albionmoonlight
06-09-2003, 03:44 PM
The more I that think about how hard it is to program a football sim with a robust AI, the more I wonder if I am not getting further from the idea of "the more customizable the better."
My point, which I hope to illustrate with a brief example, is that so many factors in a game relate to other factors, that it actually takes a lot more work than one realizes to make slidable settings work.
Say you have an injury slider (maybe one of the more innocuous sliders suggested). If you set injuries to off or to a really low value, you will know that quality backups are not nearly as important as quality starters. If you set it to really high, you know that you had better make sure that your #3 QB is decent because he will probably see some game time in a season. The question is--does the AI adjust for the injury sliders, too? If not, it becomes too easy for the gamer. If so, the whole dynamic of player evaluation (the main thing the AI does, IMO) changes. Considering that only 24 players of the 50+ on a roster are starters, the value associated with back-ups is a huge part of player evaluation. That value is directly related to injury frequency. The AI will need to tweak almost all that it does to accomidate sliders.
Also--changing injury rates (and, therefore, the rates that backups see the field) might have effects on how the game engine develops young players and how players are revealed to the gamer (and the AI teams) as boom/bust players. So the programmer may decide to change those values in relation to the injury slider (say--make playing time less important for backups when injury rates are really low). Of course, drafting players (another huge area in which the gamer goes head to head with the AI--and a part of the game that many people feel could be expanded (at least they do around April)) depends a lot on how players are developed. After simming a few seasons, humans will know how quickly they can plan to plug in a RB, OB, etc. into the starting lineup. One expects that the AI should know this, too. However, if this value is dynamic based on sliders, programming the AI to do this well becomes a lot harder.
Of course, as these values all change in the AI's mind, so too does trade value of players and picks. I won't go into all of the potential sliders and how they all can relate to each other (I think that people get my drift), but it seems that trying to program an AI to manage all of them would be like trying to solve one of those algebra II problems where you have four variables, but only three equations to combine to figure them out.
So, in theory, I agree with the slider crowd. In practice, however, if it comes down to making a universe that is static enough for the AI to stand on its own two feet and put up a good fight or a customizable universe in which the AI is not as strong across the board because so much energy had to be spent preparing it for all of the eventualities--I think that I will be happier in the first universe.
My point, which I hope to illustrate with a brief example, is that so many factors in a game relate to other factors, that it actually takes a lot more work than one realizes to make slidable settings work.
Say you have an injury slider (maybe one of the more innocuous sliders suggested). If you set injuries to off or to a really low value, you will know that quality backups are not nearly as important as quality starters. If you set it to really high, you know that you had better make sure that your #3 QB is decent because he will probably see some game time in a season. The question is--does the AI adjust for the injury sliders, too? If not, it becomes too easy for the gamer. If so, the whole dynamic of player evaluation (the main thing the AI does, IMO) changes. Considering that only 24 players of the 50+ on a roster are starters, the value associated with back-ups is a huge part of player evaluation. That value is directly related to injury frequency. The AI will need to tweak almost all that it does to accomidate sliders.
Also--changing injury rates (and, therefore, the rates that backups see the field) might have effects on how the game engine develops young players and how players are revealed to the gamer (and the AI teams) as boom/bust players. So the programmer may decide to change those values in relation to the injury slider (say--make playing time less important for backups when injury rates are really low). Of course, drafting players (another huge area in which the gamer goes head to head with the AI--and a part of the game that many people feel could be expanded (at least they do around April)) depends a lot on how players are developed. After simming a few seasons, humans will know how quickly they can plan to plug in a RB, OB, etc. into the starting lineup. One expects that the AI should know this, too. However, if this value is dynamic based on sliders, programming the AI to do this well becomes a lot harder.
Of course, as these values all change in the AI's mind, so too does trade value of players and picks. I won't go into all of the potential sliders and how they all can relate to each other (I think that people get my drift), but it seems that trying to program an AI to manage all of them would be like trying to solve one of those algebra II problems where you have four variables, but only three equations to combine to figure them out.
So, in theory, I agree with the slider crowd. In practice, however, if it comes down to making a universe that is static enough for the AI to stand on its own two feet and put up a good fight or a customizable universe in which the AI is not as strong across the board because so much energy had to be spent preparing it for all of the eventualities--I think that I will be happier in the first universe.