 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » Dynasty Vision
celamantia
June 02, 2010 at 01:26AM View BBCode
Regarding the number of plays in a game: According to the database game 1 above had 117 plays, game 2 had 104, game 3 had 110, game 4 had 113, and game 5 had 121. Now that includes kicking plays except extra point kicks. Adjusting the time settings to the suggestions in this thread yields results of 160+ plays in a game with correspondingly high scores. That leads me to believe I must have some other error in the clock somewhere.
celamantia
- Long passes were too easy to complete, they are now being adjusted for distance properly
- Interceptions are now working
- Passes tipped away by the defender are now being reported (this is equivalent to a "plus play")
- Interceptions resulting from a QB failure as opposed to defender skill are reported as such
June 02, 2010 at 03:50AM View BBCode
Also fixed:- Long passes were too easy to complete, they are now being adjusted for distance properly
- Interceptions are now working
- Passes tipped away by the defender are now being reported (this is equivalent to a "plus play")
- Interceptions resulting from a QB failure as opposed to defender skill are reported as such
bpearly69
June 02, 2010 at 08:12PM View BBCode
nice, you gonna have another set of sample games up soon?
celamantia
It seems like, when the clock is running, it takes 5-6 seconds just to reset after the previous play, longer if it was a long pass/run and players are more spread out. After the huddle, it takes 5-7 seconds to get into position, set, call cadence, and snap, longer if you are eating time.
Using 5 seconds after a play, 6 seconds to set and snap, 22-28 seconds for the huddle, and 6-7 seconds for an average play time, I'm getting about 125 plays in a game (including kicks). I'm going to reduce the huddle time a smidge with a target of 120-125 offensive plays without kicks.
June 03, 2010 at 06:14AM View BBCode
Regarding time....It seems like, when the clock is running, it takes 5-6 seconds just to reset after the previous play, longer if it was a long pass/run and players are more spread out. After the huddle, it takes 5-7 seconds to get into position, set, call cadence, and snap, longer if you are eating time.
Using 5 seconds after a play, 6 seconds to set and snap, 22-28 seconds for the huddle, and 6-7 seconds for an average play time, I'm getting about 125 plays in a game (including kicks). I'm going to reduce the huddle time a smidge with a target of 120-125 offensive plays without kicks.
celamantia
Soon, maybe tomorrow... I've worked on the end-of-game AI but it seems to have gotten worse, there's a snag where it just won't kick a field goal in crucial situations and it is still wanting to run even as it's calling time-outs, so I need to un-knot it and try it again. And scoring is too high, although that may be a result of the fact that the defense has only a single play for testing so it can't counter obvious long pass situations. I think I'm going to have to build some plays this weekend.
June 04, 2010 at 04:29PM View BBCode
Originally posted by bpearly69
nice, you gonna have another set of sample games up soon?
Soon, maybe tomorrow... I've worked on the end-of-game AI but it seems to have gotten worse, there's a snag where it just won't kick a field goal in crucial situations and it is still wanting to run even as it's calling time-outs, so I need to un-knot it and try it again. And scoring is too high, although that may be a result of the fact that the defense has only a single play for testing so it can't counter obvious long pass situations. I think I'm going to have to build some plays this weekend.
Metallica1828
June 04, 2010 at 08:34PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Bring on the 4-3 defense...let's hope my Redskins can learn how to play it this season!!!
happy
I mean, bad end-of-game AI could very clearly be the reason why there are so many plays. Or maybe a large amount of passing plays, or lots of incompletions, or lots of touchdowns, or regularly getting out of bounds. I mean, there are literally hundreds of reasons why there could be too many plays per game, so I wouldnt pay a lot of attention to that sort of thing.
Im gonna tell you the truth, I considered trying to throw together some silly sports type sim game just for fun, but realized that balancing will take a long long LONG time. Fact is that when this game comes out of beta, it will still have a LOT of balancing issues, and thats ok. Right now we need to get it looking like a football game, we will worry about high scores, too many plays, what have you after the game is actually set up.
I mean, even things like overeffectiveness of the long ball could be something along the lines of too many slow CBs, or too high of arm for QBs. I mean, also these are 1950s type players, once we get 20 or 30 years of data thru the game, the data itself will probably completely change. That is unless you came up with a better way of dealing with 1950 (cuz like...1950 sucks in SimD Baseball, so that would be great).
June 07, 2010 at 12:38AM View BBCode
I wouldnt worry much about the actual score until you get everything else ironed out. I mean, there are so many clear errors that could change the game drastically in one way or another. I mean, things like score are a way to look to check for errors, but honestly we should look at individual plays in individual situations at this point to see errors.I mean, bad end-of-game AI could very clearly be the reason why there are so many plays. Or maybe a large amount of passing plays, or lots of incompletions, or lots of touchdowns, or regularly getting out of bounds. I mean, there are literally hundreds of reasons why there could be too many plays per game, so I wouldnt pay a lot of attention to that sort of thing.
Im gonna tell you the truth, I considered trying to throw together some silly sports type sim game just for fun, but realized that balancing will take a long long LONG time. Fact is that when this game comes out of beta, it will still have a LOT of balancing issues, and thats ok. Right now we need to get it looking like a football game, we will worry about high scores, too many plays, what have you after the game is actually set up.
I mean, even things like overeffectiveness of the long ball could be something along the lines of too many slow CBs, or too high of arm for QBs. I mean, also these are 1950s type players, once we get 20 or 30 years of data thru the game, the data itself will probably completely change. That is unless you came up with a better way of dealing with 1950 (cuz like...1950 sucks in SimD Baseball, so that would be great).
celamantia
June 07, 2010 at 04:12AM View BBCode
OK, I have some fresh meat up at http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=267767 .
celamantia
It is definately not as easy as it looks. :) I've been working on this full-time for about 9 months, and I originally figured I'd be at this point last Thanksgiving.
I agree, a lot of the issues have to do with player balancing. A QB with a 100 Throw Accuracy is devastating... but then again he probably should be...
My approach is a bit different from the baseball game... I create all players at a college freshman level and then run them through years worth of improves and declines until they get to their 1960 age. I haven't decided if this is better or worse yet.
June 07, 2010 at 04:17AM View BBCode
Originally posted by happy
Im gonna tell you the truth, I considered trying to throw together some silly sports type sim game just for fun, but realized that balancing will take a long long LONG time.
It is definately not as easy as it looks. :) I've been working on this full-time for about 9 months, and I originally figured I'd be at this point last Thanksgiving.
I mean, even things like overeffectiveness of the long ball could be something along the lines of too many slow CBs, or too high of arm for QBs. I mean, also these are 1950s type players, once we get 20 or 30 years of data thru the game, the data itself will probably completely change.
I agree, a lot of the issues have to do with player balancing. A QB with a 100 Throw Accuracy is devastating... but then again he probably should be...
That is unless you came up with a better way of dealing with 1950 (cuz like...1950 sucks in SimD Baseball, so that would be great).
My approach is a bit different from the baseball game... I create all players at a college freshman level and then run them through years worth of improves and declines until they get to their 1960 age. I haven't decided if this is better or worse yet.
happy
But yes, that is a much better way of doing it. If you do this as system 3, then that would basically solve the problem.
June 07, 2010 at 09:30PM View BBCode
Yeah, but that wont exactly solve the problem. Unless you use a system 3 type system (which would be great, because system 1/2 suck), players decide who to develop, so eithe ryou would be forced to decide (and you may decide differently, like using overall rating rather than weighing based on other factors, similar to PvR being more important than CvR in Basbeall), or you wouldnt decide (making the leauge considerably more deep than it will be in the future)But yes, that is a much better way of doing it. If you do this as system 3, then that would basically solve the problem.
Pages: 1 2