Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

[countryboy]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

Same defense every post. It doesn't happen every game. I won a game 7-1. Then lost a game 4-3. Then the 6-0 comeback happened. Is there malicious code? Probably not. What I'm saying is the Cpu gets a ridiculous and unrealistic boost on higher levels. Can it be attributed to baseball being baseball? Sure. Is it realistic? Not the way the game has it play out.

What I'm getting at is that imo there is no unrealistic boost to the CPU on higher levels. If there is some type of code that exists or boost, something has to trigger it to happen. It cannot just be random.

You call it a defense, I call it trying to get a discussion amongst those seeing it as common occurrences in the games in which comebacks occur, in an attempt to deteine the issue

[Padgoi]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

What I'm getting at is that imo there is no unrealistic boost to the CPU on higher levels. If there is some type of code that exists or boost, something has to trigger it to happen. It cannot just be random.



You call it a defense, I call it trying to get a discussion amongst those seeing it as common occurrences in the games in which comebacks occur, in an attempt to deteine the issue

Oh, I agree, I don't think it's random at all. Something clearly is triggering this boost. The question is why and why would this boost be coded into the game?

[countryboy]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

Oh, I agree, I don't think it's random at all. Something clearly is triggering this boost. The question is why and why would this boost be coded into the game?

That is what I'm trying to get people to discuss. Sharing the stories shows people are seeing it but finding common factors in game would help find a solution.


Skill level?
Quick counts on/off?
Certain type of hit?
Bad call by ump?

Things of this nature

[Padgoi]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

I'm on Hall of Fame.
Quick Counts off.
Variable calls off.
Close plays on.

I've noticed these rallies are usually started by a computer generated error to start an inning, but I've also seen the boost kick in during the 5th and 8th innings usually. I think the actual inning may be the factor.

[Trequartist]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

I have this issue a lot as well.

Hall of Fame Hitting/Legend Pitching
Quick Counts Off
Variable Strike Zone OFF
Close Plays On

I've attached a video I took of a game where Greinke really didn't have his good stuff but I was slogging through it until the dam broke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXp9qARtd9I

[nomo17k]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

I think pitching interface is also important to note.

For one I tend to use interfaces which tend to be less accurate (Classic, Pulse), which I like because they replicate the difficulty of commanding pitches in real life and help me generate realistic amount of walks. But not being able to execute pitches the way I intend makes it difficult to pitch to CPU on higher difficulties (HoF and Leg).

[countryboy]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

I'm on Hall of Fame.
Quick Counts off.
Variable calls off.
Close plays on.

I've noticed these rallies are usually started by a computer generated error to start an inning, but I've also seen the boost kick in during the 5th and 8th innings usually. I think the actual inning may be the factor.

When you say inning do you mean an oddity typically happens in these two innings?

If so anyone seeing it happen during the 5th and 8th inning?

[Trequartist]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

When you say inning do you mean an oddity typically happens in these two innings?

If so anyone seeing it happen during the 5th and 8th inning?

I haven't been aware of the 5th and 8th inning hypothesis until now, I'll start monitoring. I find that most often these things happen in the half inning immediately after I score 1 or 2.

[countryboy]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

This is positive discussion. Let's please keep it going.

[tessl]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

Every time I start to think there's a comeback code or something, I find times that I was impatient or am just having a bad game with all the breaks going the other way.

HOWEVER! That's not to say there isn't faulty code that screws you over from time to time. I just believe it's coincidental whether it makes you win or lose. And in a game where every moment and break counts, it can be an emotional experience when these things occur.

So when you're infielder fans/doesn't even try on what seems to be a field-able grounder or short pop up, or when your opponent hits multiple line drives down the line in a row that all appear like the exact same type of hit with the exact same path, or when your fielder pats his glove 7 times before making what was an easy throw, now difficult, or makes a slow pickup of the ball allowing a baserunner to go from 1st to 3rd, it's just the code man. It's non-discriminative coding that makes a beautiful game incredibly frustrating from time to time, but baseball can be a cruel sport anyway.

The faultiest thing I've seen are these insane suicide squeeze attempts. I just lost back to back games from this insanity. Every time I get stuck in a bases loaded situation in the 9th I switch the infield to Bunt Defense and the cleanup hitter still lays down a perfect squeeze attempt to tie. Even had it happen two hitters in a row. One to tie, the next to win it. It was the Dodgers 4 and 5 guys. I've gotten to the point where I'm just hitting the batter and conceding defeat when I get in this jam because I can't stand to see it happen again. I can agree that this has killed my enjoyment. But all the other occasions are live-able because I still have some control over the outcome at the end of the day.

Pitchout.
---------

[Knight165]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

This is positive discussion. Let's please keep it going.

Except you guys are going down the wrong path.
There are no triggers for any boosts...and there is certainly nothing inning or score related to the outcome of plays.
I'm fairly certain that Brian stated that the engine doesn't even know the score of the game on each pitch(not the AI code for in game decision making...the actual sim engine...(not just simmed games....played games as well)

M.K.
Knight165

[countryboy]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

Except you guys are going down the wrong path.
There are no triggers for any boosts...and there is certainly nothing inning or score related to the outcome of plays.
I'm fairly certain that Brian stated that the engine doesn't even know the score of the game on each pitch(not the AI code for in game decision making...the actual sim engine...(not just simmed games....played games as well)

M.K.
Knight165

I don't believe there is a boost or rubber band AI myself. But others are seeing it. So instead of the non productive arguing between the two camps, I thought that I would engage in the idea of getting those who are seeing it to compare instances and see if they can find a common factor. It beats arguing back and forth.

Just because I don't believe it's there or think it happens doesn't mean there isn't something there or some validity to their experiences. I didn't see the bunting issue that others saw but it was obviously an issue to the extent the devs felt it needed patching.

If we continue to argue whether it exists or not we are never going to solve anything. It's already proven not to work so why not try something else?

[Padgoi]

Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

Except you guys are going down the wrong path.

There are no triggers for any boosts...and there is certainly nothing inning or score related to the outcome of plays.

I'm fairly certain that Brian stated that the engine doesn't even know the score of the game on each pitch(not the AI code for in game decision making...the actual sim engine...(not just simmed games....played games as well)



M.K.

Knight165

You see, and this right here ISN'T constructive. If you don't agree, you don't agree. I go by what I experience, not by what someone tells me to experience. That video posted last page hurt my soul because I've seen things like that so much. And what started it? A walk, then an infield single, then a computer generated error. That right there is NOT the computer getting a boost, it's the user having their ratings downgraded to allow for nonsense to happen and it's simply not real baseball any way you slice it. Let us go down our own path and you can go down yours.

[NCAAFootballFreak]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

I missed the post-game interview, but did John Farrell blame yesterday's Red Sox loss on the giant rubber band at Globe Life Park?

I bet the Red Sox really felt like the Ranger AI cheated.

[nomo17k]

Re: Rubberbanding AI is killing my enjoyment

There are no boosts that get triggered by situations, but depending on the way you look at it, you could of course argue that when you bring in a new pitcher (which tends to be in a late inning), there is always a potential of you playing with a pitcher of lesser quality in terms of attribute ratings.

It's been said energy is the biggest factor affecting the overall effectiveness of a pitcher (followed by confidence), so as you go deeper with your starting pitcher, his overall effectiveness declines, which from another side of view can be considered a rating boost to the opposing side.

When you relieve him, then you are effectively replacing a starting pitcher who is usually an overall better pitcher when fully rested against a reliever who is overall an inferior pitcher even when fully rested. Effectively, you are often making a trade off between an ineffective pitcher with an even more ineffective pitcher.

In that sense, it is not entirely wrong to say that the opposing team is getting a rating boost whenever you pitch with a slightly more ineffective pitcher. Except that rating boost is just a natural consequence of managing bullpen, and not the game forcing certain outcomes.