Jump to content
NHL'94 Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. On another note, is it possible to increase the speed at which this is emulated or something? It seems to run slower than I remember it or maybe it's just me. But it would be nice to speed up the game a bit.
  3. You've got it right The nice thing about going with your RNG value of 7 (or a value of 8) instead of the original 9 is that it eliminates the overlap case where a player rated 1 higher than another in attribute (on the base 0-6 ratings) can be equal to a player rated 1 lower, if the better player is max cold and the other is max hot.
  4. Team Name: Edmonton OIlers LD: Patrice Brisebois RD: Dave Ellett LW: Jimmy Carson C: Cam Neely RW: Wayne Gretzky X: Wayne Presley 3rd D: Chris Dahlquist Tony Amonte change to number 89. G: Patrick Roy
  5. Not being familiar with IceHL, my first thought was if this related to the IHL [1945-2001] [quickly clear it was not] Have to say, the colour photos are impressive. I was a bit curious where the rosters came from until I saw an Alaska Husky player name Calvin Broadus. ....hmm, wait a minute.
  6. Team Name: Milwaukee Admirals LD: B. Leetch RD: G. Suter LW: M. Messier C: D. Gilmour RW: K. Dineen (change to # 12) X: D. Volek 3rd D: I. Kravchuk G: J. Blue
  7. Yesterday
  8. Yeah, but I actually didn’t set it as low as he did (4), I’ve got it somewhere in-between (7). I’m embarrassed to say I never could quite wrap my head around the seemingly simple logic, but set it based on play-testing instead. If I understand you & chaos correctly… …the original RNG of 9 plays out as… ~6% (1/18) odds of -3 (random values -9) ~17% (3/18) odds of -2 (random values -8,-7,-6) ~17% (3/18) odds of -1 (random values -5,-4,-3) ~28% (5/18) odds of 0 (random values -2,-1, 0,+1,+2) ~17% (3/18) odds of +1 (random values +3,+4,+5) ~17% (3/18) odds of +2 (random value of +6,+7,+8) …while my RNG value of 7 should plays out as follows… ~14% (2/14) odds of -2 (random values -7,-6) ~21% (3/14) odds of -1 (random values -5,-4,-3) ~36% (5/14) odds of 0 (random values -2,-1, 0,+1,+2) ~21% (3/14) odds of +1 (random values +3,+4,+5) ~7% (2/14) odds of +2 (random value of +6) Not a huge change, but I like it this way. Most importantly to me, it reduced the chance that an attribute will be boosted or cut by more than 1 from 40%, to 21%.
  9. Is it such a problem? Well, the unknown is the problem, and I don’t want to invite the unforeseen. The randomization settings have already been thoroughly tested, and I don’t want to disrupt that. Whether or not player attributes should remain constant game to game is a matter of opinion or preference. I'm happy with the way the variance has been managed, reducing, it from the original, but still keeping some minor variance game to game, situation to situation, to keep things fresh.
  10. Doesn't this already have hot/cold randomness minimized? It says "less variance in Hot/Cold rating randomization" in the description. If this is Chaos's hack, then it reduces the hot/cold effect from +/- 6ish percent down to 3 percent.
  11. sure I can beta test it. Is the ripple effect such a problem? Player stats should remain relatively constant I would think. Maybe sometimes a player went to sleep late or ate too much steak the day before but like you know a players stats are a players stats lol
  12. Unfortuneately that would have a ripple effect on other things. I am going to try remapping the Aggression distribution. It should make a minor difference. Would you be willing to Beta test this for me?
  13. There is some minor things to adjust. As Im working through some adjustments and alignment. The years the players don't play Im making sure their are adjusted. Since, say 2000 its based on 1999 season.
  14. What a tome! Perusing the spreadsheet I found a couple notes so far: Mario Lemieux did play in 2006 as well; Taylor Hall shows up as playing in 1986, then not again until 2011.
  15. Ive been working on a project that will hopefully help with other members with future projects, and mods/hacks. I've compiled all the roms from the forums @clockwise @naples39 @mitch13 @skip, and outside sources to create a NHL database that will hold all the NHL players careers in. If you looking for the following, you will find it here: Player ratings from 1951-2022 Player Attributes from 1951-2022 Player Salaries from 1918-2022 (based on previous year results, which are available also) Conversion from NHL95 to NHL94 and vice versa. If there is other details you wanting to add, please let me know. The link is below. Player DB 1918-2022 - Google Sheets
  16. Hi everyone, Just a quick note, related to my post above. I will be releasing a version 5.5, that has minor updates to a myriad of things, but it won’t be released until I get more feedback and have logged more playtime hours. Right now my focus has been on getting the energy Depletion & Recovery rates right, as I am still unhappy with how they play in some games. In my current v5.5 betas, I have got it better, but still not quite right. If there is anything else in the game that you notice that you think could be better, please let me know ASAP! I won't be making any big revolutionary changes, but I do want to make sure that every mod has been thoroughly play tested, and any issue teased out. And your input on this is both welcome and encouraged. cheers, -Adam
  17. Hi there, Thanks for the feedback! Lately I’ve been playing a 20 minute game a night, and I know exactly what you are talking about. Most of my games are fine, but the other night I was Edmonton playing Calgary, and Calgary just lost their mind and took penalty after penalty. And I hate when I get called for a penalty on a hit where I've not charged the opponent. I'm not sure what I can do about this, but I will share with you what I did, in case you can think of a way to do it better! And so that you can tweak it to suit your own tastes better. I ran simulations with a myriad of Player Rating combinations, and found that two attributes had the most significant impact on penalties being called… 1. Aggressiveness. This was exactly what I expected. 2. Checking. The checking rating doesn’t just affect the quality of a players body checks, but it also a higher rating also increased the frequency and tendency to body check in a scenario. I learn this stuff by trying settings, then running 24 games at once, and tracking the statistics from those games. What I found was that both of these settings had a similar affect on Penalties called AND Body Check thrown by the CPU. Setting them both to zero would reduce penalties called, but reduce body checks thrown to the point that it made the CPU easier. In the end, I relied on Naples & Smozoma’s excellent research, and conformed my checking & aggressiveness ratings curves to the original distributions, but a tiny bit lower on checking, and a tiny bit more lower on aggressiveness. This *should* produce results similar to the original, with very slightly fewer penalties called, and I believe I verified this in testing. I say “should” & “I believe” because I can't find any records of that test! Of course I would have done it, but of course I make mistakes and forget things sometimes. If you were willing to run a bunch of demo simulations of the original vs mine, and report back, I would appreciate it! There is a third things that affects penalties called… 3. Randomness. Bear in mind that every player attribute is varied by a random amount each game. It is entirely possible that this random process will sometimes disproportionately give a team higher aggressiveness ratings. I will be releasing a version 5.5, that has minor updates to a myriad of things, but it won’t be released until I get more feedback and have logged more playtime hours to make sure that 5.5 is stable. Right now my focus has been on getting the energy Depletion & Recovery rates right, as I am still unhappy with how they play in some games. I would be willing to include an adjustment to the Aggressiveness ratings (but not the Checking ratings), if it reduced penalties without making the CPU easier to play. If you wanted to run any tests and make any suggestions, I would definitely consider them. I have tried to incorporate every piece of feedback I have received to date. But at this point I don’t have time to do anything other than fit in a game for fun, and make notes on what I’d observed, and tweak a value here and there. So I would need your help. cheers, -Adam
  18. Thank-you so much. Your kind words mean so much to me. Thank-you again. And thank-you for early on tipping me off about Rewind's graphic treatments, which I ended up scraping and using either as references, or the basis of many revised logos.
  19. In playing like ~10 games in a row I noticed there are too many penalties called. And it's just random. It's usually for something the AI did I think. Also injuries from a direct body check happen.. I wouldn't say frequently but 5-6 times in 10 games or something. Maybe that's how the original game is, I don't remember but it's just... not realistic. Then I get a penalty for kneeing... ok... otherwise good.
  20. This is a cool project - do you have any lore on the league to share? The aesthetic of the ROM is really cool, I just wish I knew which teams/players/etc have particular playstyles or whatever.
  21. I admit I haven't truly taken the time to appreciate the work here until recently. The attention to detail, the extra graphic work done, the organization and explanation is a damn masterpiece. Thank you, it's going to take me some time to fully digest it all @AdamCatalyst!
  22. Last week
  23. 2022 05 22 - Version 5.4 released (in the first post as alway) Gameplay: Energy depletion rate reduced, for better gameplay balance.
  24. welcome back blake!
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...