BAP Issues
Not sure where to put this, but here is a list of issues I've encountered, most seem like they should be easy fixes. 1.) Being able to view team/line strategies, as well as the coaches adjustments t...
Forum Discussion
@EA_Aljo If the developers see these posts etc, then why are the most basic issues not being remedied? Do they just not give a f? Who the hell is overseeing the game development and saying "yup, this is fine."? I don't have a background in software/gaming, but surely there's gotta be someone who can tell the developers that this in an unacceptable product, especially at that pricepoint.
I see a few things here - In the first video it looks like the guy got lucky with the initial movement of the stick and let go of R1 -- Since he was not actively pokechecking according to the game, his stick is allowed to phase through your skates to prevent physics based issues.
In the second video, your Ai was too close to the defender and would have resulted in an interception most likely. It would have been nicer for him to wait a little bit to pass after the D-man shifted to the side but the shot itself was decent. You have the ability to call for manual passes; I find those to be way more reliable than assuming the Ai will make a human pass (no matte how obvious it may seem).
I agree the AI should have done something in the 3rd video but you weren't looking at him and weren't right on the boards for a chip-up. Might also be because your other AI was so close, it probably confused him a bit.
I have AI defensemen get absolutely smashed in the exact location all the time so I know how frustrating it can be.
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:I see a few things here - In the first video it looks like the guy got lucky with the initial movement of the stick and let go of R1 -- Since he was not actively pokechecking according to the game, his stick is allowed to phase through your skates to prevent physics based issues.
what's the use. I already said that I DID NOT initiate the poke check until AFTER I was clear of his legs. and according to the quote above (from one of my first videos) I can do that (that was an AI player by the way). Is that not true? To be honest and I'm not sure of anyone else, but it seems all I'm getting are excuses. The AI can do this stuff but the player can't. It seems that the game is geared to give the AI the advantage when it should be the player who gets the advantage. I don't care how good you are, no one can out think a computer. the human will always react slower than the AI. so I'm done, no more videos.
EA_AljoCommunity Manager
I'm not entirely sure exactly which video you're talking about. Regardless, if you couldn't outthink the computer, you'd never win any games against them. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you have been winning games against them. The AI players play by the same rules as everyone else. Yes, they can make more precise moves and they tend to be better than most humans at moving the puck quickly, but they are bound by the same rules and mechanics as human-controlled players.
@EA_Aljo wrote:Yes, they can make more precise moves and they tend to be better than most humans at moving the puck quickly, but they are bound by the same rules and mechanics as human-controlled players.
Then they should be called for the blatant holding/interference/obstruction a.k.a. "body/stick tie-up" they're allowed to do for days in front of the net when there's no puck around or when a pass is made to the covered guy, or when they check a guy after the puck is gone during a "board-bank self-pass". The CPU is allowed to grab guys, in front of the net or at the boards, from miles away and while they're in motion, while they player can't (especially with the motion caveat), and compared to actual NHL hockey, these are illegal moves. Yeah, in the NHL, sometimes the zebras "swallow the whistle", but these infractions are never called in-game.
I've said in other threads, there's a certain amount of "cheat" we just have to let slide, because there is no true AI here, and difficulty has to get increased somehow, but just pointing out that your quote here is 100% untrue.
Community Highlights
- EA_Aljo17 days ago
