Warrior General Games

Decided to run some tests to make sure tagging was working correctly. Started out with a simple test in the following game:

http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1448

Basically, I tagged the running QB as "Runner" and created a specific input that used a goal line formation with all players blitzing if the running QB entered the game. Goal line was called in every instance the running QB came in.

The general default builds for the test server teams are pretty terrible so I created a offense with pro level type of builds for Milwaukee and a defense with pro level type of builds for Kansas City. Milwaukee's defense was the default and Kansas City's offense was the default. I ran one test game to make sure the builds I had created worked - returner was too powerful so I changed him to be much slower/less agile. Some concerns from the sim, especially regarding pass blocking/passing, but that was not what I was testing but I made note of my concerns and posted them:

http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1458

Originally posted by thehazyone
Some definite concerns came from the game and not just from Team #1 Pro Offense vs Team #2 Pro Defense as it was happening on both sides of the ball.

Passing is atrocious - between the two teams they were a combined 24 of 84 - Team #1 Pro Offense had moderate success in terms of yards (304.5) but 1/2 of that came on two plays.

Interior line pressure from DT's and NT's is out of whack. Test NT1 had 7 hurries, Test DT1 had 8 hurries, Typical NT (Backup) had 7 hurries, Typical NT had 2 hurries. For the test defense this was against very good interior line builds. These hurries are what led to the atrocious passing numbers as hurries definitely have a more profound effect on the quality of the pass.

I'll put in a more extensive AI tomorrow with a little more play calling variety and more typical game plan than basic AI, but those two things worry me.

Ran a test game with tagging utilized in more depth. Essentially, I tagged the Passing QB, Running QB, Power HB, Elusive HB, Blocking TE, Receiving TE. I then created specific defensive inputs for the following scenarios:

Running QB in game
Power HB in game with Blocking TE
Elusive HB in game
Passing QB in game with Receiving TE

I had specific defenses in for each of those scenarios. Each time those scenarios hit, the correct play was called.

http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1461

Again, had concerns with pass rushing/OL blocking/pass game and noted them (see comment in Testing the New Pass Blocking Code thread).

There were a few cosmetic issues with tagging as far as wrong position's showing up in drop boxes. Pointed those out for Bort.

General observations about Tagging:

Works as intended. Teams that utilize a player in only one way (i.e. Running QB solely as runner, Elusive HB solely as pass receiver, Power HB solely as inside runner) will no longer be able to do so without facing a defense that likely shuts it down completely. It will require that these players do more than one thing. It will create more cumbersome and complicated defensive AI's, which is the biggest reason I am not a fan of tagging - not because of how it works, but because of the work it creates. If any one has a specific situation they want tested, post here and if it needs testing (meaning I'm not just going to test anything for the sake of testing it), I'll do so and post results in here.

honestly its too much work

Thanks Hazy.

Can you play with some "odd" inputs that offenses will add in to make DCs confused, like Rushing QB-Receiving TE, and make sure that the playcalling goes up to down?

Basically, tag those two players, don't make a defensive input where they are both tagged, and make sure that it calls the "top" one.

The biggest thing I can think of that needs testing is out-of-position tagged players. Say that I tag a HB as "Elusive", and as "Custom Tag 1" (if that's changed, adjust as appropriate). If he's in the game at FB, which of the following inputs will fire:

* elusive HB in game at HB (shouldn't)
* custom tag 1 at HB (shouldn't)
* custom tag 1 at FB (should)
* elusive HB in game at FB (probably should be an option, probably isn't, should fire if available)

Originally posted by thehazyone


Works as intended.


And points out why tagging is going to be an enormous problem. Because any QB coming to the line seeing an all out blitz GL D would audible to a play to exploit it.

It's ridiculous to give the D a tool this powerful and not give anything to the O to counter it.

Originally posted by cwrujosh
Originally posted by thehazyone



Works as intended.


And points out why tagging is going to be an enormous problem. Because any QB coming to the line seeing an all out blitz GL D would audible to a play to exploit it.

It's ridiculous to give the D a tool this powerful and not give anything to the O to counter it.

And it wasn't equally ridiculous to spend 4-6 seasons with offenses bringing in one dimensional players without giving the defense a way to key in on it? Because I sure wouldn't assign my best coverage linebacker to try to cover a TE built like Orlando Pace.

Originally posted by cwrujosh
And points out why tagging is going to be an enormous problem. Because any QB coming to the line seeing an all out blitz GL D would audible to a play to exploit it.

It's ridiculous to give the D a tool this powerful and not give anything to the O to counter it.

To be honest, this is the defense's counter to the offenses' custom slots.We were able to toss out speed/power backs, blocking/receiving FBs, blocking/receiving TEs, and the defense had to sit there and hope they knew which one was going on.


Now, they can adjust to personnel.


The offense does need a way to occasionally gain the upper hand, but I guess that would be in building multi dimensional players. Either that, or name your players something AWFULLY close to each other and hope the DC messes up his tagging

Originally posted by wrw47
The biggest thing I can think of that needs testing is out-of-position tagged players. Say that I tag a HB as "Elusive", and as "Custom Tag 1" (if that's changed, adjust as appropriate). If he's in the game at FB, which of the following inputs will fire:

* elusive HB in game at HB (shouldn't)
* custom tag 1 at HB (shouldn't)
* custom tag 1 at FB (should)
* elusive HB in game at FB (probably should be an option, probably isn't, should fire if available)

You can only give a player one tag.

Originally posted by Staz
Either that, or name your players something AWFULLY close to each other and hope the DC messes up his tagging

A friend of mine did that with his fullbacks, one blocking one rushing. Same name, just different spacing.

Originally posted by thehazyone
You can only give a player one tag.

And will custom tags follow a player around the depth chart?

Originally posted by wrw47
And will custom tags follow a player around the depth chart?

Yes, the tags are all named the same, so players playing out of position still carry the same tag. IE a QB tagged "speedy" would also be "speedy" in the HB slot or FB slot.

Originally posted by Bort
Yes, the tags are all named the same, so players playing out of position still carry the same tag. IE a QB tagged "speedy" would also be "speedy" in the HB slot or FB slot.

so let me understand this tag thing

if a rushing qB on the field a audible will go that changes the D????

Originally posted by Number 7
so let me understand this tag thing

if a rushing qB on the field a audible will go that changes the D????

If the team has tagged the rushing QB and set their defensive AI with some input and plays for the tagged running QB, yes, in a sense, that is correct. Like here:

http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1448&pbp_id=316117

The defensive AI had one input. Basically looked to see if the Running QB was in the game (he was tagged as Runner). If he was, run goal line defense with all player blitzing.

Originally posted by pottsman
And it wasn't equally ridiculous to spend 4-6 seasons with offenses bringing in one dimensional players without giving the defense a way to key in on it? Because I sure wouldn't assign my best coverage linebacker to try to cover a TE built like Orlando Pace.

Well that's a ridiculous counter argument. So the solution to giving the offenses a free ride in Season 11...is to give Defenses a free ride in Season 12? This game has to get away from doing that.