Player Ability Bans - ECL '25 Season Discussion

[Pawetzki]

1 tunti sitten, tkantola kirjoitti:

Without X-factors thats feels like a crap. 
If you want ban something to ECL, ban golden abilities and keep silver open. 
 

1/10 1T goes in now -> you can just play passive def. Idk and don't care about it but can't understand who feel that's " fair " or "good" gameplay now. Only nice part of the gameplay is the hitting so....
 

 

Well is that fair and good example onetee factory has feature that freezes goalie so he cant move when you shoot onetee?without xfactory we can move so nowdays goalies can save better onetimers.

Edited 20 hours ago by Pawetzki

[Akunkku]

I've been reading this conversation—if you can call it that—for a while and have been thinking about writing, so now's the time. There have been some good arguments for both sides and some really uneducated ones that I want to comment on. If you're only going to read the TL;DR and get mad, please also read the paragraph about it before losing your marbles.
 

TL;DR:

• BS goals close to the net happen with or without close quarters, and defenses should be punished for allowing someone to shoot from that close.
• It is easy to defend one-tees if you're playing actively and not just standing in front of the net.
• Goalies will make saves they shouldn’t, with or without traits on the shooter or the goalie.
• The game auto-aims poke checks ridiculously well, with or without stick 'em up, though stick 'em up does improve aim slightly especially from awkward positions.
• Truculence makes the "rhino" playstyle too effective, and you can't counter hit after making a play.
• Banning everything would make passive defending more effective than aggressive defending.
  -> Let's just stand in front of the net and counter attack, yay free points.
• A large portion of goals already come from counter attacks, and it's much harder to score in 5v5 offensive zone situations than it is to defend them. Banning traits would only enforce this more.
• Golden one-tee and golden close quarters don't cause goals against well-structured defenses—they just punish defensive mistakes.
• Poor communication on SportsGamer's behalf is a major issue in this situation as well.

 

A lot of people have claimed that close quarters (CC) causes BS goals. It's true that you can score BS goals close to the net with or without CC, and it probably happens slightly more often with it. However, it's also a fact that goalies can absolutely rob you, even when sliding away from the shot and exposing an open net—something that, in my experience, happens more often than CC goals. Since CC only activates at close range, I don’t see how it’s unfair for those shots to sometimes go through the goalie. If you allow someone to take a shot from that close, they should have a higher chance of scoring. It's even realistic that shots from close range occasionally trickle through the goalie, and in my opinion, it's a good thing for the game that these shots are rewarded.

For the one-tee (1T) trait, I have similar thoughts. As a defender, it's incredibly easy to position yourself in the passing lane and prevent your man from getting 1T shot off. The 1T trait only makes a difference if you're standing right next to the attacker—then golden 1T might allow a shot that otherwise wouldn’t happen. More importantly, it's fun and rewarding to play active defense rather than just standing in front of the net, especially when there’s a risk-reward balance in benefit of playing aggressively. Yes, golden 1T allows for some unrealistic shots, but without the 1T threat, defenses tend to clog the middle of the zone, making offensive play more dull and predictable. When scoring becomes too difficult, defenders have no reason to spread out and/or take risks, leading to a game based more on luck than skill, for example, when forcing the puck towards the goal with passes or outside shots.

There's also been a lot of discussion about stick 'em up (SEU). I think poke checks in this game are already unrealistically good, even without SEU. For example, if you press R1 while an opponent is mid-deke, the game automatically aims at the puck, regardless of whether you have SEU equipped. With SEU, poke checks can connect slightly better espcially from worse positions, even behind your back, and the manual poke moves a bit faster. I’ve played with both elite and casual players, and I’ve heard complaints about SEU from both—often from players who skated straight into a poke check. That’s why I think SEU is too often used as a scapegoat for own mistakes. Personally, I don’t care whether it’s banned or not, since it doesn’t drastically alter gameplay like banning 1T would. Some people have said they’ve seen even elite defenders struggle without SEU, but if you’ve used a trait for nearly six months, it makes sense that it would take time to adjust even if the change is small.

Another hot topic this year has been truculence. Personally, I’ve always preferred gameplay without it. Without trucu, you can still land hits when it's realistic—and even when it's not realistic. But with trucu, you can too often hit someone just by making contact, even if they’re skating at full speed past you or you're trailing behind them at the same speed. I don’t think it’s overpowered or game breaking, but it does make the rhino playstyle too effective. As for counter hitting, sometimes it works against trucu, and sometimes it doesn’t—but in many situations, counter hitting isn’t the best move anyway. Often it's smarter to take a hit to make a play rather than trying to counter hit. Also you get penalised too rarely from boarding, charging or interferences after touching the puck so running aroung hitting people with trucu is not my preference of gameplay.

I think the biggest issue in all of this is the skill gap, which affects how gameplay feels across different leagues. I’m speaking from an elite perspective (I'm not above anyone. I'm not the best, nor am I even close, just a nerd about this stuff), where defensive mistakes—like allowing a wide-open 1T shot or letting someone walk in front of the net—should be rare. When these mistakes do happen, they should be punished. I don't really know how the gameplay is in lite or core division so I can't really speak on that but for me defensive mistakes should always be punished. The challenge is that elite and pro divisions need to have the same rules, and ideally, every division should follow the same ruleset.

One reason elite players are "whining" about this situation is the unbelievably poor communication surrounding these bans. When the first national leagues started, it was easy to predict that traits would also be banned in FCL, and it was likely decided early on—but why wasn't there an announcement as soon as the decision was made? And if the decision was made at the last second, why wait that long? This could have been decided right after the elite finals, giving players at least two and a half weeks of notice. Communication has always been a huge problem here and I don't understand how it still is after many many years.

Banning everything would make passive defending more effective than aggressive defending, leading to fewer quality scoring chances and more skating and passing around the corners. Large part of goals already come from counter-attacks, and it's much harder to score in a structured 5v5 offensive situation than it is to defend one. If scoring becomes even harder, it will lead to more goals from lucky bounces. BS goals will always happen, with or without traits, so banning everything for that reason alone is shortsighted. The one exception in scoring traits, in my opinion, is tipper. Golden tipper can create a meta where players just fire pucks on net from anywhere, making it the most effective strategy.

I don’t see why we should ban all golden traits just for the sake of gameplay balance. Doing so would shift the game toward a more passive playstyle, as silver 1T is significantly worse than its golden counterpart. Even with banning golden traits, traits would still be used as scapegoats, and people would still complain and gameplay would swift towards a more passive one—so no one would actually be happy. That’s how compromises work, though, so I understand it. That said, golden 1T and golden CC aren’t causing goals against well-structured defenses—they’re just punishing defensive mistakes.