Play Calls and Gameplans

[Yngvai]

Playcalls not being correctly called from profiles?

Just had a league game. Checked the game log file and compared it to my offensive profile.

Plays are called that are not in line with my profile.

One example. It was 1st & 10, I'm on offense. Score is 0-0. I'm on my opponent's 36 yard line. There's more than 10 minutes left in the half. There are 4 plays in my profile for the situation DN1, TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED.

The game did not call one of the 4 plays. It called a pass play that was not in those 4.

Another example. It was 1st & 10, I'm on offense. Score is 7-0. I'm on my opponent's 40 yard line. There's more than 10 minutes left in the half. There are 13 plays in my profile for the situation DN1, TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, UP7-10.

The game called a pass play that is not in those 13 plays.

[Scott_WAR]

Yeah, I have been having a hard time getting the profiles to work correctly. Last night, during a league game I had a couple of people with more experence than me tell me the profiles do not work correctly.
 
  Really frustrating considering all the time and work I put into my profile.

[Marauders]

The number one thing to keep in mind while doing gameplans is not to use ANY in the profile further up the tree of a specific instance.

Only use ANY if you don't have more detailed instances for that situation.

One example. It was 1st & 10, I'm on offense. Score is 0-0. I'm on my opponent's 36 yard line. There's more than 10 minutes left in the half. There are 4 plays in my profile for the situation DN1, TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED.

If you also have an instance where DN=ANY TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED its plays could be used as well.  The AI will use the first instance it finds that is TRUE for the pass/run percentage.

[Yngvai]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

One example. It was 1st & 10, I'm on offense. Score is 0-0. I'm on my opponent's 36 yard line. There's more than 10 minutes left in the half. There are 4 plays in my profile for the situation DN1, TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED.

If you also have an instance where DN=ANY TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED it could be used if the AI finds it first. It AI will use the first instance it finds that is TRUE.

That's not the problem. The examples I gave you are one of the very first in the entire tree...they are at the very top of the list. I also barely have any situations that have ANY in them....they are all very specific.

[David Winter]

Hi.
 
Can you try removing all the situations that involve 'ANY'. 'ANY' style situations are inclusive, so the result plays are added to any plays returned from the specific situation. What might be happening is that it's getting the <n> plays from your specific situation, and the <n> plays from the situation that includes an 'ANY'.
&nbsp;
"DN1, TG>5, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED" and "DN1, TGANY, TIH>10, DFG26-75, TIED" with both return plays.

[Scott_WAR]

Does the game call a play from the first group that is appropriate, or the group that is most specific?
&nbsp;
If it calls a play from the first appropriate group it comes to we REALLY need the ability to move groups up and down in the list.

[David Winter]

What I might do is just remove the option for 'ANY'. It just causes way too much confusion. The downside is that playbooks will need a lot more profiles in them.
&nbsp;
David

[Marauders]

Yngvie stated: That's not the problem. The examples I gave you are one of the very first in the entire tree...they are at the very top of the list. I also barely have any situations that have ANY in them....they are all very specific.

The tree is general to specific. It does not matter when it is created.

Scott asked: Does the game call a play from the first group that is appropriate, or the group that is most specific?

The pass/run percentage is taken from the first group that is encountered that is valid. The play is taken from all of the groups that are valid.

If it calls a play from the first appropriate group it comes to we REALLY need the ability to move groups up and down in the list.

As it stands, only the pass/run percentage is based on that. The play is taken from available plays.

David Winter stated: What I might do is just remove the option for 'ANY'. It just causes way too much confusion. The downside is that playbooks will need a lot more profiles in them.

Please do not remove the ANY feature.

Most of the confusion comes from players believing that the situation groups were exclusive rather than inclusive.

[Scott_WAR]

ORIGINAL: Marauders

Most of the confusion comes from players believing that the situation groups were exclusive rather than inclusive.

Theres the problem, and honestly, in my opinion, the game does things backwards. Logically, it should be exclusive. If I make a profile to choose from only long pass plays on 2nd and 1 or less, it should only use those plays on 2nd and 1 or less, and not plays it finds in 2nd and any. The way it appears to work from your description, is that if I have the 2nd and any group, and the 2nd and 1 or less group, on 2nd and 1 I may call a play from the 2nd and 1 or less group or from 2nd and any with the pass to run % being whichever list is created first. Completely backwards logic wise. It should use the 2nd and 1 or less group only on 2nd and 1 or less and not other groups, and the 2nd and any on all other 2nd down plays besides thse situations that are covered by a more specific group.

If this is the way it works, then it seems to me using ANY would actually screw up your specific situations, so really shouldnt be used anyway.


Please correct me if I am wrong.

[David Winter]

Scott, I'm sorry but I don't think the logic is backwards at all.

Say there are three situation groups in the playbook. One specific to 1st down, one specific to 2nd down, and one set to 'ANY'... meaning you really don't care what down it is at the time. 'Any' in this case could also be taken to mean 'ALL' downs.

So when 1st down comes along, it's going to grab two of the three profiles. The one specific to 1st down, and the one that applies to any (or all) downs (assuming the rest of the situation is applicable as well).

To me having the ANY exlusive wouldn't work. You would have a situation for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, (and maybe 4th) down, and a situation with ANY. In the example you provied, the ANY in this case would never be used.

The idea behind the 'ANY' was that you could, to reuse the example above, create profiles that didn't care what down it was, but was more specific on other things, like say position on field.

I don't have all of the FBPro versions, but based off the ones I do have (95 and 98) it didn't use an ANY either in the profiles. But you had to create a lot more situations in the profile to cover everything. The goal of the ANY option was to reduce the need for that.

Removing the ANY is a fairly straight forward process.. probably an hours worth of work. I'm not married to the feature either way so it's up to the user base to decide I guess. Please keep in mind though it would mean that you would need to have many more situation groups in a profile.

thanks
David

[Deft]

I think we would all rather see the ability to copy and paste the plays situations in the profile and select more than one play to add at a time, so they don't all have to be made from scratch. It would be a big time saver and help much of the frustration.

[jdhalfrack]

Removing the ANY is a fairly straight forward process.. probably an hours worth of work. I'm not married to the feature either way so it's up to the user base to decide I guess. Please keep in mind though it would mean that you would need to have many more situation groups in a profile.

Okay, before I respond, just to let you all know I have yet to actually play the game, just sim some stuff. But, from what I can gather, I too think David is right. The whole purpose of the ANY "option" is that it will work for any situation under which the criteria apply. If it's 2nd and 1 or 2nd and 15, if you have a 2nd and any option, it should be in the mix.

Now, my question is, why can't you just make an option to "turn off" the ANY option or not have any plays in it at all. Or, is this already an option. Because, if it IS an option to turn it off, then my thought would be that it's pointless to totally remove the ANY options. If someone doesn't like the ANY option, then they should be allowed ot make that decision. But, if people do like the ANY options, then you should give them the option to keep it.

Does that make sense? Remember, I don;t really know what you are talking about, so, I am probably completey wrong...

JD

[David Winter]

ORIGINAL: jdhalfrack

Now, my question is, why can't you just make an option to "turn off" the ANY option or not have any plays in it at all. Or, is this already an option. Because, if it IS an option to turn it off, then my thought would be that it's pointless to totally remove the ANY options. If someone doesn't like the ANY option, then they should be allowed ot make that decision. But, if people do like the ANY options, then you should give them the option to keep it.

Does that make sense? Remember, I don;t really know what you are talking about, so, I am probably completey wrong...

JD

The option is there.. it's just not an explicit option per se. If you don't want to have 'ANY' used in your situation groups, you just don't select it from the radio option buttons. So the option is there to use it or not.

[Marauders]

Scott_War stated: Theres the problem, and honestly, in my opinion, the game does things backwards. Logically, it should be exclusive.

At first, I thought the same thing. When considering how FBPro worked, all profile situations were exclusive. The thing to consider is that there was no ALL option in FBPro. If one want to make sure that each situation is exclusive, then one has to not use the ALL command in any of the variables of that situation in another situation.

The way it appears to work from your description, is that if I have the 2nd and any group, and the 2nd and 1 or less group, on 2nd and 1 I may call a play from the 2nd and 1 or less group or from 2nd and any with the pass to run % being whichever list is created first.

One could get a play from the second and 1 group or from the second and any group; that is correct.

The pass/run percentage comes from which ever situation the AI encounters first that is valid.

Completely backwards logic wise.

Logic wise, it is how it is stated. ALL means all inclusive. ALL ELSE would be exclusive.

If this is the way it works, then it seems to me using ANY would actually screw up your specific situations, so really shouldnt be used anyway.

It could if it is not used correctly. If one wants to make more detailed plans, one needs to be careful not to use ALL with a large number of plays on a general situation. One must be especially careful not to use ALL in the DOWN variable if one wants to have much more detailed plays.

On the other hand, one may want to have an ALL playgroup for long down situations as an example. By having a few plays that can be used in all long situations, one needs to add less plays to the detailed situations.

One may also want to use general playbook plays for first down, and be specific on second, third, and fourth down. In that case, one would use DN1, TGANY, TIHANY, DFGANY, UPANY.

The use for ANY is to add plays to the gameplan in areas that one does not have the time to, or would just rather not, be more specific. One could also use ANY as a base for building blocks into several situation groups. One needs to take care not to cross up his own gameplan, but ANY does have its uses.

David Winter stated: I don't have all of the FBPro versions, but based off the ones I do have (95 and 98) it didn't use an ANY either in the profiles. But you had to create a lot more situations in the profile to cover everything. The goal of the ANY option was to reduce the need for that.

That is correct. FBPro did not have the ALL option.

Removing the ANY is a fairly straight forward process.. probably an hours worth of work. I'm not married to the feature either way so it's up to the user base to decide I guess. Please keep in mind though it would mean that you would need to have many more situation groups in a profile.

Again, please do not remove the ANY feature. Coaches that wish to use it will be glad it is there. Coaches who do not want to use it do not have to.

[Scott_WAR]

Ok, lets try to explain this again. I'll do it from the perspective of trying to create a book the way I would like to.

First I set 1rst and any in all catagories.
Then I set 2nd and any in all catagories
Then 3rd and any in all catagories.
Then I set a 2nd and <=1
Then I set a 2nd and >10
Then I set a 3rd and<=1
Then I set a 3rd and >5
Then on to set other situation like late in the game and behind, late in the game and ahead etc...

The idea is that on any 1rst down, 2nd down or 3rd it uses the plays in the respective 'any' groups, UNLESS the specific situations...... 2 and 1, 2 and >10, 3rd and 1, or 3rd>5 is met then it calls a play in those specific groups only. The way you have it working now, I might as well not even have the lower groups, since the plays in the any groups will be used as well as the groups I set up for specific situations.

If it worked where the specific situations were used exclusively, it would save massive amounts of time, as you could have umbrella plays for general situations, 1rst and any, 2nd and any,...etc. but could still have specific groups to overide those general situations, such as 2nd and <=1, or 3rd and >15.

[Marauders]

Ok, lets try to explain this again. I'll do it from the perspective of trying to create a book the way I would like to.

First I set 1st and any in all catagories.
Then I set 2nd and any in all catagories
Then 3rd and any in all catagories.
Then I set a 2nd and <=1
Then I set a 2nd and >10
Then I set a 3rd and<=1
Then I set a 3rd and >5
Then on to set other situation like late in the game and behind, late in the game and ahead etc...

I can see what you are trying to do, but you are seeing ANY as ANY ELSE.

The idea is that on any 1rst down, 2nd down or 3rd it uses the plays in the respective 'any' groups, UNLESS the specific situations...... 2 and 1, 2 and >10, 3rd and 1, or 3rd>5 is met then it calls a play in those specific groups only. The way you have it working now, I might as well not even have the lower groups, since the plays in the any groups will be used as well as the groups I set up for specific situations.

You would want it to be more similar to this:

DN1, TGANY, TIHANY, DFGANY, UPANY
DN2, TG<=1, TIANY, DFANY, UPANY
DN2, TG>10, TIANY, DFANY, UPANY
DN3, TG<=1, TIANY, DFANY, UPANY
DN3, TG>5, TIANY, DFANY, UPANY

You would not want to set a second down and ANY unless those plays could be used in other situations as well.

The one thing that makes this more difficult is that the yards TG options are <=1, >1, >5, >10, >15.

Because ALL is not ALL ELSE, it is difficult to fill the >1 and >5 situations because they could be used as part of the >10 and >15 group if they truely mean "> than" because >10 is certainly >1 and >5. If they were >1-5, >5-10, ... it would allow more specific play groups to be made. In your example, there is a potential hole from 1-10 yards on second down because of this. Of course, the AI will select plays from the whole playbook in those cases, but it makes >1 and >5 of little use if one wants to use >10 or >15 situations.

[Scott_WAR]

The hole would be the purpose of the 2nd and all.

See with the current method, i have to set every single situation, to get the exact plays i want there, whereas the all command could be used to cover all situations but the others i have set and would save tons of time, while still giving good control over what is called.

[Marauders]

Now, my question is, why can't you just make an option to "turn off" the ANY option or not have any plays in it at all. Or, is this already an option. Because, if it IS an option to turn it off, then my thought would be that it's pointless to totally remove the ANY options. If someone doesn't like the ANY option, then they should be allowed ot make that decision. But, if people do like the ANY options, then you should give them the option to keep it.

ANY is one option that may be used or not used in the variable options.

[Scott_WAR]

If&nbsp;I set a group for 2nd and >1&nbsp; and a group 2nd and >10, with any in all other catagories,.... wouldnt the plays I have in the 2nd and >1 also have a chance of being used in a 2nd and>10 situation......... which is another reason why exclusive would work better.
If it worked the way I want, I could set an any group, a <=1 group and a>10 group. If it was 2nd and 8, the any group would be used, if it was 2nd and 12, ONLY my 2nd >10 group would be used. I wouldnt need to set EVERY single group to get what I wanted.

[Marauders]

The hole would be the purpose of the 2nd and all.

See with the current method, i have to set every single situation, to get the exact plays i want there, whereas the all command could be used to cover all situations but the others i have set and would save tons of time, while still giving good control over what is called.

&nbsp;
At one time, I thought that is how it worked, but it does not.
&nbsp;
ALL is an added tool.&nbsp; It is a feature FBPro did not have.
&nbsp;
In order for ALL to work as a general tool, but also allow specific&nbsp;situations to be used exclusively, the AI would have to find situations that match in general but use the specific situation group alone if every variable matched.&nbsp; I don't know if that could be programmed easily.&nbsp; Again, having variable groups that overlap for yardage could be a problem, as more than one situation could potentially match all variables.
&nbsp;