Difference between revisions of "Talk:Displacement Vector"

From Robowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(elaborate a little)
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
Essentially, like a 'guessfactor' except measuring the bot's movement relative to itself, instead of an angle relative to the wave source. --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 14:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 
Essentially, like a 'guessfactor' except measuring the bot's movement relative to itself, instead of an angle relative to the wave source. --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 14:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
ahh, cool concept!  I'm on the verge of understanding it.. lol. I need a minute to think it throu :) -[[User:Jlm0924|Jlm0924]] 03:48, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:48, 18 April 2010

Kudos

Thanks for posting this. I thought I understood it before, but now I really get it. Now to figure out a good neural network representation... =) --Darkcanuck 04:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I understand the method of displacement Vectors. It sounds like a bots begining and end position over a given time is translated to be relative to your own bot before recording. Is this what it is? later on you sum the vectors to get a complete displacent vector to aim at? if someone could correct me. thx -Jlm0924 06:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

It is the relative position to enemy's robot. Like the enemy has moved for -115.23 pixels in the direction of -23.1 degrees or something like this. To get the aiming angle, just projected enemy's movement vector with the displacement vector. --Nat Pavasant 09:27, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, it's relative to the enemy bot. Also, there is no summing of vectors. To get a firing angle, you just multiply a vector by the number of bullet ticks and apply it to the enemy location/heading. The vector basically measures displacement per tick. --Voidious 14:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Essentially, like a 'guessfactor' except measuring the bot's movement relative to itself, instead of an angle relative to the wave source. --Rednaxela 14:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

ahh, cool concept! I'm on the verge of understanding it.. lol. I need a minute to think it throu :) -Jlm0924 03:48, 18 April 2010 (UTC)