Warrior General Games

Originally posted by vipermaw82
preaching to the choir

ditto

Originally posted by william78
It's a metric ton - well to do it without a hack in a way that works reliably and meaningfully. Granted Bort's probably one of the most experienced developers on the planet in football games given how long he's been at it so maybe he's got insight to actually solve it - but I used to use this as a question with college graduates after they thought the interview was over (at least those who had a concept of what it is).

The problem isn't the offense, well that's difficult - but it's the defense. The defense can't be perfect it has to be variable but it also has to now recognize (triple option) at least two potential ball recipients who don't yet have the ball and are not currently blocking anyone and recognize that one of those options (the outside) is the most dangerous and that the ball can be pitched/handed off at any time until that person has passed the QB horizontally - and - move with anticipation before finally closing.

That's not even the hard part, the hard part is when you take it another step.

Making AI always react perfectly is relatively easy. The hard part of writing AI is the part where it needs to fail, and do so in a way that's fun and engaging for everyone. Figuring out how they fail, what attributes affect it, and what is a "fair" number in those attributes. What makes it so that it isn't horribly broken at Rookie numbers but also competitive at Veteran level?

As play action has shown, having one AI trick another AI isn't exactly fun. It either works too often to be fun for one team, or doesn't work enough for the other. It's like, yay, we have it...but in practice, what is it? Just a pass play that the defense is designed to react poorly to? Does it feel good to have your defenders react poorly because they were "tricked"?

Originally posted by Corndog
What makes it so that it isn't horribly broken at Rookie numbers but also competitive at Veteran level?


I would start with Vet and work your way back...lol

Originally posted by Corndog
Does it feel good to have your defenders react poorly because they were "tricked"?

Maybe the defenders should invest in more awareness. Or..or...hear me out....or change their play action tactic to "don't fall for fakes". Only if the defensive players had a "play action" tactic...

Ironic you stated this, because this is a perfect example of the point I was making in the other thread.

Originally posted by Cybertron
Maybe the defenders should invest in more awareness. Or..or...hear me out....or change their play action tactic to "don't fall for fakes". Only if the defensive players had a "play action" tactic...

Ironic you stated this, because this is a perfect example of the point I was making in the other thread.

I'm going to leave my guy set to "fall for fakes", thanks.

Also that's not irony, like even remotely. Coincidence is probably closer to the word you're looking for.

Originally posted by Corndog
I'm going to leave my guy set to "fall for fakes", thanks.

lol....obviously it would hurt him in some other aspect of the game.

Originally posted by Corndog
That's not even the hard part, the hard part is when you take it another step.



This is why I wrote : The defense can't be perfect it has to be variable

That said yes its among if not the hardest part.

I actually didn't ask the question of college grads because I expected them to solve it on the spot I asked the question of them because they could basically take 3 taks to answering (also at this point I know they have a basic knowledge of football and the option because of the discussions in the interview)-

A. They tell me its easy and give me a solution in 2 minutes - I didn't hire them. This is usually a good sign that they were not very good at breaking down problems.

B. They turned the white board in the interview room into their version of a beautiful mind - this was probably the most common response - the questions sounds relatively easy it isnt. Possibly hired depends on rest of candidates and rest of interview. But they realized as they started something "a skew" with comoing up with a simple solution to it.

C. Automatic offer was basically anyone who paused thoguht about it and then started to break it down to units of actions that were smaller than the overall concept - basically having a plan instead of just diving in - though we tended to get outbid for those guys.

Fair enough, I thought you meant variable whether to defend the QB or HB, not variable as in fallible in their decision.

I guess it's all possible to do, but whether the outcome is fun. It's not even fun to watch highschool teams run wishbone options every play, let alone watching your virtual players fall for it every other play. And if they don't fall for it regularly enough then it's garbage, and I don't see a way to reconcile those two things.

Like, I feel it's worse seeing mental failures than physical failures in the game. It's easier to deal with "oh he just happened to miss his tackle this time", rather than like "oh, this is the 13th time he's played against this play incorrectly this game".

Also interesting, randomly doing research on the triple option. About four posts into a thread, I realized they were talking about my hometown. Apparently all they do is run triple option nowadays. When I was there we pretty much just ran air raid all day every day. Same coaches too, interesting pivot. Considering it's a Division 5 school with a graduating class of under 50 people every year, pretty surprising to stumble across a thread about it.

I want handoffs and pitch plays to the WR's

Originally posted by Corndog
Also interesting, randomly doing research on the triple option. About four posts into a thread, I realized they were talking about my hometown. Apparently all they do is run triple option nowadays. When I was there we pretty much just ran air raid all day every day. Same coaches too, interesting pivot. Considering it's a Division 5 school with a graduating class of under 50 people every year, pretty surprising to stumble across a thread about it.

It's almost as if Google takes into account its audience in serving up search results

Originally posted by o The Boss x
It's almost as if Google takes into account its audience in serving up search results

thankfully he didnt mention it over facebook! lol

Originally posted by Corndog
Fair enough, I thought you meant variable whether to defend the QB or HB, not variable as in fallible in their decision.

I guess it's all possible to do, but whether the outcome is fun. It's not even fun to watch highschool teams run wishbone options every play, let alone watching your virtual players fall for it every other play. And if they don't fall for it regularly enough then it's garbage, and I don't see a way to reconcile those two things.

Like, I feel it's worse seeing mental failures than physical failures in the game. It's easier to deal with "oh he just happened to miss his tackle this time", rather than like "oh, this is the 13th time he's played against this play incorrectly this game".

Perhaps you can figure these "fakes" into the defendeer pass fails a simpler way, and by simpler i mean I'm glad I dont have to do it but it may be an easier way to code the failures. You can possibly relate it to the defender tactics as far as pass rush style or pursuit style to basically break down the read. When we learned to defend the option (I was a kid in nebraska in the 90s so we had to learn to do both attack and defend it. Your Strong Side DE had either the qb or the hb on assignment depending on the called play, but it was always his choice as he was the guy left unblocked. If perhaps you did a Aggressive on either/or both Pass Rush Style and/or pursuit style this guy goes for the qb hit. Set to concervative we are telling him to take the pitch man.

Perhaps the qb pitches off of carry awareness. You can actually designate this to all defenders on hif they go for qb or hb. If you're playing an option team you're gonna know to adjust your d player tactics. For the most part the qb and hb run the same path until a pitch is made or the qb is dead anyway. Carry Grip is your catching factor mixed with carry awareness. If you have the qb pitch option coming off carry awareness there is still no guarantee he will pitch it every time giving it some of the randomness.

Originally posted by o The Boss x
It's almost as if Google takes into account its audience in serving up search results

Let alone the fact it listens to your conversations via your phone to taylor itself to you... I goofed around awhile back with that experiment where I randomly mentioned dog food over the course of a week despite having no dog and voila, dog food articles and commercials lol