Why is the playcalling AI so bad?

[fistofrage]

Quote: Originally Posted by MattSharp

Honestly, I have no idea how the source code for NCAA works, but I am a software developer and I would think playcalling AI would be one of the easier places to do some obvious stuff. Why are all these teams with slow QBs continually trying to run the option? Why do they mismanage the clock so much late in the game? I would love to hear what kind of things the AI actually looks at when picking plays. Supposedly the AI is smart enough to adjust if you keep picking the same play over and over again, but it's not smart enough to know that a QB with 70 SPD is not going to be able to outrun defenses?

Because the game tester that looked like Harry Potter was busy testing the Mascot Barrel rolls and side flips. I am sure that all they were looking at was that the players lined up and did indeed move when the ball was snapped. Testing they viability of each play in the playbook was never remotely considered.

[mercalnd]

Quote: Originally Posted by Undefeated

Go in and put two teams at 100% run, 0% aggressive on offense; then put both teams at 100% run, 100% aggressive on defense. Play the two teams against each other in CPU vs. CPU mode. You'll see exactly how much effect those sliders have on the CPU's playcalling. Those sliders are for simmed games.

1)The run/pass ratio slider at 100% means 100% pass, not 100% run. It's moved to the left (towards 0) to favor the run.

2)Some guy by the name of Hookemhorns over at NCAAStartegies figured out, with testing to back it up both in terms of played games and simmed games, that the run/pass ratio slider is tied to how the CPU uses its playbook rather than a straight up % of pass VS run plays. He then came up with numbers for the ratio slider that give fairly accurate results:

http://www.ncaastrategies.com/utopia...&postcount=158

Basically what he found is that the % on the run/pass sliders is factored in the playcalling but so is the % of run and pass playsin the playbook. So setting it to 50% should not necessarily result in 50% passing and 50% running calls by the CPU.

[ftball11]

Quote: Originally Posted by m00d

This is a completely false statement. The coach strategy slider effects how the cpu calls the game. There are several threads devoted to this in the slider forum, in fact the top thread is a sticky.

Sorry but I have to disagree. Even if the %’s on the sliders only effect what plays the playbook is loaded with, as mercalnd stated, you still can’t account for the AI abandoning a team’s normal tendencies or strengths. I mean, if 65% of your playbook is loaded with running plays, it is kind of obvious what your game plan is.

Take Georgia Tech as an example. When Paul Johnson came over from Navy, he didn’t abandon the triple option. In fact, against Jacksonville State Thursday Night, GT ran the ball 46 times and threw the ball 15 times. For a ratio of 75% run and 25% pass, out of 61 plays. This is typical for a Paul Johnson team and probably fairly accurate for the GT Playbook.

Yes there are times, in a game, where coaches (and the AI should) adjust their game plan. I mean, if you are in the 4th Quarter, down by 7 and starting on your own 35 (big kick off returns in ’09), with 1:20 left on the clock; chances are your not going to try and march down the field on the ground – even if your team has a “run heavy” offense.

But I have played many games against the comp, where my opposition had…say…the #3 rushing offense in the nation and the #45 passing offense in the nation, only to have the AI throw the ball 70% of the time. Of course, I won because the AI didn’t play to that team’s strength.

All I am saying is the AI’s play-calling in NCAA has never depicted the true tendencies of any team. It seems the AI calls a game with no regard for the team it is controlling or the statistical success that team has had during a season. This makes the AI very predictable, and often leaves me feeling like I am playing against the same opponent every game.

I think if EA would fix this problem, the game would take on a new challenge because you would have to adjust your style of play, especially on defense, against each team.