The Need for a Game Editor & other thoughts

[galvatron]

I mean, if I had the ability to alter the opposition's batting order during a game, why wouldn't I just put in all their poor batsmen high up? And mess them around? It just lets me cheat.

[ruby23]

weetabixharry Yes, it would be cumbersome to say the least. But some of us would still prefer to play against a close to 100% likely opposition as per real life scenario. It may sound silly I know.

Also, galvatron why would we use the editor to play Bumrah opening batting when we don't want to do that sort of thing exactly?! Also with SL, they juggle their batting order so much that the AI batting order selections would seem apt, so why would we tinker with that? Again, an editor is just useful to simulate real life scenarios as much as possible, not alter them. Again, this is my view for the use of an editor, but others may use it exactly for what you're implying.

???????I would conclude by saying that users be given the choice to play around with the editor if they so wish. Editors should not be available to play online games. Only available in Easy mode.

[galvatron]

None of this seems like a reason for an editor. The ability for me to change the opposition's batting order seems unfair, I could promote Bumrah to open for India if I wanted.

Sri Lanka regularly have all rounders in their top 4 on the game, often because they have excellent batting records.

[weetabixharry]

You're right, an editor wouldn't do much in changing the behaviour in selecting the batting order.

I agree. I have had requests to make it possible to edit other teams' selections and batting orders. I think this would be possible with some effort (I was at least able to edit my own team selection externally - even to use players not contracted to my club). The problem is it would be very cumbersome to use. Before each game, you would have to review the AI's team selection, decide what you didn't like and edit it by hand.

Personally, I prefer to just imagine that the opposition's manager is a bit stupid. Or, maybe he's trying out some wacky new strategy, or dealing with some unknown circumstances (maybe the whole middle order showed up to the match stinking of booze, so he moved a couple of all-rounders up the order to give them time to sober up). So the AI selections don't bother me, but I know it is an annoyance for some people.

[ruby23]

You made it out as if all rounders never bat in the top order, when in fact they do. It's not that common but it does happen, Shane Watson opened and was the 5th bowler for a number of years.

I don't see how an editor would stop the computer from selecting an all rounder in the top order.

You're right, an editor wouldn't do much in changing the behaviour in selecting the batting order. But changing bowling all rounders to pure bowlers helps that. I know its an annoying deliberation on their status, but unless the game engine changes it's selection algorithm, it probably seems the only way out.

And I completely understands that it's almost impossible to assess when all rounders are promoted to the batting order (say NZ are 220-2 in 46 overs, then Grandhomme may walk out to bat), but unfortunately, the AI doesn't change batting orders depending on game situation, its fixed at the start of an innings.

[galvatron]

I agree, it's better to improve the game engine galvatron but if it's not possible then an editor is the best option. While Stokes batted at 4, could you imagine de Grandhomm, Pandya doing the the same. I think your judgement is clouded by certain countries. Kallis & Stokes could be exceptions, not the norm!

You made it out as if all rounders never bat in the top order, when in fact they do. It's not that common but it does happen, Shane Watson opened and was the 5th bowler for a number of years.

I don't see how an editor would stop the computer from selecting an all rounder in the top order.

[ruby23]

All rounders regularly bat in the top order. Kallis batted at 4 for most of his career, sometimes at 3. Shane Watson often opened the batting and was the 5th bowler. Stokes usually bats at 5 and batted at 4 at the Oval vs Australia only last year. This is not unrealistic, it happens in the game.

All of the incidents you mention are solvable by better AI and programming, not by an editor.

I bought the original Cricket Captain way, way back and while I haven't played every version, never have I wanted an editor.

The solution is to improve the game engine, not offer fans an editor.

I agree, it's better to improve the game engine galvatron but if it's not possible then an editor is the best option. While Stokes batted at 4, could you imagine de Grandhomm, Pandya doing the the same. I think your judgement is clouded by certain countries. Kallis & Stokes could be exceptions, not the norm!

[galvatron]

Dear Chris Child ideally the need for an editor does not arise if the AI is adept at understanding real life scenarios. For example, when all rounders are chosen as 5th bowler in a team, they regularly bowl 2.5 times more overs than the 4th bowler. Sometimes all rounders bat at 3 or 4 when this is never realistic. The transitive nature of the AI to choose a team out of the squad is always flawed. I had one T20 match on a seemingly good for batting hard wicket where Afghanistan bowled 4 spinners first and the 5th bowler was their opening bowler!

It's these type of unrealistic selections that force your users to want an editor. While we're spending a lot of time trying to correct the AI's flaws and oddly superhuman skill of certain players, we are happy to do it as we love the game. I've been buying the game for 5 years now (including 2020) and even simple things such as separation lines in the records page for internationals & domestic (which was discussed and agreed to by the developers) has not been incorporated.

While there can be hundreds of complaints, you still have your loyal base of customers which will only increase if an editor is available for a few more bucks! It's strange that you would not consider this aspect, but I do understand that updating the database is a major selling point for every release. Pls be rest assured, your loyal fans will buy every year, if anything you're losing fans because of the your persistence not to provide an editor!

All rounders regularly bat in the top order. Kallis batted at 4 for most of his career, sometimes at 3. Shane Watson often opened the batting and was the 5th bowler. Stokes usually bats at 5 and batted at 4 at the Oval vs Australia only last year. This is not unrealistic, it happens in the game.

All of the incidents you mention are solvable by better AI and programming, not by an editor.

I bought the original Cricket Captain way, way back and while I haven't played every version, never have I wanted an editor.

The solution is to improve the game engine, not offer fans an editor.

[ruby23]

Still don't agree that an editor is needed for the game AT ALL.

What's the point in playing the game if you can then just go an edit the players to your own desire? That's not the point in the game, you're meant to explore what players and combinations work. Not alter them to meet your requirements.

galvatron one would agree if the AI behaves at least 80% as per real life scenarios. While no one wants to waste time editing player's skill and/or ability, it is needed because of some shortcomings of the team selections, batting position selections, sudden regen appearance, etc.

[galvatron]

Still don't agree that an editor is needed for the game AT ALL.

What's the point in playing the game if you can then just go an edit the players to your own desire? That's not the point in the game, you're meant to explore what players and combinations work. Not alter them to meet your requirements.

[Lynx54321]

The issue for me is less about regens and more about development.

Real young players FEEL like they don't develop

Regens FEEL like they don't need to develop

[ruby23]

This is probably getting a bit far off topic, but randomness can be constrained. We typically talk about the "mean" (average value) and "variance" (average deviation² from the mean) of a random variable. So the players with "-2 potential" would get the highest "mean" potential (so if you play a billion savegames, they will be best on average). However, due to the variance, they will be better in some savegames and worse in others.

Computers aren't truly random, but they can generate extremely convincing random-like behaviour. (This is called pseudorandomness and is a truly enormous area of academic study on its own). Cricket Captain, like virtually all computer games, will generate vast amounts of pseudorandom numbers to determine the outcome of just about any event. For example, each ball bowled in a match probably consists of many random events. I'm just guessing, but for example, they might include: the line of the delivery, the length of the delivery, how much the ball swings/spins (and in which direction), the batsman's shot selection, whether he middles the ball/edges it/misses it, whether a fielder stops/catches/drops/misses the ball, etc. The skill of the batter, bowler and fielder will all have some influence on these random events - so more skilled players will on average get more positive outcomes than less skilled players. But even Bradman can get out for a duck sometimes.

I don't know how the regen players are generated in Cricket Captain, but for sure there must be some amount of pseudorandomness, otherwise they would be identical in every savegame. It sounds easy, but honestly it's amazing how well balanced Cricket Captain is. I've heard stories of people playing literally hundreds of years and the teams remain balanced and competitive.

Sort of understood the problem now. If guess its impossible to do anything about the regens. I agree its a great game, without doubt. Just a few glitches.

[weetabixharry]

It would however be impossible to implement if the randomization of regen players is just that, random! I honestly don't know how this works, does the AI just create regen player's by randomising the information from the existing database or is this systematically built into the game architecture?

This is probably getting a bit far off topic, but randomness can be constrained. We typically talk about the "mean" (average value) and "variance" (average deviation² from the mean) of a random variable. So the players with "-2 potential" would get the highest "mean" potential (so if you play a billion savegames, they will be best on average). However, due to the variance, they will be better in some savegames and worse in others.

Computers aren't truly random, but they can generate extremely convincing random-like behaviour. (This is called pseudorandomness and is a truly enormous area of academic study on its own). Cricket Captain, like virtually all computer games, will generate vast amounts of pseudorandom numbers to determine the outcome of just about any event. For example, each ball bowled in a match probably consists of many random events. I'm just guessing, but for example, they might include: the line of the delivery, the length of the delivery, how much the ball swings/spins (and in which direction), the batsman's shot selection, whether he middles the ball/edges it/misses it, whether a fielder stops/catches/drops/misses the ball, etc. The skill of the batter, bowler and fielder will all have some influence on these random events - so more skilled players will on average get more positive outcomes than less skilled players. But even Bradman can get out for a duck sometimes.

I don't know how the regen players are generated in Cricket Captain, but for sure there must be some amount of pseudorandomness, otherwise they would be identical in every savegame. It sounds easy, but honestly it's amazing how well balanced Cricket Captain is. I've heard stories of people playing literally hundreds of years and the teams remain balanced and competitive.

[ARW96]

I would pay very silly amounts of money for an official editor. I can say this because I have spent some hundreds of hours developing an unofficial editor, which still can't do a lot of the things I would like it to do. However, in my case, it's not because I'm unhappy with any of the mechanics of the game. On the contrary, I think Cricket Captain is absolutely miles ahead of any other game in this genre (in distant second place is Cricket Coach, last updated in 2014). I just like trying out different scenarios which are only possible with an editor.

To be honest, of the six problems you listed, I'm not sure that many of those could be fixed with an editor. You could hunt down superstar regens and nerf their attributes. However, I think the other 5 are rather more deeply nested in the mechanics of the game and probably beyond the reach of an editor.

Part of the reason why I don’t like putting things on here about an editor is because I know you will have something to say about it. I understand that you have created unofficial editors which do a few things, however that’s not what most of us are asking for.

And in response to the other 5 things I mention, if they are not solvable with an editor, then they need solving in the game mechanics as they significantly lower the realism of the game.

[ruby23]

This is a nice idea. Perhaps this could be done in a similar way to Championship Manager, which categorised the very young (and unproven) players into 3 tiers of potential in the pre-game database:
0: Totally random potential.
-1: Random, but likely to be a very good player.
-2: Random, but likely to be a superstar.

This would basically fulfil exactly the same role as regens, but would maybe feel a bit more relevant. The main drawback I can think of is that these junior players would need somewhere to go (like a youth squad), which might just add a layer of complexity that could detract from one of the game's main strengths - its strong focus on playing cricket matches (and not micromanaging all the minor details).

It would however be impossible to implement if the randomization of regen players is just that, random! I honestly don't know how this works, does the AI just create regen player's by randomising the information from the existing database or is this systematically built into the game architecture?