Warrior General Games

Originally posted by PsychoMan001
another example:
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=116982&pbp_id=4498682


I know that the representation shows otherwise, but im wondering if this is just a situation where the FS just has the WR in an attempted tackle and the WR's trying to break free though? Maybe Bort can expand on this, but thats kind of what it looks like to me. I know it's frustrating watching your WR seemingly tread through a mud bog, but the FS slowed down just as much, makes me believe this is what's happening here.

Originally posted by PsychoMan001
This is one of many examples I have been seeing lately where the player can't figure out how to run toward the endzone when there's no one in front of him. If cutting toward the sideline is going to slow him down by 80%, then why don't they just run straight to the endzone?

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=116646&pbp_id=3973029



This seems to have happened quite a bit to my receiver this season. 75 speed, 49 agility.

Tends to get tackled by guys who are three or four yards away as well.

The thing people have to understand is, sure your player might have 70 speed, 50 agility, blah blah blah, but your opponent isnt a statue either. Everyone seems to expect their player(s) to dominate an opponent just because they have a good build. I think Bort's doing a great job in making this game more and more realistic. Anyone who's every programmed *anything* in their lives knows how difficult it is to get everything working perfectly in any program. EA has been working on Madden for YEARS now and they still have bugs up the wazoo. Im not saying we shouldnt report them, but we need to realize how hard Bort is working to make this game right and cut him a break now and then. And just because your player has great strength, speed, agility, vision, whatever, doesnt mean your opponent doesnt.

Originally posted by Snakebite99
The thing people have to understand is, sure your player might have 70 speed, 50 agility, blah blah blah, but your opponent isnt a statue either. Everyone seems to expect their player(s) to dominate an opponent just because they have a good build. I think Bort's doing a great job in making this game more and more realistic. Anyone who's every programmed *anything* in their lives knows how difficult it is to get everything working perfectly in any program. EA has been working on Madden for YEARS now and they still have bugs up the wazoo. Im not saying we shouldnt report them, but we need to realize how hard Bort is working to make this game right and cut him a break now and then. And just because your player has great strength, speed, agility, vision, whatever, doesnt mean your opponent doesnt.

You're right. What I'm specifically referring to in this thread is when a player is on a breakaway, and he doesn't take the simple obvious path toward the endzone. I've seen where they cut sideways, or diagonal, or possibly headfake guys behind them and it just screws things up. It doesn't matter what your build is at all in this case, you should just run toward the endzone.

Originally posted by PsychoMan001


You're right. What I'm specifically referring to in this thread is when a player is on a breakaway, and he doesn't take the simple obvious path toward the endzone. I've seen where they cut sideways, or diagonal, or possibly headfake guys behind them and it just screws things up. It doesn't matter what your build is at all in this case, you should just run toward the endzone.

Yeah, im not arguing that at all, but we just dont see the "real" action of whats going on down there on the field. All we see are dots If you were to convert a real NFL game into a bunch of dots, you would see your dots slowing down all the time, when thinking they should just be running full speed at all times. Thing is, a real football game hardly sees player break away that easily. You have guys trying to maintain balance, fight through weak arm tackles, etc etc.

Good news is that somebody made an actual good suggestion on a fix for running pathfinding. I'm working with it right now in testing.

It's basically a double pass on the "best path" algorithm: one with a long vision distance for a general "avoidance vector" and one with a short, 3-5 yard distance for a "juke vector." Add 'em together, with the juke vector at a stronger strength than the avoidance vector, and it seems to get a pretty good path that really takes the runner's vision into account quite well.

Originally posted by Bort
Good news is that somebody made an actual good suggestion on a fix for running pathfinding. I'm working with it right now in testing.

It's basically a double pass on the "best path" algorithm: one with a long vision distance for a general "avoidance vector" and one with a short, 3-5 yard distance for a "juke vector." Add 'em together, with the juke vector at a stronger strength than the avoidance vector, and it seems to get a pretty good path that really takes the runner's vision into account quite well.

I think i remember seeing that suggestion made. ETA on implementation?

Originally posted by Bort
Good news is that somebody made an actual good suggestion on a fix for running pathfinding. I'm working with it right now in testing.

It's basically a double pass on the "best path" algorithm: one with a long vision distance for a general "avoidance vector" and one with a short, 3-5 yard distance for a "juke vector." Add 'em together, with the juke vector at a stronger strength than the avoidance vector, and it seems to get a pretty good path that really takes the runner's vision into account quite well.

Thanks Bort!!!

God damn I want to buy you a beer, Bort!

Originally posted by Bort
Good news is that somebody made an actual good suggestion on a fix for running pathfinding. I'm working with it right now in testing.

It's basically a double pass on the "best path" algorithm: one with a long vision distance for a general "avoidance vector" and one with a short, 3-5 yard distance for a "juke vector." Add 'em together, with the juke vector at a stronger strength than the avoidance vector, and it seems to get a pretty good path that really takes the runner's vision into account quite well.

I have NO IDEA what the fuck you just said....but it touched me.

Originally posted by Robbnva
ETA on implementation?

Next day or two - I'm doing some last bits of testing to find the right coefficients for the avoidance values. I'm sure it will still not be perfect, but it seems much better so far. KR's work better too.

Included with this will also be some tweaks to blocking duration (like I've been talking about) and some more tweaks to the coverage stuff I've been working on, since it's all kinda rolled together at this point.

Originally posted by Bort
Originally posted by Robbnva

ETA on implementation?
KR's work better too.


THANK YOU JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I should try to find a way to post test games for scrutiny. Of course, I'm using real players/teams so that might piss some people off.

you can use my KR. his name is I Rickrolled cybershot

Originally posted by Bort
I should try to find a way to post test games for scrutiny. Of course, I'm using real players/teams so that might piss some people off.

some way to post the results but have the names hidden to protect the innocent?