 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Football Game & Site Questions » PBP requests
Yyggyty
Substitutions -- if subs are listed in the pbp when they come in we all can debug that aspect of the game easier. Personally, I do a lot of subbing, and this would increase my enjoyment and ease of play a lot.
Tackles -- tackles listed in the pbp will help us realize who's actually doing the work on defense, and help us plan better.
Blocks/Missed Blocks -- same as tackles, but helps us figure out who is doing the job on offense.
Execution -- we have QB 'poor throws' but what if another position player blows a play because of poor execution and being in the wrong place at the wrong time? What about being in the exact right place at the right time? Again, this will help us figure out who's actually performing up to expectations. You already have some of these instances coded but more would add enjoyment to the game.
Secondary receiver -- if the QB has to throw to secondary receivers because of coverage, that would be a help to both offense and defense.
Scrambling -- if the QB (or anyone behind the scrimmage line) avoids a tackle to continue the play, that would also be a help in coaching and imagining the game.
Thank you for a great game!
PBP requests
March 08, 2011 at 10:49AM View BBCode
Great game! I have a couple of play-by-play requests that you might have in store for us, but I figured I'd ask anyway. Having written dialogue and baseball pbp for computer games I realize that while pbp writing is sensitive and can get repititious and boring if over0used, it can also add a lot of depth to the imagination of the human reading it. Part of kleeping it 'new' is to have a wide range of diverse pbp actions.Substitutions -- if subs are listed in the pbp when they come in we all can debug that aspect of the game easier. Personally, I do a lot of subbing, and this would increase my enjoyment and ease of play a lot.
Tackles -- tackles listed in the pbp will help us realize who's actually doing the work on defense, and help us plan better.
Blocks/Missed Blocks -- same as tackles, but helps us figure out who is doing the job on offense.
Execution -- we have QB 'poor throws' but what if another position player blows a play because of poor execution and being in the wrong place at the wrong time? What about being in the exact right place at the right time? Again, this will help us figure out who's actually performing up to expectations. You already have some of these instances coded but more would add enjoyment to the game.
Secondary receiver -- if the QB has to throw to secondary receivers because of coverage, that would be a help to both offense and defense.
Scrambling -- if the QB (or anyone behind the scrimmage line) avoids a tackle to continue the play, that would also be a help in coaching and imagining the game.
Thank you for a great game!
Admin
As far as the play-by-play goes, I agree and am trying to add more detail. Tackles are currently not listed for the same reason that there are no defensive stats yet; once I solve one, I'll be able to solve the other.
Specifying that the QB is not throwing to his primary receiver is a good idea.
As far as "repetitious". I don't have a problem with that; the play-by-play is meant to mimic more what is found in a newspaper box score rather than a an announcer play-by-play. I had originally considered trying to do it more in an "announcer" style, where you would get lines like "He's at the 30... the 20... the 10..." but some of the feedback I got early on was that even having important information like showing the quality of the hold on a field goal was too much information.
To keep the database size down, everything in the play-by-play comes from a master table of possible play-by-play responses, which has fields in it where Dynasty Vision data is plugged in. There are 149 possible sentences that can occur in the play-by-play at this point. Right now, any time you see a difference in wording, it means something; there are no places where I just pick "Which of these 3 ways to say "incomplete" do I want to use now" and just pick a random number. But you can see the trend with the wordings for "near" interceptions and dropped catches.
So more detail is always coming, but I'm perfectly happy to hear suggestions. At some point I'll probably have to offer people the option to turn off the extra detail like the baseball side has.
One thing I am exploring is detail related to your strategic decisions that only you can see, so whereas your opponent just sees you lining up for a punt, you might see an extra line such as "Your coach considers kicking a field goal but estimates the chance of success as only 42%".
--Chris
March 08, 2011 at 05:16PM View BBCode
Substitutions are a little tricky because of the way they are done, and because players can come in and out for a variety of reasons, i.e. going from a Pro Set to a Shotgun pulls out an RB and puts in a WR, but it's not really a "substitution". I'll look to see if there is a way to communicate this in a reasonable way; as I am writing this a potential solution's coming to me.As far as the play-by-play goes, I agree and am trying to add more detail. Tackles are currently not listed for the same reason that there are no defensive stats yet; once I solve one, I'll be able to solve the other.
Specifying that the QB is not throwing to his primary receiver is a good idea.
As far as "repetitious". I don't have a problem with that; the play-by-play is meant to mimic more what is found in a newspaper box score rather than a an announcer play-by-play. I had originally considered trying to do it more in an "announcer" style, where you would get lines like "He's at the 30... the 20... the 10..." but some of the feedback I got early on was that even having important information like showing the quality of the hold on a field goal was too much information.
To keep the database size down, everything in the play-by-play comes from a master table of possible play-by-play responses, which has fields in it where Dynasty Vision data is plugged in. There are 149 possible sentences that can occur in the play-by-play at this point. Right now, any time you see a difference in wording, it means something; there are no places where I just pick "Which of these 3 ways to say "incomplete" do I want to use now" and just pick a random number. But you can see the trend with the wordings for "near" interceptions and dropped catches.
So more detail is always coming, but I'm perfectly happy to hear suggestions. At some point I'll probably have to offer people the option to turn off the extra detail like the baseball side has.
One thing I am exploring is detail related to your strategic decisions that only you can see, so whereas your opponent just sees you lining up for a punt, you might see an extra line such as "Your coach considers kicking a field goal but estimates the chance of success as only 42%".
--Chris
Williams_482
March 08, 2011 at 09:48PM View BBCode
probably borderline impossible to actually program, but it would be nice to be be able to tell the coach on any given play that he did the wrong thing. ex: on 4th and in, up by one with two minutes remaining, he decided to try a field goal. this impossible hypothetical would give me the option of telling them, perhaps in a drop down menu or something, that that I wanted them to go for it in that exact situation, and if that comes up again, they will.
Yyggyty
March 08, 2011 at 11:24PM View BBCode
I like the way you have it set up. I did realize there was but one scripted line for each kind of result, and noticing those nuances can help make coaching decisions. I like as much information as i can get, but realize other people have different preferences. So, yeah, I'd think down the road you'd have to offer or More Or Less option. I really like the idea of seeing strategic decisions. And on a tangent from your example of a field goal . . . on the thread of long field goals it was mentioned the percentage of successful long field goals was similar to that of shorter field goals. I have no doubt of that, but there thinking on the fact that there are less long ones attempted -- and it is because, I posit, that knowing long field goals are a lower percentage chance, coaches base their decision on whether to field goal kick or punt or go for it based largely on weather and wind (outside of score, of course). In effect, there are fewer long field goal attempts because less are attempted in less than optimum conditions. it follows that those that are attempted are done so in optimal conditions, accounting for the success percentage mimicking that of shorter field goals (where weather and wind are given far less consideration). So where is that to game design? Perhaps weather and wind (and fatigue) can have a larger effect each yard distant from the goal posts (if it already doesn't).
Yyggyty
March 08, 2011 at 11:30PM View BBCode
oops, my "but there thinking" in the above, should be "but thinking" . . . I am not referring to "their" -- I originally had a different sentence but didn't delete all of it, evidently.
redcped
For instance, you could indicate what the defense was thinking, since that is hardly secret information. Lines could read things like:
"The Cowboys are in a zone."
"The Cowboys are playing up for the run."
"The Cowboys have six defensive backs in the game."
March 09, 2011 at 12:42AM View BBCode
I do think there's a place to show strategy in the PBP.For instance, you could indicate what the defense was thinking, since that is hardly secret information. Lines could read things like:
"The Cowboys are in a zone."
"The Cowboys are playing up for the run."
"The Cowboys have six defensive backs in the game."
Admin
They do. Field goals are a straight physics simulation for the most part. The trajectory is calculated through a moving air mass and the position of the ball is calculated as it crosses the plane of the end line. So the farther you are from the goal post the more the ball will move wit the air mass. Temperature variations add or subtract from the initial ball velocity off the foot, reducing range. But if an owner has his field goal preferences set to 75% or higher, then he will appear to have an average success rate of 75% or higher from anywhere on the field because he simply doesn't attempt those with lower chance of success (so his longer field goas are more likely to be wind-assisted).
--Chris
March 09, 2011 at 07:44PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Yyggyty
And on a tangent from your example of a field goal . . . on the thread of long field goals it was mentioned the percentage of successful long field goals was similar to that of shorter field goals. I have no doubt of that, but there thinking on the fact that there are less long ones attempted -- and it is because, I posit, that knowing long field goals are a lower percentage chance, coaches base their decision on whether to field goal kick or punt or go for it based largely on weather and wind (outside of score, of course). In effect, there are fewer long field goal attempts because less are attempted in less than optimum conditions. it follows that those that are attempted are done so in optimal conditions, accounting for the success percentage mimicking that of shorter field goals (where weather and wind are given far less consideration). So where is that to game design? Perhaps weather and wind (and fatigue) can have a larger effect each yard distant from the goal posts (if it already doesn't).
They do. Field goals are a straight physics simulation for the most part. The trajectory is calculated through a moving air mass and the position of the ball is calculated as it crosses the plane of the end line. So the farther you are from the goal post the more the ball will move wit the air mass. Temperature variations add or subtract from the initial ball velocity off the foot, reducing range. But if an owner has his field goal preferences set to 75% or higher, then he will appear to have an average success rate of 75% or higher from anywhere on the field because he simply doesn't attempt those with lower chance of success (so his longer field goas are more likely to be wind-assisted).
--Chris
Pages: 1