|
Post by Lance-Pittsburgh on Oct 17, 2018 4:55:00 GMT -5
Poking around the upcoming game previews this morning, I noticed that a number of us have two goalies (Fleury on my team, for example) with the same name but different conditioning/readiness levels (not really sure what to call the marker next to the goaltender). Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Oct 17, 2018 6:44:05 GMT -5
Poking around the upcoming game previews this morning, I noticed that a number of us have two goalies (Fleury on my team, for example) with the same name but different conditioning/readiness levels (not really sure what to call the marker next to the goaltender). Any thoughts? That is odd. I will check that out when I get home from work.
|
|
|
Post by Brian-Cleveland on Oct 17, 2018 9:45:34 GMT -5
Poking around the upcoming game previews this morning, I noticed that a number of us have two goalies (Fleury on my team, for example) with the same name but different conditioning/readiness levels (not really sure what to call the marker next to the goaltender). Any thoughts? That is odd. I will check that out when I get home from work. While you're checking stuff out, in my game last night there was a "Borderline Call on Johnson (HAL) fouling Murray (CLE)". Matt Murray was my backup goalie.
|
|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Oct 17, 2018 10:41:28 GMT -5
That is odd. I will check that out when I get home from work. While you're checking stuff out, in my game last night there was a "Borderline Call on Johnson (HAL) fouling Murray (CLE)". Matt Murray was my backup goalie. Maybe there were some extra curriculars by the bench and someone took a shot at him?
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Oct 17, 2018 11:23:06 GMT -5
That is odd. I will check that out when I get home from work. While you're checking stuff out, in my game last night there was a "Borderline Call on Johnson (HAL) fouling Murray (CLE)". Matt Murray was my backup goalie. Will do. I would like to be able to chalk it up to any Penguin filth being the wrath of fouls but that would not be an accurate reflection of the coding.
|
|
|
Post by Lance-Pittsburgh on Oct 17, 2018 19:20:28 GMT -5
While you're checking stuff out, in my game last night there was a "Borderline Call on Johnson (HAL) fouling Murray (CLE)". Matt Murray was my backup goalie. Will do. I would like to be able to chalk it up to any Penguin filth being the wrath of fouls but that would not be an accurate reflection of the coding. That hits a little close to the Hornets’ home.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Oct 17, 2018 19:47:17 GMT -5
I also noticed in my game vs. Pittsburgh that Kreider took a borderline call for fouling Radulov at 14:59 but at 14:59 Kreider was penalized for a fight vs. Oleksiak. No other penalties at that time. Something's Fucky.
|
|
|
Post by Lance-Pittsburgh on Oct 18, 2018 4:44:30 GMT -5
I also noticed in my game vs. Pittsburgh that Kreider took a borderline call for fouling Radulov at 14:59 but at 14:59 Kreider was penalized for a fight vs. Oleksiak. No other penalties at that time. Something's Fucky. My understanding of the borderline call is that it could have been called a penalty, but the ref chose not to. I guess Oleksiak elected to stick up for his teammate and make the call himself. Haha.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Oct 20, 2018 21:17:22 GMT -5
Negative, take a look at EDM vs MIL game 10/20...
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Oct 21, 2018 10:16:25 GMT -5
Borderline calls mean a call was made that was questionable. Certifiably not a clear cut penalty. There is a chance a player on the ice will take a penalty and that is checked when a player on the other team has possession of the puck. If a fighting major is determined to occur the engine will pick a random player from the other team based on their propensity to fight. Obviously a fight occurred so I need to change the logic from reporting a questionable occurrence if there was a fight.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Alaska on Nov 2, 2018 20:46:04 GMT -5
Haven't been on forums for a while so not sure if im late to this but I noticed that casey desmith got 0 games when I had all my goalies set at 33%. After varlamov got injured I changed them to 50% and he got in a game but didn't start so not sure if that will continue or not but is there some type of mechanism behind why he wasn't getting starts before?
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Nov 2, 2018 21:45:18 GMT -5
Goalie A - 33% or 1-33* Goalie B - 33% or 34-67* Goalie C - 33% or 68-100*
*with the .33*
The simulation will 'roll a 100 sided dice' each and every single game.
So the simulation just may 'roll' a 1-33 six times in a row, thus Goalie A will start all six times.
Setting Goalies with anything other a 100% is only for people going on vacation or going on autopilot for a long long time.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Nov 3, 2018 9:24:05 GMT -5
Phil is correct in his statements. Even if you would have left them at 33/33 they still each would have a 50% chance of playing because a random number would be generated for all of the percentages for non injured goalies. In this case it would have been a 66 sided die and if 1-33 goalie 1, 34-66 goalie 2.
Not sure what you mean by not starting as i haven't put code in to pull the goalies (aside from trying to tie the game in the last minute). Which game in particular are you referring to?
|
|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Nov 3, 2018 12:10:09 GMT -5
I think Chris is seeing that DeSmith is showing as having played in a game (by virtue of being the backup and therefore suited up for the game, even if he didn't see any actual ice time). Am I close?
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Alaska on Nov 4, 2018 14:17:43 GMT -5
Yes Jed is correct in what I meant and I understand that having all at 33 means they only have that chance of playing and doesn't mean the season will get split three ways evenly. Just figured in 10 games it was surprising he didn't get at least 1 start. I wasn't sure if maybe the code only chose from 2 goalies and have all 3 set may not even allow the 3rd goalie an opportunity. I think 10 games is a decent sample size to question if it's working aka the dice is 99 and not just 66.
|
|