I just played 55 overall Morgan Rielly in the NHL with Top 4 minutes and played all situations. He jumped from 55 to 75 overall.
Anyone seen any like breakout years from guys? Like someone getting 5+ overall points in an offseason all I ever see is 2 and 3
Have any of the Canucks prospects like Jensen, Gaunce,Schroeder and Kassian became good Players after simmons seasons?
That makes it seem more pre-determined than random. If player development is pre-determined, how does the game select how a created player develops? Although, Test#4 could be an outlier. Have you tried re-running that test to see if you get the same result? The only final alternative theory I could offer is that as long as you play that player at a level that is much higher than what his player role dictates, he'll be able to improve as long as the team is successful. I would be really interested to see if the overall jump is replicated if he played on the fourth line of a terrible team (like Columbus).
One final point, could you post the attributes he starts with?
That makes it seem more pre-determined than random. If player development is pre-determined, how does the game select how a created player develops? Although, Test#4 could be an outlier. Have you tried re-running that test to see if you get the same result? The only final alternative theory I could offer is that as long as you play that player at a level that is much higher than what his player role dictates, he'll be able to improve as long as the team is successful. I would be really interested to see if the overall jump is replicated if he played on the fourth line of a terrible team (like Columbus).
One final point, could you post the attributes he starts with?
I've also found the player growth really random too. A few examples:
Bartschi jumped to an 86 overall from a 69 overall during one year in the AHL. Played 2nd line in NHL one season and stuck at 86 overall. Next season he gets bumped to first line, drops to an 85 (team won Stanley Cup).
Ristolainen - I know a lot of people say this guy turns into a stud... Have had him for ~4 seasons and he's 61 OVR and potential has dropped to 3.5*.
Wannstrom - drafted this guy as a 61 OVR 3.5 Red *. Played fourth line minutes in the AHL if he wasn't scratched and he turned out into an 82 OVR after a few seasons.
Eberle - Stuck at 85 playing top line most the time, then after 3 seasons I drop him to 2nd line and he jumps to an 89...
MPS - 79 OVR 4*, labelled as a 4th line FWD and I've played him on the third line with PK time, won a cup etc... hasn't budged an inch.
Galchenyuk - Heard other people say he was a stud, he's currently a 67 OVR and his POT has dropped to 2.5*.
Agreed it seems random but you cant expect every player to develop perfectly.
Agreed. Just seems crazy you can give a player every opportunity to develop (ie: Dumba, Ristolainen, Galchenyuk, etc.) and they don't turn out whereas you develop a player poorly (Wannstrom, Roy, Bunz, a few others) and they can take huge jumps.
I had Galchenyuk for 5 years and he never passed 76 overall, I played him in every possible situation and he could never develop, Sam Reinhart on the other hand went from 65 ish to 82 in one year in the CHL.
I had Galchenyuk for 5 years and he never passed 76 overall, I played him in every possible situation and he could never develop, Sam Reinhart on the other hand went from 65 ish to 82 in one year in the CHL.
Without a roster update Galchenyuk potential is 2.5 stars. Maybe thats why?
Players generally have a breakout season between the ages of 19 and 25 and the most likely age is 25.he was 4.5 yellow stars, its wierd there are a few players who can't seem to progress while others do extremly quickly. for the Sabres Ennis and Hodgson are both 4 yellow yet Ennis progressed alot faster.
The more I look at it, the more I think "Real Players" meaning guys like Morrissey, MacKinnon, Yakupov, Grigorenko, etc, are already pre-determined. I've put them in every different scenario except for not playing them at all, and they all progress basically the same, give or take a point or two.
Having said that, when you get later in the game is where it seems to go completely random. Most 1st and 2nd round picks "make it" compared to NHL12 where it was more up in the air. On the flipside, Ive been trying to find guys in rounds 3-7 who make it. Used to be goalies and defensive dmen, etc, you could still get in late rounds and they would progress. I've yet to see anyone's POTENTIAL change (for the better) as it did in 2012. That random German def defenseman who all of a sudden was a 76 B prospect after two years not signed.
I just started a new GM and I will try and keep valid records on growth. The 5 year study I just did crapped out in 2037 as the players didnt grow at all in the final season of Be a gm. What I did determine is it matters ZERO if you play the guy in the NHL or in the AHL. In fact Im more inclined at this point to say they grow better in their determined slots like "minor top 4", etc, instead of playing the player "up"..
Just simmed a season with a 54 overall grinder, 18 years old, 3.5 star potential on Anaheim's 4th line with no PK or PP time. He put up 14 points in 82 games. All his stats were 65ish but had 75 checking.
He grew from 54 overall to 74 overall.
Agreed it seems random but you cant expect every player to develop perfectly.
I would agree with that, which is why people are seeing consistently similar results across the board. Add a small bit of randomness, and some statistical based growth and you can see some small variations across the board. When EA released information on BeAGM, they described how they modeled player development based on historical data. It's not inconceivable that players get assigned a certain growth pattern, and that new players that are CPU generated for the draft get assigned a particular growth model based on percentages.
Again, it all depends which attributes went up. Overall doesn't tell the whole picture especially with the weight attributes are weighted, particularly offensive awareness and defensive awareness.
Randomness would show a large variation in results between different individuals and various GM modes. The fact that for the most part we always see the same players grow rapidly, the same players grow slowly, and in your example, the same created player grow the same way (at least in the overall rating) regardless of the situation that player is placed in suggests that randomness doesn't play a large role in year-to-year changes in player ratings.