Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Frustrating

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Frustrating

    Hi,

    I'm a long time fan of ICC games, owning most since the Australian version that came out in the mid-late 90's.
    I bought ICC2010 as soon as it came out, and have played several seasons of County & Australian leagues.

    I am however finding it really frustrating in trying to bowl sides out regularly.
    I find myself often in the situation where I'm playing a much weaker side, have them seemingly on the ropes, with a very healthy first inning lead, yet with alarming regularity these sides seem to become reinvigorated in their second innings and make large scores.

    Now if this was an irregular occurrence I would simply say 'Well played Sir' and continue on without a gripe and try and figure out what I'd done wrong.
    However this happens almost every game no matter who the opponent and no matter how in form either I or they are.

    I am increasingly becoming worried that there is some kind of AI working in the background that is thwarting me, and therefore no matter what tactics I try this is always going to occur.
    Can anyone confirm or refute that there is something hard wired into the code that is doing this?
    I would be terribly dismayed if it is the case, as it totally removes or at the very least severely limits the fun of the game.
    I don't seem to recall having this problem in older versions of the game. Sure there were other problems like left arm orthodox spinners being superhuman, but nothing like this.

  • #2
    I think it's called a 'catch up mode', which is totally frustrating. This regular occurence sucks the fun out of the game. Its even more annoying on a worsening pitch such as my last game when I posted 478, had India out for 172 and then as the ball is turning a mile and the paceman should be having a field day, they rally to post over 400 in the second. Luckily in this case I still won otherwise I would have smashed my keyboard in despair. Had I been in the situation that India were in or other sides I've played, I would have been routed. My love for the ICC series keeps me playing it but it does suck the fun right out of it.

    Comment


    • #3
      On a pitch with one green bar on pace and bounce and one or two on spin, Australia chased down over 550 against Steyn, Morkel, Flowers, Harris and Kallis!

      Comment


      • #4
        There is no such thing as "catch up mode"

        Comment


        • #5
          Can I rename it the Phoenix Bug to make it clearer and prettier?

          Comment


          • #6
            There's definitely no catch-up mode. You've just had a run of bad luck. A lot of people play a lot of matches and the laws of probability mean someone will score lucky centuries against you. If you look at the "near-miss" stats for these games, you'll often see a ton of chances that weren't taken.

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't agree with Chris

              I don't know if it's a deliberate coding, or if players have a "backs to the wall"rating we don't know about that needs tweaking, but 450 scored on devilish pitches against good bowling attacks opens way to often.

              I'm speaking as someone who has played the hind legs off these games over the years.

              Sometimes it works for me - sometimes against. I have posted a few screenies somewhere on this forum of a run of these.

              3 450 plus scores with 1 bar bounce and 1 bar evenness in the space of one test series.

              Always seems to happen in the fourth innings. Seen stuff like
              Team a 520 all out
              Team b 290 all out
              Team a 202 all out
              team c 400 for 2 in 5 sessions - the last 5 sessions played against an excellent bowling attack on an awful pitch.

              I've played to many UCC games over the years and this is the first time I've noticed anything like this. And it's not rare - it's a "more often than not" occurance.

              Not saying it's a deliberate feature, but somewhere I'm certain the algorithm has a "stubborness" or "backs to the wall" rating for players or teams that needs toning down a bit.

              Scritty
              The continued lack of stats in ICC is not so much the elephant in the room - as the Brontosaurus in the bathtub.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm trying to think what could cause this. One issue is batting scores in general have got higher over the years. This means there are better batting line-ups to deal with. There was also an issue in the early release that the transfer system was increasing the effect because the more valuable top batsmen were being bought while bowlers were not. Cut a long story short, if you played a lot of games pre-patch then there will be some awesome batsmen to deal with. If you get one of them out first innings for a duck and he scores 200 2nd innings then you'll see the issue you have here.

                Another factor is being too aggressive to try to get the opposition out quickly. If you leave the aggression high too long, the bowlers get tired and a defensive batsman can get settled by scoring easy runs. If you are patient you'll get more quality overs of the bowlers and the batsmen will still be scratching away at 1.5 runs an over.

                Comment


                • #9
                  You say batting scores get higher but I notice that most good batsmen end up with terrible averages. By 2012 Strauss averaged 31 in tests. The bowlers seem to get too good.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I get the oppisite. My batsmen average soar (in my aussie save Katich is 37 averaging 50+, khawaja is his opening partner who still averages 100 after 10 tests, ponting averages 50+, clarke averages mid 40s, watto averages just under 50 and cosgrove averages mid 40's.) My bowlers averages seem to keep rising though.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X