Warrior General Games

Originally posted by yello1
Because its not logical.

My idea is.

And you yourself just said you have had this problem yourself, so....

The problem was on me. Not auto adjust....

i can get behind kirg's suggestion on user defining the yardage that defines the adjustments, but this is just waaaay too over the top.

Originally posted by bhall43
The problem was on me. Not auto adjust....

i can get behind kirg's suggestion on user defining the yardage that defines the adjustments, but this is just waaaay too over the top.

Thats fine.

But I don't get the why of it.

Why would you prefer an iffy random number based system when RN's in computers are fraught with issues it seems, and thats fuzzy around the edges at best, when you could have actual detailed control over the play choice based on actual hard measurable mid game data?

Its like saying you could have the hot 20 year old but you'd prefer the chubby haus frau. Yes its a choice you are free to make, but its a puzzling one.

Because its a really easy change to auto adjust and all one really needs to make auto adjust work well.

Originally posted by bhall43
Because its a really easy change to auto adjust and all one really needs to make auto adjust work well.

I've seen AAdjust do too much crap that mathematically makes no sense to agree with you. There is more going on with that system than the stated percentage changes, and some of it at least is buggy as heck. Give me my own On Off input triggers instead por favor.

That said, that change in the other thread is desirable, to be sure.

Tie it to this:

http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4912150&page=3#45500864

And you've got the plusone

Originally posted by yello1


The sim is perfect.



everybody is dealing with the same thing .... try to do better with what you have

Originally posted by Time Trial
Tie it to this:

http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4912150&page=3#45500864

And you've got the plusone

This bit?

"Make focus have more impact on outcome. When designing a play you currently have the option of designating whether it is going to stop the pass or the run:...These are currently used only for organization... but what if you could actually get a bonus for guessing correctly?"

Thats a very cool idea. Though it sounds like your idea is more about the play design than the input AI. It could easily be an option in the AI input settings though. Yeah, I would add that as a choice. Though its not adjusting to performance exactly.

The OP is essentially suggesting that the game needs three times more input parameters than it has now, which would result in AI's of over 9000 inputs to cover them all. Meanwhile, Bort recently made the outputs collapsable because many people had their browsers freeze and/or crash when opening their AI's because the page files were too big. Assuming for a minute that this level of complexity was desired by the average user, the implementation would be downright impossible to make work on nary any computer or web browser because of the size that AI's would grow to be.

Originally posted by Kirghiz
The OP is essentially suggesting that the game needs three times more input parameters than it has now, which would result in AI's of over 9000 inputs to cover them all. Meanwhile, Bort recently made the outputs collapsable because many people had their browsers freeze and/or crash when opening their AI's because the page files were too big. Assuming for a minute that this level of complexity was desired by the average user, the implementation would be downright impossible to make work on nary any computer or web browser because of the size that AI's would grow to be.

That sounds unlikely.

The collapse is to minimize scrolling through. Not computer collapse. In an age of streaming video as an internet norm, whose computer rig is so weak as to be laid low by text and drag downs?

Originally posted by CowboysAmerica
everybody is dealing with the same thing .... try to do better with what you have

Yes, we should never strive for improvement.

Call of Duty 1 was really all anyone should have wanted.

Originally posted by yello1
That sounds unlikely.

The collapse is to minimize scrolling through. Not computer collapse. In an age of streaming video as an internet norm, whose computer rig is so weak as to be laid low by text and drag downs?



My browser constantly failed with the old AI lay out. To the point I couldn't even go into it anymore and I didnt for 3 seasons.

Originally posted by bhall43
My browser constantly failed with the old AI lay out. To the point I couldn't even go into it anymore and I didnt for 3 seasons.

What the heck are you using, an abacus?

Just stinks of yellos typical "game is too complex for me so lets make it even more complex so no one else gets it so I have a chance to compete."


That said if we are giving the defense this detailed auto adjust then we need to give the offense a detailed auto-adjust to counter.

Originally posted by beenlurken
Just stinks of yellos typical "game is too complex for me so lets make it even more complex so no one else gets it so I have a chance to compete."

That said if we are giving the defense this detailed auto adjust then we need to give the offense a detailed auto-adjust to counter.

I don't think that is the case.

I think most calls for more complexity come from people with very small AIs, putzing around in joke leagues. While making their 5 input 15 output AI, they discover that there is a niche thing they want to do, then head to the suggestions forum without thinking about any of the repercussions to people that have actual AIs.

Originally posted by yello1
That sounds unlikely.

The collapse is to minimize scrolling through. Not computer collapse. In an age of streaming video as an internet norm, whose computer rig is so weak as to be laid low by text and drag downs?



You have a dozen plus input parameter you want added. Each one would need to be added to each formation, and at least 5 instances of down and distance, and another four or five tag inputs on defense. To do what you are saying correctly would require at least 500 or 600 inputs. I don't know about you, but my defensive AI hovers between 90 and 120 inputs depending on the game now, and I have zero desire to increase that.

The best way to achieve what you are wanting is to write a comprehensive AI, and lobby for yardage threshold controls in the auto adjust like my suggestion elsewhere in this forum.