Quote:
|
There is no perfect game at which you will be able to act, unfettered, in any way against a computer AI
|
I dispute this premise.
I program computers for a living -- automated control systems that have to "think" like humans using a decision matrix to handle events that might come up in a manufacturing process environment. Believe me these decision matrices can become quite complex, you'd be surprised!
It is completely possible to make a game with tight, challenging AI. Quite simple really, all you have to do is put constraints on the "endpoints" of the decision-making logic.
For example, if coding more than 1 for 1 or 2 for 2 trading is too tough to evaluate correctly in the programming, then as a developer the solution is to simply limit the AI to never accept trades unless they were 1for1 or 1for2 or 2for2. If someone wants to force an override in commissioner mode (to mirror real-life transactions for instance) then fine, that facility is available. But at least the existing AI then actually has some value and meaning.
If AI is NOT going to challenge a human player then it's a waste of time/resources to try to even put it in place.
To describe what I've seen from OOTP in general terms regarding this "trade bug", here's an example. This happened to me about 4-5 times in the course of playing the demo so it is not a rare instance.
Player (me) offers trade:
I'll give you my 3 star/3 star player for your 4 star/5 star player.
Computer rejects trade -- rightly so.
Player(me) adds some low level talent maybe 1 star/2 star prospect.
Computer says -- I'll have to think about it. Manager for player says "I'd ask for another prospect"
Player adds 1 star / 1 star dreg to computer side.
Computer says OK that would make this work now.
Hmmm, it was marginal before I added the dreg but now it's OK?
Player removes 1 star / 2 star from player side of trade.
Computer says OK that would make this work now.
Final trade player gives up one 3/3 in exchange for one 4/5 and one 1/1
It's obvious the computer is treating it's 1/1 as a negative liability to its own club and trying to dump it. The point is it's a minor league player. The computer could simply release this player to FA if it really doesn't want it on the team AND SUFFER NO TEAM CONSEQUENCE since the minor league contract carries a contract value of $0.
Very easy to solve. Never treat a player with a minor league contract as a negative liability to the team for purposes of evaluating a trade -- job done. Coding time about 10 minutes (literally) including compile time.