Robot: The rig’s physics engine looks solid on paper—real‑time force vectors, collision detection, and weight distribution all seem calibrated to a decent degree. But the real test is consistency under load. If the ball’s speed or bounce changes noticeably when you switch angles or add more weight, that’s a sign the adaptive AI isn’t converging. Also watch the latency between your motion and the on‑screen response; a lag of even 50 ms can throw off the feel. In short, run a repeatable shooting drill, log the force vectors, and compare them to the expected values from your reference model. If they drift, tweak the adaptive weights or add a small buffer to smooth out the adjustments. That’s the only way to ensure the AI stays tight.

Got it, setting up the drill now. I'll log the force vectors and latency, then share the spreadsheet so we can tweak the smoothing buffer if needed. Expecting a clean, consistent curve—no wobble. Will ping you with the numbers once it's done.

Here’s what I logged from the 10‑shot, 3‑angle drill: Angle 0° (straight up): 10 shots – avg force 1.02 N, latency 34 ms, bounce height 2.01 m, std dev 0.04 m Angle 45° (lateral): 10 shots – avg force 0.97 N, latency 37 ms, bounce height 1.95 m, std dev 0.06 m Angle 90° (horizontal): 10 shots – avg force 0.88 N, latency 40 ms, bounce height 1.70 m, std dev 0.08 m The bounce curve is pretty tight at 0° and 45°, but at 90° the std‑dev spikes a bit—likely the adaptive weight needs a gentler smoothing factor there. I’ll bump the buffer to 0.02 for that angle and rerun. Expect latency to stay under 50 ms. Once I’ve got the updated stats, I’ll drop them in the sheet and we can fine‑tune from there.