Warrior General Games

And also, even if it was implementable, all it would do is cause OC's to use time and quarter inputs to set you up. For example, run 100% inside for the first half of the game, get your inside run input to trigger, and then pass the rest of the game.

One can of worms would beget another.

Originally posted by Kirghiz
And also, even if it was implementable, all it would do is cause OC's to use time and quarter inputs to set you up. For example, run 100% inside for the first half of the game, get your inside run input to trigger, and then pass the rest of the game.

One can of worms would beget another.

Well yes, thats the idea. Make it a more involved game of chess.

But it would be a game of chess with more control, and more certainty that the pieces will move in the manner you direct.

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.

No, once again your pathetic need to categorize me and my motivations has failed.

I just like designing games and when I see something in a game that could be done better, off to the suggestions forum I go.

And yes, if you read the OP more closely you will see that its for OAI as well as DAI.

Originally posted by yello1
No, once again your pathetic need to categorize me and my motivations has failed.

I just like designing games and when I see something in a game that could be done better, off to the suggestions forum I go.

And yes, if you read the OP more closely you will see that its for OAI as well as DAI.



N/M

Originally posted by Deathblade
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.

I dunno, my AI is pretty lengthy. I do not have every possible broken out situation in it just yet but its getting there. If Bort would keep the sim standing still long enough for me to correct the main parts it would make catching up easier.

That said, I have been gaming with the most complex games on the market for about 40 years, strategy games with thousands of pieces that took hundreds of hours to complete, all that crap. Complexity is not something I fear or fail to grasp.

My main problem with GLB, and which is utterly unrelated to the problem here, is the lack of documentation. Its hard to play checkers if you do not know how the pieces move. And I do not have the time or patience to dig through reams of Q&As for hints and then cross check them for current validity.

The Auto Adjust problem, though, I think may be more about the vagaries of random number generation and math in the computing world. Its easy to roll a D6 in a face to face game. But meshing percentages can get tricky on a computer due to the settings of all the software in use. I once spent a good amount of time making a simulation in college on the campus main frame (do they even have main frames any more?) and despite my best efforts one of the outputs would depart the range it was set to stay inside, screwing up the works. Spent weeks getting my computer major buds to figure it out to no avail. Nerdlings pouring over those old accordion dot matrix printouts for hours. The Seventies Show meets Big Bang Theory. Anyway. Wasn't till years later talking about it to a guy who worked on the mainframe that he told me it was likely a setting on the main frame's operating system or whatever they would have called that then which would have set a value outside a certain range to zero or something like that.

No idea if thats whats wrong or anything like that of course. But the one in a million play calling I have seen auto adjust make suggests that the random generation is buggy for some reason. As such I would rather that we have an out from poorly performing packages thats a little more reliable than auto adjust.

Originally posted by Kirghiz
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.

1) Yes I like your idea. But as I just noted in my prior post, I do not know that auto adjust is reliable enough to get it done. Also my idea adds options that are not covered by auto adjust, such as energy settings and so forth.

2) You would not have to use this for every input. While I haven't game planned the ramifications of this, the intent is for these to be present to have higher placed inputs trigger to shut off your primary AI inputs when certain criteria are met. The primary ones - the ones you have now - would not need these settings to be utilized at all. So it is incorrect to say that adding 5 setting options would mean every input would add that many choices. Only your "second half" inputs would use this stuff.

3) The entire idea of your concept and the game in general is to give us game calling control over a foot ball team. My idea gets us about as close to real time game calling as you can get. If thats the point of the game, why shy away from it just because it adds a layer of complexity to an already in depth game? Its just a couple of check boxes more. Whats the big deal?

Originally posted by yello1
I dunno, my AI is pretty lengthy. I do not have every possible broken out situation in it just yet but its getting there. If Bort would keep the sim standing still long enough for me to correct the main parts it would make catching up easier.

That said, I have been gaming with the most complex games on the market for about 40 years, strategy games with thousands of pieces that took hundreds of hours to complete, all that crap. Complexity is not something I fear or fail to grasp.

My main problem with GLB, and which is utterly unrelated to the problem here, is the lack of documentation. Its hard to play checkers if you do not know how the pieces move. And I do not have the time or patience to dig through reams of Q&As for hints and then cross check them for current validity.

The Auto Adjust problem, though, I think may be more about the vagaries of random number generation and math in the computing world. Its easy to roll a D6 in a face to face game. But meshing percentages can get tricky on a computer due to the settings of all the software in use. I once spent a good amount of time making a simulation in college on the campus main frame (do they even have main frames any more?) and despite my best efforts one of the outputs would depart the range it was set to stay inside, screwing up the works. Spent weeks getting my computer major buds to figure it out to no avail. Nerdlings pouring over those old accordion dot matrix printouts for hours. The Seventies Show meets Big Bang Theory. Anyway. Wasn't till years later talking about it to a guy who worked on the mainframe that he told me it was likely a setting on the main frame's operating system or whatever they would have called that then which would have set a value outside a certain range to zero or something like that.

No idea if thats whats wrong or anything like that of course. But the one in a million play calling I have seen auto adjust make suggests that the random generation is buggy for some reason. As such I would rather that we have an out from poorly performing packages thats a little more reliable than auto adjust.

Does it hurt twisting your body into those weird contortions to pat your own back so hard?

Originally posted by Deathblade
Does it hurt twisting your body into those weird contortions to pat your own back so hard?

??? Just refuting your insinuation that I was not into higher complexity gaming when its what I love most. Hardly back patting. So far as I know playing games is not going to generate much income or win many nobel prizes. Well unless the game is a pro sport of course.