Difference between revisions of "Talk:NP"
(reply) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
It seems that kev's implementation of WaveSnake probably the best Velocity Surfing implementation. My own extended version from it not only cost 50 more bytes, but also cost me -7APS! (compare to 1.2, 1.3 and 1.3b have some features removed) Maybe just spent those bytes on gun is better. » <span style="font-size:0.9em;color:darkgreen;">[[User:Nat|Nat]] | [[User_talk:Nat|Talk]]</span> » 13:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) | It seems that kev's implementation of WaveSnake probably the best Velocity Surfing implementation. My own extended version from it not only cost 50 more bytes, but also cost me -7APS! (compare to 1.2, 1.3 and 1.3b have some features removed) Maybe just spent those bytes on gun is better. » <span style="font-size:0.9em;color:darkgreen;">[[User:Nat|Nat]] | [[User_talk:Nat|Talk]]</span> » 13:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hey nat, nice APS jump with 1.32! I see that my VS micro is still your biggest problembot, however:-). I have a question, why does your robot try to stay so close to the enemy? I've always heard that it was better for robots with good movement to stay farther back. Is it to try to keep only one enemy bullet it the air?--[[User:CrazyBassoonist|CrazyBassoonist]] 18:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Well, the velocity surfing engine saves the data for last bullet only so I need to stay close or when I hit the data will go into wrong segment. In another word, it only coded to care only a bullet at a time. But I'm developing NP 2.0, which I took your idea on Wave Surfing. Watch out! » <span style="font-size:0.9em;color:darkgreen;">[[User:Nat|Nat]] | [[User_talk:Nat|Talk]]</span> » 02:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 03:22, 3 August 2009
Hey, if anyone can find a way to squeeze this robot. Please told me. I think it can squeeze more, but I can't figure out where. Thanks in advance! » Nat | Talk » 16:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, to let you know, ry.LightningBug is nearly the same concept as yours. It uses velocitysurfing and GF. Take a look at it. --HUNRobar 19:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Just looked at LightningBug, it is basically WaveSnake without any modification, and almost exactly same GF implementation as GFTargetingBot. For what I look at, he/she does combine it brainless, really. Since WaveSnake fire at 2.4, in onBulletHit it reduce the energy by 11.4. That robot fire at 1.9, and still reduce by 11.4. And it never control it distance, causing the movement segmentation to be useless. And it isn't do any codesize-optimized. Even this robot doesn't rank as high as that robot, I do understand every parts of this robot. » Nat | Talk » 12:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
It seems that kev's implementation of WaveSnake probably the best Velocity Surfing implementation. My own extended version from it not only cost 50 more bytes, but also cost me -7APS! (compare to 1.2, 1.3 and 1.3b have some features removed) Maybe just spent those bytes on gun is better. » Nat | Talk » 13:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey nat, nice APS jump with 1.32! I see that my VS micro is still your biggest problembot, however:-). I have a question, why does your robot try to stay so close to the enemy? I've always heard that it was better for robots with good movement to stay farther back. Is it to try to keep only one enemy bullet it the air?--CrazyBassoonist 18:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the velocity surfing engine saves the data for last bullet only so I need to stay close or when I hit the data will go into wrong segment. In another word, it only coded to care only a bullet at a time. But I'm developing NP 2.0, which I took your idea on Wave Surfing. Watch out! » Nat | Talk » 02:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
