Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Paydirt] Re: 71CIN vs. 71CLE

Expand Messages
  • August Helmbright
    The PC game normally does a very good job, in my experience. I find it even more challenging to play one team against another using a customized solitaire game
    Message 1 of 20 , Jul 18 11:41 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      The PC game normally does a very good job, in my
      experience. I find it even more challenging to play
      one team against another using a customized solitaire
      game plan (see the template with sample Michigan 1947
      team with game plan in the BB group files), using the
      PC game to resolve plays.

      Matt will admit that there are a very few bugs in the
      PC game - it sometimes spots the ball in the wrong
      place after some penalties, and there can be some
      oddities that creep in with kickoffs and short returns
      (in the Paydirt game only). Nevertheless, this game is
      incredible in terms of the amount of coding required
      and the AI involved, as you can tell if you actually
      try to parse each play into every separate phase
      including final resolution.


      --- Chris Fry <cfryface@...> wrote:

      > Wow! I had no idea it did all that! Very cool. I
      > love to play where it's just chart vs. chart. I
      > will have to put more time into playing the pc game.
      > Thanks!
      >
      > Chris
      >
      > mfloray63 <sundancekid63@...> wrote:
      > --- In Paydirt@yahoogroups.com, Chris Fry
      > <cfryface@y...> wrote:
      > > Matt, I thought you had explained this, but can't
      > find it
      > anywhere, so pardon me if this is a stupid
      > question...
      > >
      > > How does the CPU call plays? Is it completely
      > random?
      > >
      > > I thought defense was random, but offense seems to
      > use
      > some "smarts". Does it stay away from, for example,
      > Florida's (BB
      > set 1) bootleg?
      > >
      > > Thanks
      > > Chris
      >
      > The CPU should, in theory, shy away from plays that
      > don't work
      > well. The play calling should be more random early
      > on, but then get
      > better as the game progresses.
      >
      > If the team throws a bunch of INT's, the CPU should
      > go to the run.
      > If it fumbles a bunch of times, it should go to the
      > pass.
      >
      > I am not sure, but I think it gets confused at
      > times. I have seen
      > it continue to pass even after throwing 5 INT's.
      > This could be
      > because the value of the gains it is getting are
      > worth more than the
      > negative impact of throwing an INT. Or, it could be
      > that the
      > running game is not functioning, either because of a
      > poor rushing
      > attack on the chart or because the opponent has rock
      > solid run
      > defense or both.
      >
      > In any event, it measures the value of
      > gains/losses/turnovers/penalties/sacks and so forth
      > to get an idea
      > of what play to run next.
      >
      > At this point in time it seems to function pretty
      > well.
      >
      > If someone could show substantial documented proof
      > that it was doing
      > something extremely poorly, I would be more than
      > happy to change the
      > programming. I want it to provide a good opponent
      > for those that
      > can't find a human to play against!
      >
      > Using a specific game as an example, the '71 Eagle /
      > Bengal game
      > would be good.
      >
      > The Eagle passing game had 14 completions in 31
      > attempts with 4
      > INT's for 233 yards and they were sacked 5 times for
      > 58 yards in
      > losses. That is 7.5 yards for each time the ball
      > went into the air
      > or 4.86 yards for every time they called a pass
      > play. Terrible
      > numbers, yet 31 attempts would show the CPU did not
      > shy away from
      > the pass. So, did the CPU get confused? Maybe, but
      > then take a
      > look at the Eagle running game. They had 12 rushes
      > for 4 yards.
      > Yes, that is correct, 4 yards. Or 0.33 yards per
      > carry and they
      > fumbled 1 time in those 12 attempts. Not
      > surprisingly, the CPU kept
      > putting the ball in the air.
      >
      > On the turnover issue, they fumbled 1 time in every
      > 12 rushes and
      > threw an INT 1 time in every 9 passes. Not a huge
      > difference and
      > the passing gains were more than enough to offset
      > that.
      >
      > Next issue, was the game malfunctioning because the
      > Eagles only ran
      > the ball 12 times? I doubt it because the CPU was
      > controlling both
      > teams and the Bengals ran the ball 46 times. The
      > difference is,
      > where the Eagles were getting 0.33 per rush, the
      > Bengals were
      > picking up 4.2 per carry. The Bengals fumbled 1
      > time in 46 carries
      > and had 0 INT's in 21 attempts. Again, not a huge
      > difference in
      > values there. They were not sacked. They had 105
      > yards on 11 of 21
      > passing or 5.0 per attempt.
      >
      > Overall, and I admit to heavy bias, I think the CPU
      > did as well as
      > could be expected for both teams. Or perhaps it did
      > poorly for both
      > teams. Either way, both teams had the same fair
      > unbiased treatment,
      > which is what I am after as I play these CPU v CPU
      > games.
      >
      > Matt
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      > Visit your group "Paydirt" on the web.
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
      > to:
      > Paydirt-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
      > Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Do you Yahoo!?
      > Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.




      ____________________________________________________
      Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
      http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
    • werderwayne
      ... One thing that always got me about Paydirt was that you can see what plays you stink at before you try it. I don t think you d know that well through
      Message 2 of 20 , Jul 18 10:26 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In Paydirt@yahoogroups.com, "mfloray63" <sundancekid63@s...> wrote:
        > --- In Paydirt@yahoogroups.com, Chris Fry <cfryface@y...> wrote:
        > > Matt, I thought you had explained this, but can't find it
        > anywhere, so pardon me if this is a stupid question...
        > >
        > > How does the CPU call plays? Is it completely random?
        > >
        > > I thought defense was random, but offense seems to use
        > some "smarts". Does it stay away from, for example, Florida's (BB
        > set 1) bootleg?
        > >
        > > Thanks
        > > Chris
        >

        One thing that always got me about Paydirt was that you can see what
        plays you stink at before you try it. I don't think you'd know that
        well through practice that you can't run a bootleg pass to save your
        life. So maybe Matt's nethod is MORE realistic.

        Was I praising Matt? EEP! Must be FRAUD! Yeah, that's it...Matt's
        paying me off!

        -WW
      • Chris Fry
        Always my problem when playing solitaire. I end up calling just a couple of plays and it ends up being more unrealistic. I played quite a bit of the pc game
        Message 3 of 20 , Jul 19 4:45 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Always my problem when playing solitaire.  I end up calling just a couple of plays and it ends up being more unrealistic.  I played quite a bit of the pc game last night, cpu vs. cpu.  I have to say, it was a great way to compare charts, and I had some really great games.  It was not perfect, but it was consistent.


          werderwayne <ismith@...> wrote:
          --- In Paydirt@yahoogroups.com, "mfloray63" <sundancekid63@s...> wrote:
          > --- In Paydirt@yahoogroups.com, Chris Fry <cfryface@y...> wrote:
          > > Matt, I thought you had explained this, but can't find it
          > anywhere, so pardon me if this is a stupid question...
          > > 
          > > How does the CPU call plays?  Is it completely random?
          > > 
          > > I thought defense was random, but offense seems to use
          > some "smarts".  Does it stay away from, for example, Florida's (BB
          > set 1) bootleg?
          > > 
          > > Thanks
          > > Chris
          >

          One thing that always got me about Paydirt was that you can see what
          plays you stink at before you try it.  I don't think you'd know that
          well through practice that you can't run a bootleg pass to save your
          life.  So maybe Matt's nethod is MORE realistic.

          Was I praising Matt?  EEP!  Must be FRAUD!  Yeah, that's it...Matt's
          paying me off!

          -WW



          Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.