Who thinks the AI cheats?

[AlanSilver]

I must say you seem to know when the other team are going to score. In my experience I have noticed I seem to let in a lot of goals with the 1st attack, away. goals in stoppage time at the end of both halfs and after I have scored. before anyone says its the tactics it happens whatever ones I use the same thing happens. I have read these forums for any pearls of wisdom..still struggling.

[Bigwig]

I might add that while the AI doesn’t cheat, it has certain advantages over human users, possibly due to being able to do multiple tasks that are just not feasible for humans.

One example would be player values and knowing the exact moment a club will drop their asking price of £40m to £20m. I’m assuming it’s because they can be scouting players indefinitely so they will know exactly when a player’s value drops, but it’s practically impossible for a human manager to do this because it would just take too long.

Another example is how the AI uses shortlists differently to human managers. I’m not sure exactly what they do, but there have been multiple occasions where a human manager bids for a player with no clubs seemingly interested, only to suddenly have a host of clubs making offers. I can only assume it’s because the AI uses shortlists differently, which human managers can do by setting up two shortlists, but they just can’t check te ‘inactive’ one as regularly as the AI can.

[glamdring]

Every time you go into tactics and make changes the game recalculates the remainder of the half. That’s why the AI changes tactics and makes substitutions instantly, because it’s already been calculated for that to happen. It’s nothing like you score then the AI reacts, because when you make changes on 70mins the game knows you’re going to score in the 80th minute and knows it will make appropriate changes straight after. It doesn’t wait until you score then make changes, they’re already pre-determined.

As soon as the game kicks off the AI has calculated everything that will happen up to half time and the only way to make it recalculate is if the human makes changes, not the AI.

I'm not completely convinced by that...or at least it is bad programming if that is the case since it is slightly different from what I was saying. "The AI" is not (or should not be) a single entity. Just because the match engine has already calculated the game up until the human player makes some kind of change doesn't mean that the AI manager of the team you are playing has this information - it should be two different AI objects with no information flow between them whatsoever. The AI manager should react to what goes on on the pitch just like a human manager does, it's just that, as I said, the AI can react instantly (or instantaneously...I always forget the subtle difference in meaning between those two...) whereas the human manager takes some amount of time to react.

As for the issue of shortlists and the apparent sudden interest of a load of AI clubs, that may just be an issue of the player screen only updating when you interact with that player and your bid for the player then triggering all the AI bids just like it might in real life when interested teams hear of a bid for a player they want.

[Bigwig]

The AI isn’t a single entity and they don’t have the information, otherwise they would react before you score. Maybe someone official can explain it a bit better than me.

[FM08_Joe]

i dont think the ai cheats.....

[Heisenberg]

Of course they go for a goal, but how do they make the change to a defensive tactic/formation AS SOON AS THEY GET THAT GOAL? I'm not talking about the way the A.I teams play just about the way they make subs, IMO they have an advantage over the user in some sense or another when it comes to subs.

edit: Your saying because I watch on extended highlights my substitutions occure slower then if I was watching full highlights? Seriously?

Since people keep batting the 'it can't cheat its not got a brain' point around, I agree it can't cheat but it can be programmed to have advantages over the user, I think this is the case with substitutions. Hopefully in FM 2009 they will have changed the way substitutions work, I really hope to see instantaneous changes (as soon as the ball FIRST goes dead after you've made changes).

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I mean the higher the level of detail you watch the matches on, the more you have opportunities to react to changes. The system with substitutions isn't perfect just now but it's possible to go straight into your tactics and make a change when a goal is scored. The AI has an advantage in that it can technically "click the button" faster than you, but the AI can only access it's Tactics and subs at the same points of the game as you

I'm not trying to argue the game is perfect, far from it. I'm just saying that this is often blown WAY out of proportion for what is a flaw you can deal with fairly easily

EDIT: My apologies to Glamdring, I didn't see your post above which says more or less the same as mine

[Heisenberg]

Yeah but its bringing on a defender instead of an attacker when losing, the only time this would make any kind of sense at all is if it did it after it equalised. Its shoring up the defence when losing according to you, its not logical.

Are you saying it brings on a DC or a DM? If it's a DM then I've explained why it could do this, rearranging it's formation and so on. Same could apply to a DC, though I must admit I've not seen it do this often (in rare occurances I've seen the AI put a DC up front in a 4-2-4 as that was all it had left on the bench)

The game can't tell the future, so it can't react tho things that haven't happened. It can only see what you can see, and react at the same things you can react to.

It can't cheat

[philly_flyer10]

Are you saying it brings on a DC or a DM? If it's a DM then I've explained why it could do this, rearranging it's formation and so on. Same could apply to a DC, though I must admit I've not seen it do this often (in rare occurances I've seen the AI put a DC up front in a 4-2-4 as that was all it had left on the bench)

The game can't tell the future, so it can't react tho things that haven't happened. It can only see what you can see, and react at the same things you can react to.

It can't cheat

Yes it can, as someone else has pointed out, the game has already calculated whats going to happen.

The only 2 logical reasons the ai does what it does is:

1-its calculated the result and knows a goal will go in then and reacts to the goal before it happens, meaning the sub comes on right after the goal is scored.

2-the ai can make instant subs, the user cannot.

Either way, its cheating. Stop parroting what SI say, they are not going to admit their engine cheats and why trust them, they already lie to our faces by saying no cds are illegal.

[medievalist]

I agree that the AI can make many tactical adjustments much faster than we can - things like switching their markers around happens *instantly*, which is not exactly realistic - but if you want to bring on subs/change tactics right after scoring or being scored on, that you can do. When the goal goes in, immediately pause the game. Go to tactics, make your changes. A lot of times you'll miss the replay but the subs and adjustments should be in place for the kickoff.

It does seem to take a very long time for subs and tactical changes to get implemented. Especially if i'm just making tactical changes, it seems like it should happen faster. I know the argument is 'well, you have to communicate what you want to your players in the middle of a match', but presumably the team would practice these things.

Especially something like responding to the 4-2-4: we see this nearly every match. Presumably the team should have practiced the heck out of how to play against the 4-2-4 and the reaction should be more or less instantaneous. This is something that isn't in the game currently but maybe could be another wrinkle of training down the road.

[Heisenberg]

Yes it can, as someone else has pointed out, the game has already calculated whats going to happen.

The only 2 logical reasons the ai does what it does is:

1-its calculated the result and knows a goal will go in then and reacts to the goal before it happens, meaning the sub comes on right after the goal is scored.

2-the ai can make instant subs, the user cannot.

Either way, its cheating. Stop parroting what SI say, they are not going to admit their engine cheats and why trust them, they already lie to our faces by saying no cds are illegal.

Ok, I'll clarify my position:

1) Yes, the match engine calculates the run of play up untill a change is made. As the match engine has been proven by other users of these forums to treat the AI and human users EXACTLY the same, it can't tell who's who and thus the AI manager can't get the information you claim it has

2) It can't make instant subs, it just reacts to things like you do, as I've already stated

You're just repeating the same argument again and again, regardless of what I say. If you listen to the other users on the forums, make some subtle changes to your tactics and play on maximum highlights, the problems you're experiencing won't happen

Also, playing a game without a legally purchased CD IS illegal. If you're so convinced the game is a "cheat" and that SI are lying to you and trying to ruin the game for you, why are you here arguing about it? Why not go and do something else? They're hardly going to make a flawed product and drive away their customers, are they?

[glamdring]

Tactical changes are definitely idiotic. There is a delay after you set them and then they suddenly get acted upon mid-pass. I can understand it is realistic to have some kind of delay in tactical instructions being relayed around the team, but this any realism added in by this is completely undone by having those instructions suddenly implemented in the middle of a pass as almost always happens!

[glamdring]

Yes it can, as someone else has pointed out, the game has already calculated whats going to happen.

The only 2 logical reasons the ai does what it does is:

1-its calculated the result and knows a goal will go in then and reacts to the goal before it happens, meaning the sub comes on right after the goal is scored.

2-the ai can make instant subs, the user cannot.

Either way, its cheating. Stop parroting what SI say, they are not going to admit their engine cheats and why trust them, they already lie to our faces by saying no cds are illegal.

People keep using this umbrella term "the game" as if it is all just a single entity with all its information just sloshing around for every aspect of the game to access. Program code only works that way if it is specifically programmed to do so. There is no such thing, as I said above and others have also said, as some single entity "the game". The match engine is one AI module, the managers are separate AI modules. If you choose to fly in the face of all reason and common sense and assume that SI have programmed the game so that information on pre-calculated match events that haven't yet happened get passed to the AI manager during a game then I guess that is up to you, but I am more than happy to believe that the game is not deliberately programmed in so idiotic a way.

So, of your two logical reasons, No. 1 is just plain incorrect and No. 2 may be technically correct, but only for the reasons described above, that the AI can react instantly when a goal goes in and make its decision on substitutes in that small window of time between the goal hitting the back of the net and the players returning to the centre circle to kick off again whereas the user can rarely manage to do that simply because it takes time to react and click the relevant buttons.

[philly_flyer10]

Ok, I'll clarify my position:

1) Yes, the match engine calculates the run of play up untill a change is made. As the match engine has been proven by other users of these forums to treat the AI and human users EXACTLY the same, it can't tell who's who and thus the AI manager can't get the information you claim it has

2) It can't make instant subs, it just reacts to things like you do, as I've already stated

You're just repeating the same argument again and again, regardless of what I say. If you listen to the other users on the forums, make some subtle changes to your tactics and play on maximum highlights, the problems you're experiencing won't happen

Also, playing a game without a legally purchased CD IS illegal. If you're so convinced the game is a "cheat" and that SI are lying to you and trying to ruin the game for you, why are you here arguing about it? Why not go and do something else? They're hardly going to make a flawed product and drive away their customers, are they?

They said no cds are illegal, thats plainly wrong and they lie to us. If they lie to us about that, they are more likely to lie about other things.

Virtually all games cheats, people cannot seem to understand that and the gullible ones only parrot what SI says.

You say it does neither of the things I say but no one can explain why the ai makes a defensive sub while losing that just happens to only make sense after the goal has gone in.

Ive already said games give the illusion of competing on the same level, I enjoy the game and I enjoy other games I know cheat, it still doesnt change the fact that most of them cheat.

This is where the fanboy thing comes in, I cannot believe people are so gullible they think that FM is the only game that doesnt cheat and everything is done on the level and these are the people you cannot talk sense with.

You make as much sense as people who say driving games or shoot em ups compete on the same level where its clear the ai dont use the user physics and the ai in FPS take one shot to be killed and the user takes 20 shots to be killed.

[glamdring]

Virtually all games cheats, people cannot seem to understand that and the gullible ones only parrot what SI says.

I haven't heard a single word from SI on the subject.

You say it does neither of the things I say but no one can explain why the ai makes a defensive sub while losing that just happens to only make sense after the goal has gone in.

I don't recall ever seeing that happen so I'm not going to try to explain something that I have seen no proof of.

Ive already said games give the illusion of competing on the same level, I enjoy the game and I enjoy other games I know cheat, it still doesnt change the fact that most of them cheat.

This is where the fanboy thing comes in, I cannot believe people are so gullible they think that FM is the only game that doesnt cheat and everything is done on the level and these are the people you cannot talk sense with.

Seemingly your use of the word "cheat" is so vague and wide-ranging that sure every game cheats and every player who plays any of those games also cheats so there isn't really a discussion! All humans cheat and all AI games cheat by your definition - end of story.

[Squirmy Rooter 2.0]

Finally, I have decided to ignore the repeated statements from PaulC that the match engine has no knowledge of which team is the AI and which team is the user and that the AI does not cheat.

That's fine that the match engine does not differentiate between human and AI, but that's not the whole story is it?

When it comes to what's feeding inputs into the match engine, there is a definite massive distinction between human and AI "managers".

Human managers have to observe the match unfolding and apply logic, reasoning, experience, intuition, knowledge etc. to determine the correct tactics for a given situation.

The AI has algorithms, the processes contained within are not comparable to any of the thought processes that the human uses. It may also use knowledge and methods that are not available or possible by us in order to make it's decisions. This is why it is "Artificial Intelligence" and not just "Intelligence". The AI will be painstakingly tuned by SI to ensure that overall the AI doesn't have any obvious unfair advantage, and yet remains challenging.

Paul may repeatedly state that the AI doesn't "cheat", and I believe this to be true only so far as that - for example - it doesn't have a magic "I WIN" button that decides that no matter what you do, it's going to score 2 goals in the last 2 minutes and rob you of victory, maniacally laughing at you as it does so.

However, what if those algorithms were just too good in some situations? What if something was missed in the tuning process? What if the AI's version of the 4-2-4 was more effective than intended? Could that be considered cheating?

Maybe.

But then again, the AI would be well within it's rights (if it had any of course!) to accuse us of cheating by using our eyes to recognise patterns as the game plays out on the 2D representation. We're cheating by drawing on our experience of watching real-life football matches that the AI can't possibly have seen. We're cheating by going on the T&TT forum and downloading "super tactics" or just taking advantage of another user's analysis.

Personally I don't care if the AI cheats. I have a good understanding of how AI in games works, and what it means to "cheat" in this context. As long as the game is reasonably challenging, and there is an adequate perception of intelligence in the computer-controlled opposition, then that's all that matters.

To the people who say "the AI cannot cheat, it doesn't have a brain". The AI can cheat. It doesn't need a brain. It just needs to be programmed to cheat. And more often than not, it actually needs to be programmed to cheat in order to keep up with the unfair advantage that the human opposition naturally has.

[Nomis07]

Seemingly your use of the word "cheat" is so vague and wide-ranging that sure every game cheats

Lucky I read that before I posted, because I was about to say the exact same thing. There are certain things that philly_flyer10 has said and I agree are irritating and shouldn't be in the game, but I don't think it's cheating I just think it's not very well done in the game.

[glamdring]

That's fine that the match engine does not differentiate between human and AI, but that's not the whole story is it?

When it comes to what's feeding inputs into the match engine, there is a definite massive distinction between human and AI "managers".

Human managers have to observe the match unfolding and apply logic, reasoning, experience, intuition, knowledge etc. to determine the correct tactics for a given situation.

The AI has algorithms, the processes contained within are not comparable to any of the thought processes that the human uses. It may also use knowledge and methods that are not available or possible by us in order to make it's decisions. This is why it is "Artificial Intelligence" and not just "Intelligence". The AI will be painstakingly tuned by SI to ensure that overall the AI doesn't have any obvious unfair advantage, and yet remains challenging.

Paul may repeatedly state that the AI doesn't "cheat", and I believe this to be true only so far as that - for example - it doesn't have a magic "I WIN" button that decides that no matter what you do, it's going to score 2 goals in the last 2 minutes and rob you of victory, maniacally laughing at you as it does so.

However, what if those algorithms were just too good in some situations? What if something was missed in the tuning process? What if the AI's version of the 4-2-4 was more effective than intended? Could that be considered cheating?

Maybe.

Well, again that all comes down really to the semantics of what people define as "cheating" and I guess everyone's definition is different. Obviously what you are describing above is the AI's alternative to a "brain". Something like 4-2-4 being too effective or too many goals being scored from corners (something which, I might add, is almost always more in favour of the human player rather than the AI in my games, although many of those late goals I concede are corners) I would consider as either dodgy programming or, in the vast majority of cases, just slightly unbalanced programming where so many variables are concerned. Others consider that as "the game" or "the AI" cheating.

But then again, the AI would be well within it's rights (if it had any of course!) to accuse us of cheating by using our eyes to recognise patterns as the game plays out on the 2D representation. We're cheating by drawing on our experience of watching real-life football matches that the AI can't possibly have seen. We're cheating by going on the T&TT forum and downloading "super tactics" or just taking advantage of another user's analysis.

Yup! Players don't like to consider themselves as cheating though!

Personally I don't care if the AI cheats. I have a good understanding of how AI in games works, and what it means to "cheat" in this context. As long as the game is reasonably challenging, and there is an adequate perception of intelligence in the computer-controlled opposition, then that's all that matters.

To the people who say "the AI cannot cheat, it doesn't have a brain". The AI can cheat. It doesn't need a brain. It just needs to be programmed to cheat. And more often than not, it actually needs to be programmed to cheat in order to keep up with the unfair advantage that the human opposition naturally has.

I'd agree with most of that, although again my definition of "cheat" is different. The people who make the game may be cheating if what was happening where to be considered cheating, but not the AI itself. As it is, as I've said, I consider neither the AI nor the game programmers to be cheating.

[earmack]

Squirmy: I said the A.I can't cheat because to cheat you have to break rules, an A.I can't cheat because it can't BREAK rules, its a logic machine (well its code used on a logic machine), as I said it (the programme) can be written so as to have an inherent advantage over the user, you can call it cheating if you want but symantically in the context of a computer programme that is incorrect.

WWF: Is there any need for that tone? Maybe you are fedup with people 'constantly' complaining about a thing you now (and for a while) have had a lot invested in but theres no need to be rude. Everything you said had been said before in the thread with less attitude. I of course am most dissapointed in your comment:

'Fourthly, the light has come on with regard to the uselessness of my decision making. I had always regarded my ability to grind out 1-0 wins as being directly linked to my proactively switching to a defensive formation during the last quarter and targetting oppositional threats. Likewise, I used to think that my late comebacks were a result of my going to a 4-2-4 and putting the AI under pressure. However, I now see that, actually, I only achieved these things because I was lucky enough to be playing a match in which the AI had decided not to cheat. From this point on, I vow not to make any in match change as I now accept that the whole outcome of any match is pre-determined by the AI's decision to cheat or not to cheat.'

This seems to be a response to me psoting I didn't know how relevant I was after not being able to win with a 4-4-2 and changing to a 4-3-1-2 and insta-win (every single word in my post about this were accurate and didn't talk about the A.I cheating at all). I certainly didn't opine about it in terms that warranted this sort of response. It was actually a valid point to make in an appropriate thread so lay off. Since no-one else talked about how irrelevant/arbritrary(with regards their effects) their decisions/changes felt I have assumed this was a dig at me hence this response.

[Heisenberg]

They said no cds are illegal, thats plainly wrong and they lie to us. If they lie to us about that, they are more likely to lie about other things.

Virtually all games cheats, people cannot seem to understand that and the gullible ones only parrot what SI says.

You say it does neither of the things I say but no one can explain why the ai makes a defensive sub while losing that just happens to only make sense after the goal has gone in.

Ive already said games give the illusion of competing on the same level, I enjoy the game and I enjoy other games I know cheat, it still doesnt change the fact that most of them cheat.

This is where the fanboy thing comes in, I cannot believe people are so gullible they think that FM is the only game that doesnt cheat and everything is done on the level and these are the people you cannot talk sense with.

You make as much sense as people who say driving games or shoot em ups compete on the same level where its clear the ai dont use the user physics and the ai in FPS take one shot to be killed and the user takes 20 shots to be killed.

"They said no cds are illegal, thats plainly wrong and they lie to us. If they lie to us about that, they are more likely to lie about other things." What do you actually mean here? Playing a game without the disk it's meant to run on (using a "crack" or whatever) is illegal. It doesn't matter whether you heard this from SI or anywhere else, it's against the law. If that statement is the whole basis for your "SI lie to us" argument and thus your cheating argument, you seriously need to think about what you're saying

I DID explain the sub. As soon as you see a goal if you try to go straight to your tactics you can do it and thus make a change. You've been offered proof that the AI can't know what's going to happen, and an explanation of how the subs happen and yet you ignore this and carry on repeating yourself and ignoring the explanation because it doesn't agree with you and you can't offer a counterargument

Ah, fanboy comments. The mark of a well thought out argument if ever there was one.

All games work differently. What you seem not to be remembering is that this, as well as being a game is a simulation, and thus designed to mimic real life. While in other games, there may be difficulty levels, catch up settings and so on, this is a football management sim and has no relation to them. You accuse me of being gullible and blindly believing SI have made a perfect game, yet you make comparisons to totally different kinds of games to justify your arguments and ignore explanations to your problems with the game instead of admitting that maybe your approach to the game is flawed, and there are solutions if you're prepared to look for them

Yes, the substitution system could be improved a little. But it doesn't mean the game is a cheat, or that SI would sell a flawed product. Can you explain why they'd do that?

[earmack]

"They said no cds are illegal, thats plainly wrong and they lie to us. If they lie to us about that, they are more likely to lie about other things." What do you actually mean here? Playing a game without the disk it's meant to run on (using a "crack" or whatever) is illegal. It doesn't matter whether you heard this from SI or anywhere else, it's against the law. If that statement is the whole basis for your "SI lie to us" argument and thus your cheating argument, you seriously need to think about what you're saying

I DID explain the sub. As soon as you see a goal if you try to go straight to your tactics you can do it and thus make a change. You've been offered proof that the AI can't know what's going to happen, and an explanation of how the subs happen and yet you ignore this and carry on repeating yourself and ignoring the explanation because it doesn't agree with you and you can't offer a counterargument

Ah, fanboy comments. The mark of a well thought out argument if ever there was one.

All games work differently. What you seem not to be remembering is that this, as well as being a game is a simulation, and thus designed to mimic real life. While in other games, there may be difficulty levels, catch up settings and so on, this is a football management sim and has no relation to them. You accuse me of being gullible and blindly believing SI have made a perfect game, yet you make comparisons to totally different kinds of games to justify your arguments and ignore explanations to your problems with the game instead of admitting that maybe your approach to the game is flawed, and there are solutions if you're prepared to look for them

Yes, the substitution system could be improved a little. But it doesn't mean the game is a cheat, or that SI would sell a flawed product. Can you explain why they'd do that?

No-Cd cracks certainly aren't illegal, they are only illegal if you don't own the rights to use the product (the same way breaking copy protection on music CD's isn't illegal - sometimes its neccessary to get the damn thing to play).

Edit : SI DO sell a flawed product, as does EVERY PC GAME MAKER EVER, they all have bugs because theres so many different: operating systems, diffferently configured mother boards, graphics cards, processors etc...etc... even console games makers realease bugged games (they have MUCH less excuse to do so). Phily and you disagree vehmently so you can't see his point and he can't see yours, to help you: He is saying there is a history of games 'cheating' (in fact if racing games didn't 'cheat' you could never win as the computer would send the cars round perfectly) and this means theres a probablility that FM does the same (to be fair he said this as a reply to people saying it wasn't possible, this was mostly an argument over symantics).

[wwfan]

Iwasn't having a specific pop at anybody. Well, perhaps the car crash guy. What I was doing was trying to illustrate the ridiculousness of the assumptions hiding behind every cheat argument. That you recognised I was being ironic suggests you have some understanding of the weakness of your own position. That doesn't mean I don't recognise flaws in the ME. I do and have discussed them at length. It just means I believe the cheat argument rests on nothing more than hot air.

The first time a cheat argument deviates from a sour grapes perspective, I will happily debate points. Until then, I reserve my right to be ironic.

finally, I suggest that a few of you veer away from the direction you are headed. You are approaching subject matter that has no place on a game development forum and will result in an instant and permanent ban.

[Boskovic]

i believe the game cheats you out of £40

[Styles79]

AI match engine does not cheat , all other game mechanics are giving outrageous advantages to AI

Giving advantages to the AI = cheating.

[glamdring]

By the same token the advantages given to the human user are also cheating. e.g. the fact that you have a brain to use means you are cheating because the AI doesn't have that luxury!

[Styles79]

By the same token the advantages given to the human user are also cheating. e.g. the fact that you have a brain to use means you are cheating because the AI doesn't have that luxury!

What advantage does the human have? The AI knows the game engine better then any human could dream off.

[glamdring]

Whatever "knowledge" the AI has it is still bounded by programming - having a brain is always an advantage over artificial intelligence...it depends on the brain in question obviously, but there can be no question that a brain gives you advantages that AI can never have, just as AI has some advantages that the human brain doesn't. It's just like some strikers being good in the air and some having pace instead.

[Heisenberg]

No-Cd cracks certainly aren't illegal, they are only illegal if you don't own the rights to use the product (the same way breaking copy protection on music CD's isn't illegal - sometimes its neccessary to get the damn thing to play).

Edit : SI DO sell a flawed product, as does EVERY PC GAME MAKER EVER, they all have bugs because theres so many different: operating systems, diffferently configured mother boards, graphics cards, processors etc...etc... even console games makers realease bugged games (they have MUCH less excuse to do so). Phily and you disagree vehmently so you can't see his point and he can't see yours, to help you: He is saying there is a history of games 'cheating' (in fact if racing games didn't 'cheat' you could never win as the computer would send the cars round perfectly) and this means theres a probablility that FM does the same (to be fair he said this as a reply to people saying it wasn't possible, this was mostly an argument over symantics).

True, the argument had got down to small issues that didn't really prove anything. What I mean with regard to the flaws is that no game developer purposefully adds flaws to a game (note that I do not consider giving the AI the ability to make mistakes a flaw). I'm also not sure why you consider the game to be cheating when it doesn't do everything "perfectly" but I think that's just a lack of understanding on my part

[Heisenberg]

Also, I'd like to apologise if I over-argumed my point in this thread. I realised after reading back through some of it I may have gone in off the deep end a little, and that wasn't my intention.