Posted by oriole_fan on 10/16/2013 10:03:00 AM (view original):
The "throttling" was an (admittedly bad) idea I was toying with that would alter the advantage. I'm not messing with the scoring, but the idea was that if you are up large the chance would move a little towards more of an even advantage. I could argue that this is actually what happens in real life, once a team has a large lead, everyone on the team relaxes a bit, and doesn't play with the same vigor as if the game were still in doubt. I have taken that out and I'll be looking at the other issues that are plaguing the high scoring of the engine against inferior opponents.
The engine is in pretty solid state at this point, and the changes that are made are just minor bug fixes and a couple of loopholes in game planning (example: all deep passes) that I'll be working on over the next few weeks. I'll be looking into specific stuff now, but I'm done toying with all of the throttling, so you can rest easy.
Why are you concentrating on rewarding bad teams or punishing good teams? This is one of the reasons 2.0 failed. Let the games play out. As long as two average teams play out reasonably, don't worry about the fringe teams. Outliers will always have lopsided games against outliers on the other end of the curve.
If the worlds are full, there will be far fewer crappy teams. In 1.0, lopsided scores were rare. Get the engine right, don't artificially limit good teams or inflate bad teams and fix the bugs mentioned in the various threads. When the game is good, coaches will come, worlds will fill and lopsided games won't be an issue.
I thought the game was close before this throttling attempt. Now I'm wondering about the direction we're headed.