Customization vs AI: An interesting discussion on the Puresim boards

rjolley · 01-06-2005, 10:26 PM

hxxp://p089.ezboard.com/fpuresimbaseballfrm21.showMessage?topicID=351.topic

At the above link, there's a discussion on whether Puresim should try to be more flexible in the rules it plays by (on/off financials, various roster sizes, etc) or should work on the AI to make the game more challenging.

Which one is more important to you? Why?

sovereignstar · 01-06-2005, 10:28 PM

I think FOF is a perfect example of the way that I feel. Customization comes second.

Suicane75 · 01-06-2005, 11:00 PM

I would personaly like to know how much more in depth the coding would be if Jim were to incorporate some customization into the game. I think variable league size and allignment, with the ability to add teams, or at the least have a strict expansion schedule would pretty much put the cherry on the cake that is FOF.

That said I think Jim has taken the right approach, move the game as far as you can under the hood before adding the bells and whistles. But man, if he ever added those 3 things i listed to this FOF engine, i would soil every pair of underwear I have.

sovereignstar · 01-06-2005, 11:04 PM

Time managment and the end-of-game logic still needs a good deal of work IMO.

Suicane75 · 01-06-2005, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

Time managment and the end-of-game logic still needs a good deal of work IMO.

True. But while I havnt done alot of testing in that area, i would hazzard a guess that gameplanning can alleviate some of that. I would be interested to see what the results would be if Jim added a "2 minutes In The Half" section to the gameplanning area of the game. I wonder if by doing that the problem could be self medicated so to speak. But alas I have no idea if adding that function would easier or harder than tweaking the AI itself.

gstelmack · 01-07-2005, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suicane75

True. But while I havnt done alot of testing in that area, i would hazzard a guess that gameplanning can alleviate some of that. I would be interested to see what the results would be if Jim added a "2 minutes In The Half" section to the gameplanning area of the game. I wonder if by doing that the problem could be self medicated so to speak. But alas I have no idea if adding that function would easier or harder than tweaking the AI itself.

It's very easy for you to do a "2 minutes in the Game" bit. Just take the 4th quarter ones and adjust the values at the top. I've already adjusted these to my liking; 8 minutes left is a LONG time, so I've adjusted them down to less time left in the game before I switch modes. My team started doing a much better job of grinding out the clock when I did this.

Suicane75 · 01-07-2005, 12:42 PM

Holy crap. Ive played this game for a year and never realized you could change that setting down. I feel like a total dumb dumb.

Maple Leafs · 01-07-2005, 12:48 PM

But even if you fix the end-of-half AI for your own team, you still have to deal with the CPU team making bad decisions, which is just as bad from the realism perspective.

JonInMiddleGA · 01-07-2005, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstelmack

It's very easy for you to do a "2 minutes in the Game" bit. Just take the 4th quarter ones and adjust the values at the top.

Huh? Wha? That's adjustable?
Learn something new everyday I guess.
Thx.

JonInMiddleGA · 01-07-2005, 01:27 PM

To the original question, I'll answer in the generic (not Puresim specific) ... if the AI still has glaring weaknesses or issues, then I'll always say it gets the first attention.
Customization is well, fine, and good, but really only means anything to me if the core of the game is solid in the first place.

01-07-2005, 12:48 PM	#8
Maple Leafs Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2002	But even if you fix the end-of-half AI for your own team, you still have to deal with the CPU team making bad decisions, which is just as bad from the realism perspective. __________________ Down Goes Brown: Toronto Maple Leafs Humor and Analysis

01-07-2005, 01:27 PM	#10
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	To the original question, I'll answer in the generic (not Puresim specific) ... if the AI still has glaring weaknesses or issues, then I'll always say it gets the first attention. Customization is well, fine, and good, but really only means anything to me if the core of the game is solid in the first place. __________________ "I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis

01-06-2005, 10:28 PM	#2
sovereignstar Pro Starter Join Date: Feb 2004	I think FOF is a perfect example of the way that I feel. Customization comes second.

01-06-2005, 11:00 PM	#3
Suicane75 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NJ	I would personaly like to know how much more in depth the coding would be if Jim were to incorporate some customization into the game. I think variable league size and allignment, with the ability to add teams, or at the least have a strict expansion schedule would pretty much put the cherry on the cake that is FOF. That said I think Jim has taken the right approach, move the game as far as you can under the hood before adding the bells and whistles. But man, if he ever added those 3 things i listed to this FOF engine, i would soil every pair of underwear I have.

01-06-2005, 11:04 PM	#4
sovereignstar Pro Starter Join Date: Feb 2004	Time managment and the end-of-game logic still needs a good deal of work IMO.

01-07-2005, 12:42 PM	#7
Suicane75 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NJ	Holy crap. Ive played this game for a year and never realized you could change that setting down. I feel like a total dumb dumb.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)