AI in EASHL (elite, slightly above average, average, or below average)? I think what people who play smaller games want is a variable skilled AI so that in a divison 1 game of 4's that you have an AI that is roughly on the same level as your own players, and maybe slightly below. Is that something you've put much thought into doing, or do you want it to be a "one size fits all" AI? Finally, do you have goals for how much players will use particular builds and plans to check on how each build is being used, along with point production? Do you have a way to limit this to only the top 10% or so of players as well? A. Ya, don't take those numbers as what we have tuned. In many cases, it is better to hear what I mention as the theory as opposed to reading too far into my exact examples. I actually had 1 in 20 and edited it because I felt people would read too far into that and think 'well then what is the point in having a ratings advantage' so I changed it to 1 in 10 or more... It would take more info than calculating the ratings advantage of a player that has an 85 faceoff rating over a player with 83 since there are other weights in there such as but not limited to the technique you use, the timing of your draw and even if you jump early because we have that spam effect in there where you will lose if you jump the gun regardless of the other factors (instead of slowing down the game by kicking people from draws and opening up chances to grief online). Since there was also debate on if a ratings advantage of more than 1 point matters, I should let you know that it does. The weight for the ratings portion of the calculation is factored on how big of an advantage in ratings you have and that gets calculated in against the rest. Ratings only makes up part of the final outcome but it will always be more advantageous to have as high of a faceoff rating as possible. As far as AI builds, they aren't finalized yet but again from a theory perspective, the goal is to have them as average players out there that won't have a drastic effect on the outcome of the game and should fit in with whatever the rest of your team picks. As far as goals for how often players pick certain builds, we hope that the builds are balanced in such a way that teams will be discussing what type of team they want to put on the ice and what linemates will compliment others. In the end, it would be great to see a pretty average distribution but the main thing we are trying to get away from is that one particular build is an advantage over the others regardless of the game you want to play. We have some really great people working on telemetry that will help us look into how things are playing out, what builds are being picked, what the outcomes are for those players and those teams and can filter by date ranges ( to see how tuning has had an impact) or by certain portions of the leaderboard, etc. [HR][/HR]Q. Can you make the puck 100% loose when a player is idle? Why is it glued to their stick currently? It makes no sense at all. A. I assume you are referring to the difficulty to get the puck from a player that is standing still/idle because otherwise, the player in possession of the puck, even when standing idle still has 'possession' and will automatically stick handle in their base idle by design. We have made a lot of changes on our online default settings to pokecheck and incidental contact with the puck carriers stick to ensure they lose the puck when they should. A couple of things that come into play in this case are that we make it easier to track a puck with a pokecheck the slower the puck is travelling and in the case where the puck is 'still', all players, regardless of their pokecheck rating will be able to target the puck. In the past, the way the ratings worked for pokecheck, some players may still miss that puck or not hit it cleanly due to error being applied from their pokecheck rating. We have also looked at the collision of stick on puck to make sure that when you hit it cleanly that it is more of a blunt collision. In 15, sometimes the puck would move slightly but not respond appropriately to the level of contact that was made. [HR][/HR]Q. I was troubled to hear In the gameinformer along with other anecdotes about NHL 16 there has been early criticism that exactly the same type of goals were being scored as last years version (eg screen, short side cheese etc). What have u guys done (if anything) to make scoring more dynamic this year? How much credence should the community give to these early reviews thAt are claiming unfortunately that scoring is EXACTLY the same? I think this is an important question as several bells and whistles can be added to a game. However, if scoring is The same way it takes away some of the fun/newness of a title if it's the same old tricks to light the lamp. A. If you read back through some of my previous posts in this thread, you will see a couple places where I talk about the differences between our default settings (Pro/Sim) and our online settings (All Star/Hardcore). The core models are the same but the weights against each of the variables you are accountable for are much greater on our Hardcore game style (and on All Star, the AI doesn't allow as much room either). This comes heavily into play when trying to generate offensive chances or when defending against players that come in on the attack. When those first comments went up from Game Informer, it was from playing an earlier build on default settings. If you read the follow up from Game Informer's impressions from E3, it covers that in a bit more detail. Kim mentions that those impressions were from what she refers to as 'Normal' gameplay settings (our default settings) and you can read Matt's comments about what is was like for him to play on our online default settings (All Star/Hardcore) -- much tougher to generate chances and that high percentage scoring opportunities were scarce. In the end, a game of hockey regardless if it is a videogame or you are watching a real world game is going to have dekes to the forehand and backhand, slapshots through screens from the point, wraparounds, wrist shots from between the hashmarks both short and far side, deflections, one timers, etc.. but the biggest difference is how tough it is to generate those chances and your physical ability to be able to pull off some of the moves. On our different game styles, we change how important it is to be in control before you shoot or pass to get the best accuracy and look at where your momentum is going and your ability to generate power. We also change how loose the puck is in regards to incidental contacts with your stick and how easy it is/isn't to be nudged off a puck. Add in the better control we have given you to position your players on defense and it can be pretty stifling when you come up against a good opponent. On our Hardcore game style (online default) the weights of those things make you much more accountable for your actions and thus make it harder to just look for the same opportunities again and again. You won't be able to force certain chances, you will have to generate them by getting your opponent to make a mistake or pulling off a really nice passing play to get time and space. Keep in mind, these are just a few examples. There are many more that I can't get into right now due to time but I think that although you will still see wrist shots from the slot, one timers, forehand dekes and wraparounds that they will just feel more like hockey this year than moves someone is trying in a videogame. The difference in a lot of cases isn't the end result that is off but how it was achieved and that is what we are trying to solve with all of our gameplay additions and tuning this year. Was going through a couple of the last pages of this thread and a few things caught my eye that I can give you a few details about. Battles in Front - We haven't brought back the old net battle system because we didn't think the pros outweighed the cons. People complained about getting sucked in and we want something more organic. With the focus on the defensive aspects of the game, defenders should have enough tools this year to defend against players in front of the net. Small nudges can bump you off of receiving passes and connecting with one timers. Also if a shooters stick makes contact with a defenders stick when shooting it ca effect the shot quite a bit for both power and accuracy. We have also done a much better job making positioning matter so that players with good defensive skills will get sticks on pucks and do a better job getting flat out interceptions as well. We even fixed a couple bugs where if a player successfully stick lifted a player going for a one-timer that it would still solve despite the stick not being able to make contact. I am not calling that out as something we are most proud of but to give you an idea of how deep we looked into that area to make sure that defending was more predictable to play and that you get rewarded for strong positioning and smart play. It was just as much about fixing current frustrations as it was about adding new pieces to the puzzle. Player Switching - This is a tough one for me to claim that we have fixed all your worries as sometimes player switching is subjective. Some people want to just be goal side, others want the closest backchecker first as long as he has a chance to make a play, etc.. All I can say, is that we have done work against player switching and gone through a couple of iterations trying to fine tune and make it better. I have seen comments in this thread that you just want the player closest to the puck but from having people playtest, that isn't always true. It isn't even always true that you want the player closest to the puck that is goal side (as an example, what if the closest player goal side is caught in a pivot going the wrong way and by the time you pick them, the puck carrier will already be by them?). We take a lot more into consideration using those base rules but then also looking at your ability to intercept the puck carrier based on both yours and their current speed/trajectory. We then use other logic to ensure we pick someone closer to your own net if the puck is traveling that way so that we don't send you backwards. We also don't want to walk you back switching back and forth across the ice so we try to limit how far away horizontally on screen it will switch as well (assuming you are playing with a up/down camera angle). Our engineers could tell you in a lot more detail what the code is doing but thought you would like to know that we took a good crack at making it better and trying to appease the many ideas of who the next best player to switch to is for all people. Cameras for Defense - I call this out as cameras on defense as that is the area where cameras tend to cause issues the most and it has been called out specifically in this thread as the need for the Custom 3 camera but this is a new feature for everyone. As mentioned a few posts up in the thread, we don't have custom cameras in for this year but I wanted to let you know that we did update what 'auto zoom' means in camera selection. It may not fit what you are all after but it is actually pretty cool and you should give it a shot. I was a player that was constantly pressing the back button back and forth when playing defense in the previous versions of the EASHL and the new camera actually feels really good without having to do any of that. The functionality works for most cameras, if not all, and what it is does is zoom out to try and keep your player and the puck in view at all times. So if you are holding the blueline and the puck is down deep in the corner, the camera will be zoomed further away than if you were 1 on 1 with a puck carrier in your own zone attacking towards you in the slot. The closest the camera will get is whatever you set the default camera to (i.e. Dynamic Medium) and if you set Auto Zoom to 'On', it will have this functionality. Due to this, I have even been playing defense with Dynamic Low now so that I have high fidelity for 1 on 1 and stick checking situations, yet can still see both the blueline and the puck at all times in the offensive zone. [HR][/HR]Q. Is there any chance you could talk to us about injuries in the EASHL? I take it the Game Misconduct won't be back. Are injuries still going to last the entire game or what are the plans? (if you can talk about it that is) A. Can't give you much detail here yet. I will tell you though that these are the kind of discussions we have with the Game Changers. They come to the table with a pretty broad perspective of how the community feels about issues (misconducts and injury effects definitely being two of those items). It usually leads to longer discussions than just "oh ok, we will tune it up/down by x" or "yep, we will turn those on/off" because it is an opportunity to get into the theory and discuss with them not only what the community feels should change but for us to understand why we all feel that way so that we can make the right update/change. I know that is all pretty vague but just want you aware that the Game Changers are doing an excellent job and we are looking forward to when they are in next to show them what we have done since their last visit and talk about the experience that will be tuned up for Day 1 for everyone else -- with a goal of trying to catch as many of these extra pieces as possible. The beauty is though that we are a live service and have the ability to respond to feedback like we have in the past and make educated decisions for Gameplay/Mode Tuning if it is needed. [HR][/HR]Q. Appreciate the response on player switching. Just curious as to why you guys decided to change the formula for NHL 15. Is there a way for you to implement NHL 14 player switching to 16? A. We are always trying to improve. As mentioned in the first post, it can be a bit subjective as to who the best player is since it varies by situation for different people. I am sure the changes made in 15 were trying to fix something specific that was lacking in 14 because it had it's share of switching issues as well. For this year, we looked at the pieces we wanted to fix for switching and tackled them that way as opposed to looking back too much. I can't tell you how close we are or aren't to how it worked in 14, only that we feel you get the player you expect more often in situations where it is a tougher call who is the best. [HR][/HR]Q. Nice to read about the improvements on defense. Standing still with your stick in the passing lane and a long and relatively slow pass going through your stick for a cross-crease goal against is definitely one of the more frustrating things in NHL. I know nerfing cross-crease spam/exploit alienates casuals (the bulk of the customers) so I'm interested in seeing really how much interceptions were buffed. A. I have let our online producer know about the discussion on the forums in regards to the topic so you will probably see him hop on here in the next few days when he gets some time. I can however give you a bit more information about how the system works so that you can use that added info to picture how it may play out in practice and let you know how it has worked for me. One key bit of info that will be of interest based on what I have read is that it will save the last player class you picked for each position. I saw some people hoping it would allow you to pick a default option, etc. so that is how that works. As far as wondering about other people playing cat and mouse games by switching back and forth, etc. -- When you load in, aside from your own, you will see what the other teams defaults are, so you can decide if you believe that is who they will net out with or not after they start changing. All that being said, for me, I just pick the class I want to play as. I am more of a setup guy than a pure scorer so I tend to use a playmaker to get the passing ability and regardless of what others pick, that is the way I choose to play. If my other two forwards also went playmakers, then I may go sniper or something but still, I don't think the other team would influence me too much more than understanding what corner I want to dump the puck to or who to shadow the most on the PP (the same as if you had a scouting report on that team in the real world). The times that seeing the other team may influence you would be the number of players you match up against or the team as a whole that you match up against. Maybe you know they are a weaker team so you take some risk to get practice with a build you are less familiar with, or they are a high ranked team known for their offense so as a team you decide to play a bit more defensive. Most people will stick with the build they like for their style and possibly have an alternative depending on the direction they plan to play as a team. Do you pick Defensive D when the plan is to completely shut down or do you pick Two Way D as a step up if you think your team is going to play a bit more open. There are pros and cons for each build but not in such a way that if you pick a 5, that it always beats 4. As an example, if you pick a Grinder because you feel you will do a great job getting the puck back from the other teams Snipers that they have loaded up on at the wings, you will still have issues moving the puck and capitalizing on chances away from the net so it is still a trade off somewhere. The goal for the builds are that they are more like solid second liners than they are world class stars. They will all have strengths and weaknesses that you will have to weigh your decisions against. [HR][/HR]A. The closest the camera will get is the view of the default camera you pick. There is a max on the furthest out it will get as well with the main use case being zone play. We want to make sure that if you need to, you can see the puck carrier in the corner/behind the net and the blueline in behind you. [HR][/HR]Q. If i understood your first description of the camera, you can use this new auto zoom on any camera setting? (ie: classic, ice, overhead) A. It is in for most cameras that made sense. Of the ones you listed, Classic and Ice have the functionality. Overhead was already zoomed out pretty far so it isn't on for that camera and it isn't on for the Broadcast cameras. [HR][/HR]Q. I'd like a clear-cut answer on the passing for NHL16 if you'd be so kind. I've heard some game-changers say that it was a lot better and way less automated than it was in NHL15, and then I've heard others say that it's pretty much the same. The whole NHL15 passing conundrum (it being WAY WAY WAY too automated) was extremely bizarre to me because passing on last-gen (NHL13 and 14) was absolutely fine, if not perfect. I think the main thing most of us miss is the ability to control how hard or soft our passes are by holding down the RT. On top of that, the actual directional pass-assist this year was WAY too overboard and still is to this day. SO many times it has happened that I wanted to pass horizontally to a guy cutting to the net but it would either send the pass behind the net or back up-ice into the slot. It REALLY hurt the playmaking aspect of the game. Also, the inability to "pass to space" without using the saucer-pass was a negative as well. A. I think you have misinterpreted my responses but I get where you are coming from since I didn't just say, we are changing it back. The best I can describe it is that we have updated passing trying to keep the best of 14 and 15 in mind. We have added back manual control over pass power by holding down pass, however, we have raised the min speed so that you can snap the puck around a bit easier which was sometimes difficult in 14 due to having to power up after each reception just to move it quickly to the opposite point man as an example. We have added back more accountability over being in control so that passing out of a glide is better than passing in stride and passing as soon as you receive a puck isn't as good as passing when already in control. This is all graded against your players ratings as well so some players will be better than others. The other big change is in pass assist. We want to make sure you can pass to players you expect but also want creativity to be there as well. To do this we changed the pass assist angles to move off of where you plan to lead the player rather than the intended player's current position being in the target area. We then also take your requested pass speed into account so that you would aim closer to the receiver the harder you pass and further ahead the softer you pass when they are moving -- if you don't hit that spot to target the player in stride, we release it as an untargeted pass in the direction of your left stick. With that, you can bank passes off the boards or pass pucks down into the corner with the level of assist that is on in Hardcore. If you really want FULL control, you can use Manual Saucer pass but the regular pass is pretty free for most uses like it was in 14. All pass error is applied after you direct and release your pass based on what the player you are passing with is physically able to do. As an example, you will get a less powerful pass than you are asking for if you are fading away from your target and/or on your backhand than you would moving towards them on your forehand. [HR][/HR]Q. It's great to see the "Edit Player" option back... "Appearance" seems to be a new option you added this year. Will this include an option to change player faces, like say the faces of a "Matt Martin" who is by no means a superstar, but he is a regular NHL player who your team has assigned, for three or four years now, a generic face that resembles Tiny Tim more than is does Martin (and all the while you've had much better options available)? A. You can't change licensed players faces but with Edit player back, you can change all of their equipment (including all of the additions we have added down to skate lace and sock tape colours/styles, etc. and actually facial hair despite not being able to change the structure of their face). I know it was just an example, but you will be happy to know that we have a unique head for Matt Martin this year. And yes, there are a lot more heads to pick from in Create Player -- the art team added over 200 new heads. [HR][/HR] [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD]Q. This sounds great especially the part about raising the min pass speed. I think improving passing and the speed of passing will make the game more team oriented. Also, in the past, trying to make one touch passing plays could be difficult as the passing system felt sort of cumbersome...will it be easier to pull off some nice one touch passing plays? A. Setting up in the zone with the improved facing angles (better vision control) and weight of your player being better to hold your ground and get to space and stop, mixed with passing improvements, you can definitely set up a great Powerplay. That being said, you need to find the open guy still and/or get creative by putting the puck to space because the defenders do a good of job getting sticks in lanes and outright picking off passes.[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [HR][/HR]Q. why don't you change the pass strength from being determined by how long you press the trigger to how far you pull it back? The triggers are pressure sensitive and this way there would be no delay with charging up the pass strength. You could keep the time dependency when the trigger is pulled back completely for super hard, accurate passes though if the resolution of the trigger is not high enough to cover a smooth change in pass strengths. A. It is a great thought and something that we have actually talked about. The Gamechangers group brought that up as well. As you have said though, we determined that the trigger wouldn't give people quite the control they would want. Seeing how a full press is the most common and easiest thing to do from a controller perspective, and the amount of times you want a fully powered pass are usually a lower percentage, the pros didn't outweigh some of the cons. We also have to look at consistency with the Saucer pass which is a power up mechanic, based on time held, on the bumper. We will definitely continue to track how the feedback is with the current tuning though and revisit ideas like this if we aren't getting the best out of the controller and what people expect to be able to do on the ice. [HR][/HR]Q. can you tell us if auto-saucering (when the CPU decides to turn a normal pass, triggered with RT, into a saucer pass) is still going to be in NHL 16? It's one of the more frustrating aspects of the way pass assist works, particularly because it often seems to make it less likely that a pass will be completed, rather than more likely. I too would like a response to this. Passing assist is fine imo with the direction the game has taken, but I wouldn't want the game to decide when we saucer or not. I was speaking specifically for EASHL seeing how it is going to be hardcore sim. A. Couple things to cover here so I will try to touch on all of them. First off, yes we still do have auto saucer but it has changed. I originally was in the same camp as you that if I wanted a saucer pass, I would press the saucer pass button but then there is the side of the attributes and the effect they have on an amazing playmaker vs a player that isn't known for passing. If we can add more variance than just the power/angle error of the end result of the pass into the equation, we can add a bigger divide in player skill (both for NHL players and EASHL classes). When a great player makes a pass in the real world, they are making little adjustments with their stick before release (drag of an extra inch or two, etc.) to help get pucks through traffic (i.e. a close defenders legs). In the game, due to the fidelity you are able to achieve with your right stick, a lot of that just comes from the twitch side of the game when you try to make a pass and that evens out the ability to get a pass through for all players regardless of their pass attribute (before error is applied I mean -- just the original intended angle/direction). Auto saucer on the other hand allows us to give players with higher attributes a little bit of something to make the pass harder to pick off and/or to avoid sticks in lanes a little bit more, so it is a decent mechanic for expanding that range in player attribute skill. In terms of the saucer passes themselves, we have tuned them a lot, specifically because of reasons like the one shown in the video example. The saucer pass has been tuned to land/settle before the intended spot to receive it which really lowers any cases where it would overshoot (we will save the saucers that intend to land 'right on the tape' for the manual saucer pass). We have also tuned pass receptions on both offense and defense to give players with good abilities to receive/intercept pucks the ability to corral them when the are rolling and/or bouncing with low heights -- this helps in a lot of scenarios and has allowed us to focus on how you are receiving the puck (forehand vs backhand, reaching or not, behind your back vs in front, etc.) rather than just what the puck itself is doing. On top of that we lowered the max height of the auto saucer to make it more reasonable and more about a pass that does a better job getting through traffic than miraculous saucer passes that you see less often in a real world game (we will save those for people that can pull them off with the manual saucer pass).
