http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Thread%3ATalk%3ARoboRumble%2FParticipants%2FKeeping_worse_bots%2Freply_%288%29 2026-04-13T21:18:12Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.34.1 http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/Participants/Keeping_worse_bots/reply_(8)&diff=51458&oldid=prev 2017-09-07T18:11:29Z

<p>Reply to <a href="/wiki/Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/Participants/Keeping_worse_bots/reply_(5)" title="Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/Participants/Keeping worse bots/reply (5)">On removing bots worse than SittingDuck</a></p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>Let me argue that missing jars is the problem. Suppose you enter a new bot in the rumble and suppose that 10 weakest bots are inaccessible. Then this new bot, will have overall smaller APS than some old bot who already had a chance to pair up with weak ones.<br /> <br /> So your APS would be smaller, not because your bot is weaker but because bots are missing. Literumble will show this as &quot;Rankings Not Stable&quot; but its probably not what you want.<br /> <br /> Opposite will happen if 10 strong bots are missing.<br /> <br /> Thus I am pushing for removal of missing bots so the rankings is done on the same set.</div>

Beaming