Warping and speed boosts visualized

[Kentaurus]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

You are using the word “hard” in an absolute sense. I was using it in a relative sense- as in COMPARED to 0 speed it is much harder to see. Regardless, I don’t see it all that much, maybe a couple times per game, which makes me wonder what kind of difficulty, sliders and ratings adjustments you play on.

The issue is this brings many things to light. For example it proves why man coverage is nearly worthless, because even a slowish WR with high RTE will become faster than the CB when he makes a break, getting him open. (It certainly looks to me like RTE takes over for SPD,AGI,ACC during a break).

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kentaurus

The issue is this brings many things to light. For example it proves why man coverage is nearly worthless, because even a slowish WR with high RTE will become faster than the CB when he makes a break, getting him open. (It certainly looks to me like RTE takes over for SPD,AGI,ACC during a break).

I mean if we want to keep digging we'll eventually find out that there is no actual randomness at all in the game, because there isn't actual randomness in code at all and never has been. We'll find out that awareness is just a math equation governed by the aforementioned pseudo-randomness, and that the only randomness that exists in the game comes from the user. We'll find out that the entire thing is mechanical and deterministic, entirely scripted, with just such a large array of paths to go down that our puny human brains can't intuitively grasp them.


So how would you choose to incorporate man coverage on one hand, while still allowing for WR's to have good route running ratings?

I imagine you'd do something like this:

Define parameters for man coverage and route running.

Allow for some sort of time delay between the action of the WR and the action of the DB that is dependent upon those parameters (and perhaps a pseudo-random function). This time delay could be either literally a time delay or instead having the less highly rated of the two take a more curved path to the point of attack while having the more highly rated take a straighter path. Anything that results in a longer arrival time for the player with the worse rating (or a shorter reaction time or the DB).

Allow for other factors to determine how quickly the DB gets there (say, an awareness rating, speed/agility/acceleration, a play recognition rating, a pursuit rating, whatever).

Do you get where I'm going with this? There are only so many algorithms you can create to attempt to simulate route running versus man coverage.


EDIT
But based on what was in the parenthesis in your response, it sounds to me like your problem is with the BALANCE of the ratings (i.e. how they are applied).

[YaBarber]

So what’s wrong with making players who can’t guard well have slower reaction time or poor angles..? I’d much rather have a WR who is better than a CB get open because of that reason. As it is now anybody that runs a slant vs man gets position unless the CB does that weird back to the ball follow the WR perfectly in front with psychic knowledge.

Wouldn’t you rather see actual reads and reactions over literally the exact same animations play out every single play? If you put a 50spd 40rte OL at WR and make him run a corner route against a 99spd 99mcv CB and throw the corner at the perfect timing of the speed burst break the OL will burn that CB 9/10 times. Why would anybody want that in an NFL simulation?

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by YaBarber

So what’s wrong with making players who can’t guard well have slower reaction time or poor angles..? I’d much rather have a WR who is better than a CB get open because of that reason. As it is now anybody that runs a slant vs man gets position unless the CB does that weird back to the ball follow the WR perfectly in front with psychic knowledge. Wouldn’t you rather see actual reads and reactions over literally the exact same animations play out every single play? If you put a 50spd 40rte OL at WR and make him run a corner route against a 99spd 99mcv CB and throw the corner at the perfect timing of the speed burst break the OL will burn that CB 9/10 times. Why would anybody want that in an NFL simulation?

Ideally, yes.

It’s a matter of implementation.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

I mean if we want to keep digging we'll eventually find out that there is no actual randomness at all in the game, because there isn't actual randomness in code at all and never has been. We'll find out that awareness is just a math equation governed by the aforementioned pseudo-randomness, and that the only randomness that exists in the game comes from the user.

There is a randomness in software. Many programming languages have some kind of random reserved word/verb that generates random values.

[Darth Aegis]

I like knowing how games tick to a degree, but sometimes knowing to much is a bad thing imo. It basically takes the fun out of things, sometimes not knowing is better. Its like when you have a hero and you finally get to meet them in person and they just never live up to the image you had in your head. Sometimes its best to not pull the curtain back lol

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

There is a randomness in software. Many programming languages have some kind of random reserved word/verb that generates random values.

Sorry, that is incorrect. There is no such thing as true randomness in code. Anywhere. Not until we get quantum computers.

From MIT:

https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/a...random-number/

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

Sorry, that is incorrect. There is no such thing as true randomness in code. Anywhere. Not until we get quantum computers. From MIT: https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/a...random-number/

To elaborate, what you see in games is called psuedo-randomness.

Computers as they function today are fully deterministic. The only source of randomness possible is from user input. Fortunately, computers are capable of such complexity that they can APPEAR random. But in truth you could in theory predict anything they output (assuming randomness from user input doesn’t affect the result).