Warrior General Games

For my OAI, i have each output named as (formation)(playname) ex. I Form Pitch Weak.

It keeps things organized until i add new plays for a formation that i already use, so i have a list that looks like this:

SB Blast
I Form Pitch Weak
I Form Pitch Strong
Weak I Dive
Weak I Blast
SB Dive
SB Offtackle

It doesnt seem like a big deal until i have 30+outputs and i have no idea which runs i have in each formation. I'd like to be able to group my outputs together by formation so i can make sure i have no formations that just go to the right most of the time etc etc.

All im asking for is to be able to move my outputs up and down. some arrows is all i ask

cant u pick where u add said new play like u can in the DAI or am im misunderstanding u

Originally posted by Diamond Spade
cant u pick where u add said new play like u can in the DAI or am im misunderstanding u
no. i can put it under a certain input, but i want to be able to rearrange the outputs so it isnt a clusterfuck.

+1

Originally posted by ProfessionalKop

no. i can put it under a certain input, but i want to be able to rearrange the outputs so it isnt a clusterfuck.

gotcha

+1 then

+1

+1

I am so OCD about it that i'll delete all the outputs and put them all back in to get it right.

Originally posted by Kirghiz
i'll delete all the outputs and put them all back in to get it right.

i might have to do that, and i really dont want to since i had to setup 3 different OAIs and it took forever. i do not want to do all that shit again. please dont make me bort

Um, I'm with you guys here, so +1 But I want to add a suggestion for you until then. I kept notes for that stuff back when I did it cuz I damn sure didn't wanna hafta go back and do it again... and again... and again. Not only that, but taking notes gave me the ability to compare seasons and setups and results. That's also why I quit doing it... took a damn lot of time to do all that.

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Um, I'm with you guys here, so +1 But I want to add a suggestion for you until then. I kept notes for that stuff back when I did it cuz I damn sure didn't wanna hafta go back and do it again... and again... and again. Not only that, but taking notes gave me the ability to compare seasons and setups and results. That's also why I quit doing it... took a damn lot of time to do all that.

i was thinking about it, but doing it for both my teams would burn me out.

this is honestly, the easiest thing to implement. He did it with Inputs, im sure outputs would be super easy to do this with. Would save me tons of time and save me from having to take hours and hours to write shit down properly and keep track of it when i could just group my outputs together.


very simple addition that'll help every single OC.

Isn't there a way to create packages which can then be placed in outputs for specific situations?

Multiple packages can be set as outputs for a specific situation.

That is one way things could be cleaned up, i.e. specific formations in specific packages - kept small - to reduce clutter. Then if you wanted to change things up, you would just edit the packages instead. Record your original package, then whenever you want to make a change, create new appropriately named package which you can swap into the AI.

You can also customize each play within the package, so the plays will already be set up rather than having to do it within the AI.

I believe this problem was partly why packages were allowed in the first place.

Originally posted by PhillyFossil
Isn't there a way to create packages which can then be placed in outputs for specific situations?

Multiple packages can be set as outputs for a specific situation.

That is one way things could be cleaned up, i.e. specific formations in specific packages - kept small - to reduce clutter. Then if you wanted to change things up, you would just edit the packages instead. Record your original package, then whenever you want to make a change, create new appropriately named package which you can swap into the AI.

You can also customize each play within the package, so the plays will already be set up rather than having to do it within the AI.

I believe this problem was partly why packages were allowed in the first place.

youre missing my point entirely. i dont use packages. so with this method, i would have to completely redo 3 AIs..... when instead, there could be an arrow that just lets me move my plays up and down. Honestly, one of the easiest things to do since he has it for inputs, can use the same code for outputs i bet.

Originally posted by ProfessionalKop
youre missing my point entirely. i dont use packages. so with this method, i would have to completely redo 3 AIs..... when instead, there could be an arrow that just lets me move my plays up and down. Honestly, one of the easiest things to do since he has it for inputs, can use the same code for outputs i bet.

In other words, once set up a certain way, it becomes a PITA to alter and maintain....correct? Redoing it would be an equal chore, so you're just looking for a way to make it easier to work with what you've already got?

In that case, nothing wrong with the idea. It definitely needs to be done in two other AI areas, so might as well implement throughout the entire AI system.

I'd give a +1 to that.

Originally posted by PhillyFossil
In other words, once set up a certain way, it becomes a PITA to alter and maintain....correct? Redoing it would be an equal chore, so you're just looking for a way to make it easier to work with what you've already got?

In that case, nothing wrong with the idea. It definitely needs to be done in two other AI areas, so might as well implement throughout the entire AI system.

I'd give a +1 to that.



yep, exactly. would take me hours and hours just to redo my AI when all i need is an arrow to move my outputs.