Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Rugby Video Games & Apps
Scores and Difficulty
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="leicester" data-source="post: 7359"><p>I am in complete agreement that weaker rugby teams should not automatically be comprised of slower players and that strength of a side should not be determined an often apparently preprogrammed ability to win ball at the breakdown. The difference between a good side and a bad side should be skill of play. I have always felt that, whilst computer AI should account for behaviour of opposing teams in single player mode, player controlled teams should be much more even with a default more difficult level of AI to allow ones winning margin (or losing margin) to be determined by your ability to string together effective moves and adopt a style of play that suits the strengths of your team. I don't want to feel that, if I play as England, I will probably win my rucks or, if I play as Namibia, I am doomed to lose almost every one. I don't want possession / territory stats to be 90% in my favour. Rather, the difference between winning or losing should be reflected by much more subtle shifts in possession / territory unless teams are genuinely hopelessly outclassed (and a lot of that should come down to us, as players). </p><p></p><p>I am not a game designer and can't profess to know what possible solutions could be implemented to give me the satisfaction and control that I desire but I suspect THREE things would make for a lot of the difference...</p><p></p><p>1. More effective forward play (see separate thread);</p><p>2. The ability to break tackles and make more effective line breaks; and</p><p>3. Much tougher defence (smarter AI and player marking).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="leicester, post: 7359"] I am in complete agreement that weaker rugby teams should not automatically be comprised of slower players and that strength of a side should not be determined an often apparently preprogrammed ability to win ball at the breakdown. The difference between a good side and a bad side should be skill of play. I have always felt that, whilst computer AI should account for behaviour of opposing teams in single player mode, player controlled teams should be much more even with a default more difficult level of AI to allow ones winning margin (or losing margin) to be determined by your ability to string together effective moves and adopt a style of play that suits the strengths of your team. I don't want to feel that, if I play as England, I will probably win my rucks or, if I play as Namibia, I am doomed to lose almost every one. I don't want possession / territory stats to be 90% in my favour. Rather, the difference between winning or losing should be reflected by much more subtle shifts in possession / territory unless teams are genuinely hopelessly outclassed (and a lot of that should come down to us, as players). I am not a game designer and can't profess to know what possible solutions could be implemented to give me the satisfaction and control that I desire but I suspect THREE things would make for a lot of the difference... 1. More effective forward play (see separate thread); 2. The ability to break tackles and make more effective line breaks; and 3. Much tougher defence (smarter AI and player marking). [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Rugby Video Games & Apps
Scores and Difficulty
Top