Video demonstrating a flaw in the ai

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

I should've paid attention before i replied the first time. Did you mean to quote me? What in my post was ever about anything you said, anyway? Unless you mean the whole "reading and reacting" thing.

You and others want to talk about what players are doing, should be doing, etc. You mention there was "nothing wrong" in that video. There is plenty wrong. You're implying that the safety was actually reading the play as a human would read it, and that is wrong. Read what I've written, watch the video, and understand that the safety is simply playing based on the play called. The CPU knows the play called. It is not reacting to the play post-snap.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

You and others want to talk about what players are doing, should be doing, etc. You mention there was "nothing wrong" in that video. There is plenty wrong. You're implying that the safety was actually reading the play as a human would read it, and that is wrong. Read what I've written, watch the video, and understand that the safety is simply playing based on the play called. The CPU knows the play called. It is not reacting to the play post-snap.

Did the safety end up where he belonged? That is the only thing that matters to me.

You say that the cpu players just know the play, but they don't see the offensive players. If that was true, how can they cover man-to-man? I asked that before, but didn't get an answer.

What is wrong with the video from a football standpoint, defensively? Not one thing.

To me, the biggest AI problem in the video is the fact that the wing doesn't block the strong safety. That is the fundamentally wrong thing, because the he should account for the force in the outside zone play.

[Broncos86]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

Did the safety end up where he belonged? That is the only thing that matters to me.

The safety is not properly playing the run. He was in coverage, not a blitz. On run plays, he clearly blitzes with no hesitation.

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

You say that the cpu players just know the play, but they don't see the offensive players. If that was true, how can they cover man-to-man? I asked that before, but didn't get an answer.

You're implying incorrectly what I have said. Please re-read what I have said. Players do not have eyes that visibly see what's in front of them. Each player can see everything. A player such as a safety is not watching the offensive line, the ball carrier, or the TE and reacting. Cornerbacks do not watch their WR for body language. They simply understand underlying change of direction. How the offensive line moves has no bearing on that safety in how he plays other than attempting to avoid potential blocks. This is all.

Quote:

What is wrong with the video from a football standpoint, defensively? Not one thing.

This is inaccurate. From a football standpoint, a safety in zone coverage should not break to the running back the moment the ball is snapped. Any human being would need some time to make proper reads before deciding the play was a run and then acting upon it. We also see zero error. In every single instance, the safety is correctly playing. Before the hand off is made, the safety has properly "decided" what the play is and plays accordingly. At no point is there an opportunity for that safety to be fooled.

Quote:

To me, the biggest AI problem in the video is the fact that the wing doesn't block the strong safety. That is the fundamentally wrong thing, because the he should account for the force in the outside zone play.

This is beside the point, because the point is that the CPU is not reading and reacting. The CPU understands the play called before the snap.

[goalieump413]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

...This is inaccurate. From a football standpoint, a safety in zone coverage should not break to the running back the moment the ball is snapped. Any human being would need some time to make proper reads before deciding the play was a run and then acting upon it. We also see zero error. In every single instance, the safety is correctly playing. Before the hand off is made, the safety has properly "decided" what the play is and plays accordingly. At no point is there an opportunity for that safety to be fooled...

This is the underlying issue I have with the psychic nature of CPU defense this year. Either a defensive play is somehow linked to every play on offense (adjusted for down and distance, etc) or only a defensive formation is called and when the ball is snapped, all defenders react perfectly to the play.

If you see the vid again, you can't even say the safety has a zone assignment, as there's no first step backwards shown, as there would be in other plays. He just gets into position and drives to where the ball carrier should be when the ball is snapped. It's like the safety is seeing the play art on some sort of HUD in his helmet.

[Th3Rush22]

Quote: Originally Posted by TomBrady

He is complaining for absolute no reason, and here is why: First play: The safety sees that the tight end is engage a block, and of course knows that it's a running play. Nothing wrong with that. When he changes to PA the tight end does not engage a block, but runs a route, and therefore the safety goes in to zone coverage. When he flips the run it's really easy to read what way the running back will run. A count would work perfectly here, just like IRL. Again the tight end is the reason that he knows it's a running play. People really need to stop complaining for no reason. Most safeties/linebackers in college football would make these reads fairly easy.

Yep I just can't stand the cb running a better rout that the receiver, but if I was that safety I could tell by the o line that it was a run or a pass on the run they shoot out and on the pass they take a step back

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Broncos86

The safety is not properly playing the run. He was in coverage, not a blitz. On run plays, he clearly blitzes with no hesitation. You're implying incorrectly what I have said. Please re-read what I have said. Players do not have eyes that visibly see what's in front of them. Each player can see everything. A player such as a safety is not watching the offensive line, the ball carrier, or the TE and reacting. Cornerbacks do not watch their WR for body language. They simply understand underlying change of direction. How the offensive line moves has no bearing on that safety in how he plays other than attempting to avoid potential blocks. This is all. This is inaccurate. From a football standpoint, a safety in zone coverage should not break to the running back the moment the ball is snapped. Any human being would need some time to make proper reads before deciding the play was a run and then acting upon it. We also see zero error. In every single instance, the safety is correctly playing. Before the hand off is made, the safety has properly "decided" what the play is and plays accordingly. At no point is there an opportunity for that safety to be fooled. This is beside the point, because the point is that the CPU is not reading and reacting. The CPU understands the play called before the snap.

No, it's not inaccurate. I am not going to post my resume here, but I can confidently say that the flat defender (be he a safety, lb, dl, or squatted corner) will and should always anticipate the run first in a good defense. IMO, the safety doesn't run forward simultaneous with the snap. It's one of the first skills taught in defending the run, reacting to the action of the #2 receiver. Again, the fact that the safety is a zone player is not the qualifying factor. It's the fact that he's a flat player that's important. If he was a half-field or post player, I'd agree with you, but he wasn't.

I don't know if each players actions are tied into "reading" a key, or if all are programmed to act a certain way based on the offensive play that is being ran and frankly, for the last time, I don't care. I only care if it is represented in a realistic nature, and imo, it is. You, and certainly everyone else is entitled to their own opinion.

I do, however, know football. There is nothing that played out in the video that is vastly different then what you would see watching any higher-level football game, aside from the terrible tackle attempt by the safety and the incorrect blocking.

It's an uniformed example in the first video, but the thing is, the theory behind it may be correct. It was just a poor choice of offensive and defensive schemes to illustrate the theory, when one certainly could've been made if it really was a problem. The maker of the video should've chosen a different play, from a different formation against a different defense to prove his point.

[PowerofRed25]

By the logic of some people in this thread, play action plays with a delayed route by the TE should be a money play. The TE is clearly blocking and there is run action, so a player "keying" what the TE does would see him block, see the QB and HB engaging in a handoff and crash hard on that.

But what really happens?

He sits in place and waits for the TE to release, knowing full well he'll release his block and leak into the flat and it is somehow covered perfectly. Every time.

There are no defensive reads, there are no defensive tendencies and there are no defensive reactions to play fakes. Any attempt to argue otherwise is futile because it is simply not true.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by goalieump413

This is the underlying issue I have with the psychic nature of CPU defense this year. Either a defensive play is somehow linked to every play on offense (adjusted for down and distance, etc) or only a defensive formation is called and when the ball is snapped, all defenders react perfectly to the play. If you see the vid again, you can't even say the safety has a zone assignment, as there's no first step backwards shown, as there would be in other plays. He just gets into position and drives to where the ball carrier should be when the ball is snapped. It's like the safety is seeing the play art on some sort of HUD in his helmet.

Why would he back up? Who can attack him? He has the FLATS, not a deep zone. If the TE released and ran down the hash, would he have to carry him? NO! Flat players DO NOT back up on the snap. Would you expect the WLB to backup on the snap? He has the flats to his side, but we all know (or should know) that LB's NEVER back up on the snap. What does the fact that he's labeled as a safety have to do with it?