New Sticky Note

NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - Beta Chat

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 1:45 pm
(D) Adjust the distance penalties so that they make some kind of sense. QBs shouldn't be having a distance penalty applied for any pass <= 30 yards travel in the air. Right now, any slant pass (~15-20 yards travel) and swing pass (~20 yards travel) are getting distance penalties applied. Also, make those distance penalties scale with the QBs Arm Strength, so 100 Arm has the lowest penalty for a pass > 30 yards, but still enough to disrupt the play.

But distance penalties don't account for throwing into double coverage or missing wide open WRs that are in the FOV.
Last edited at 5/26/2018 1:47 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
5/26/2018 1:50 pm
setherick wrote:
(D) Adjust the distance penalties so that they make some kind of sense. QBs shouldn't be having a distance penalty applied for any pass <= 30 yards travel in the air. Right now, any slant pass (~15-20 yards travel) and swing pass (~20 yards travel) are getting distance penalties applied. Also, make those distance penalties scale with the QBs Arm Strength, so 100 Arm has the lowest penalty for a pass > 30 yards, but still enough to disrupt the play.

But distance penalties don't account for throwing into double coverage or missing wide open WRs that are in the FOV.


But, without that penalty, you get high completion rates and astronomical passing results. If we do fix the decision making process at this point, then the completion rates are going to go way up even more, and we're going to have 800-yard passing games again.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 1:53 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
(D) Adjust the distance penalties so that they make some kind of sense. QBs shouldn't be having a distance penalty applied for any pass <= 30 yards travel in the air. Right now, any slant pass (~15-20 yards travel) and swing pass (~20 yards travel) are getting distance penalties applied. Also, make those distance penalties scale with the QBs Arm Strength, so 100 Arm has the lowest penalty for a pass > 30 yards, but still enough to disrupt the play.

But distance penalties don't account for throwing into double coverage or missing wide open WRs that are in the FOV.


But, without that penalty, you get high completion rates and astronomical passing results. If we do fix the decision making process at this point, then the completion rates are going to go way up even more, and we're going to have 800-yard passing games again.


But that's kind of my point, and was my point months ago. The problem isn't with the QB and QBs shouldn't be hamstrung by "hold back" code. The problem is with the DBs who can't cover M2M.

The problem is two fold - player generation and code:

* DBs aren't athletic enough to cover downfield because of how they are generated.

* DBs aren't skilled enough to cover M2M because of how they are generated.

* DBs stop covering when a WRs route ends because they cover M2M based on a play and not the player. This is, I am sure, why they mirror WRs instead of playing the ball.

Zone is a whole other problem and not being solved any time soon.
Last edited at 5/26/2018 1:54 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By Ragnulf-le-maudit
5/26/2018 1:55 pm
For me, it's a

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
5/26/2018 1:55 pm
setherick wrote:
* DBs stop covering when a WRs route ends because they cover M2M based on a play and not the player. This is, I am sure, why they mirror WRs instead of playing the ball.


This is actually not true, they are unaware of the route and purely try to maintain a position relative to the direction the WR is running. I have seen what you're talking about, though, but have been unable to duplicate it in a sandbox to troubleshoot for some reason.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 1:55 pm
...cont'd from above.

Get rid of the hamstrings to QBs, and make M2M more effective, and we'll see game play more in line. DBs will still get beat deep, but if M2M is still slowing receivers, then it may be a wash.
Last edited at 5/26/2018 1:57 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 2:02 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
* DBs stop covering when a WRs route ends because they cover M2M based on a play and not the player. This is, I am sure, why they mirror WRs instead of playing the ball.


This is actually not true, they are unaware of the route and purely try to maintain a position relative to the direction the WR is running. I have seen what you're talking about, though, but have been unable to duplicate it in a sandbox to troubleshoot for some reason.


I see it on slant passes the most. The DB has tight coverage until the ball is in the air and then mirrors the WR. What I wonder is if the DB is actually acting like the WR in this case as if the roles are switched. What bothers me the most is when the trail DB mirrors a WR instead of going for the pass.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
5/26/2018 2:27 pm
setherick wrote:
I see it on slant passes the most. The DB has tight coverage until the ball is in the air and then mirrors the WR. What I wonder is if the DB is actually acting like the WR in this case as if the roles are switched. What bothers me the most is when the trail DB mirrors a WR instead of going for the pass.


He does change state to either pursue the ball or knock it down at that point, in either case though he is supposed to be heading toward the same spot that the WR is going to make the catch. I'll have to look more closely at it to see if I can identify what's going wrong.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 3:12 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
I see it on slant passes the most. The DB has tight coverage until the ball is in the air and then mirrors the WR. What I wonder is if the DB is actually acting like the WR in this case as if the roles are switched. What bothers me the most is when the trail DB mirrors a WR instead of going for the pass.


He does change state to either pursue the ball or knock it down at that point, in either case though he is supposed to be heading toward the same spot that the WR is going to make the catch. I'll have to look more closely at it to see if I can identify what's going wrong.


To be clear, this is a separate problem from the more painful DB stops covering for no reason problem. But I wasn't looking to see how often that was happening now.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
5/26/2018 6:58 pm
1) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329949
a) QB throws almost immediately into double coverage despite not being under pressure or reading the field. QB has 69 INT and 96 FOV.

2) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329950
a) Throw away goes down field instead of out of bounds.

3) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329952
a) Another immediate throw instead of letting the play develop.

4) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329954
a) Distance penalty. Ball travels 16 yards in the air.

5) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329960
a) This is why QB hamstring penalties are dumb.

6) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329962
a) What is this?

7) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329971
a) Sigh... see #6.

8) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329986
a) This play is a bit absurd. QB throws in triple coverage while there is a wide open WR at the bottom of the screen.

9) https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1811#329997
a) ...

OK - I'm done. I'm seeing the same thing in this game as the other game.