Difference between revisions of "Thread:Talk:GrubbmThree/Planned investigations/reply (15)"
GrubbmGait (talk | contribs) m (Reply to Planned investigations) |
GrubbmGait (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In the meantime two more ideas next to the two first ones have popped up that show some promise, at least in theory. | In the meantime two more ideas next to the two first ones have popped up that show some promise, at least in theory. | ||
| + | |||
- At start, turn radar towards the middle of the field. Gains nothing (maybe 0.02 APS) and cost quite some code. So dump it. | - At start, turn radar towards the middle of the field. Gains nothing (maybe 0.02 APS) and cost quite some code. So dump it. | ||
| + | |||
- Introduce 'wobble'. This shows some promise, but still is rough and needs more exploration. The rough version gains 0.3 APS though. | - Introduce 'wobble'. This shows some promise, but still is rough and needs more exploration. The rough version gains 0.3 APS though. | ||
| + | |||
- next to headingchange, also keep speedchange into account. Although I can't exactly follow the Robocode rules (accel and decell is 1) this gives approx 0.4 APS. | - next to headingchange, also keep speedchange into account. Although I can't exactly follow the Robocode rules (accel and decell is 1) this gives approx 0.4 APS. | ||
| + | |||
- my 'prevent wall-shooting' aims in the field and adapts bulletpower to intercept the opponent at that point. This works very well at relatively greater distances. At close range, forget that: Aim in the field and fire full power ! Should gain some 0.x APS | - my 'prevent wall-shooting' aims in the field and adapts bulletpower to intercept the opponent at that point. This works very well at relatively greater distances. At close range, forget that: Aim in the field and fire full power ! Should gain some 0.x APS | ||
It is only a pity that all these things feel a bit 'hacky', while the behaviour of [[MaxRisk]] in a battle has much more natural beauty. | It is only a pity that all these things feel a bit 'hacky', while the behaviour of [[MaxRisk]] in a battle has much more natural beauty. | ||
Latest revision as of 14:06, 21 September 2017
In the meantime two more ideas next to the two first ones have popped up that show some promise, at least in theory.
- At start, turn radar towards the middle of the field. Gains nothing (maybe 0.02 APS) and cost quite some code. So dump it.
- Introduce 'wobble'. This shows some promise, but still is rough and needs more exploration. The rough version gains 0.3 APS though.
- next to headingchange, also keep speedchange into account. Although I can't exactly follow the Robocode rules (accel and decell is 1) this gives approx 0.4 APS.
- my 'prevent wall-shooting' aims in the field and adapts bulletpower to intercept the opponent at that point. This works very well at relatively greater distances. At close range, forget that: Aim in the field and fire full power ! Should gain some 0.x APS
It is only a pity that all these things feel a bit 'hacky', while the behaviour of MaxRisk in a battle has much more natural beauty.
