Talk:CunobelinDC

Whoa! 327 pairings and it above WeeksOnEnd! But it lost badly to WeeksOnEnd (edit: you seem to lost to singletick pm since you lost to WeeklongObsession too) :-( Can't wait for the stable ranking! » Nat | Talk » 10:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

3 Pairings to go and you will be news KING! 462 battles to go and you will be first member of The 2100 Club/Mini!!! Hope it will hover over! » Nat | Talk » 11:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Pairings just complete and you are still at 1st. Congratulation! » Nat | Talk » 11:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

2102.3 with 760 battles. Too bad that when pairing complete it no longer get priority over other robots :-( » Nat | Talk » 12:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, my loss to any decent PM gun was sort of expected, as my only surfing attributes are latVel, lastLatVel and distance. If I want to improve my PL score a bit I'll have to add some time-based segments in, but I'll need to free up some codesize before I can do that. And I'm not sure where I'd manage something like that without reducing functionality. I'm sure I'll figure something out though ;-) --Skilgannon 12:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Three clients running isn't fast enough. I really expected your bot to be in The 2100 Club/Mini before I went to sleep! (and I'll go to sleep within a couple of hours) » Nat | Talk » 13:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

• But it's already there... pairings are complete so I don't think the score will change much. The reason it was originally stipulated as 1000 battles was that pairings would not fill up immediately, but by around 1000 they would be mostly full. The new server does a better job at filling up the pairings ASAP. I hold very little value in ELO and Glicko as fixed ranking systems because of the rating drift. I'm quite sure 2100 ELO corresponded to around 85 APS, I think it's time to switch to the new standards. --Skilgannon 13:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

• I think I suggested that The 8500 Club before =) This is the first bot in ... err ... a year? that have ELO rating over 2100! » Nat | Talk » 13:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
• Why don't you create page? » Nat | Talk » 13:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
• Wouldn't a better name be The 85APS Club? I actually have to go now, otherwise I'd write it up now =) --Skilgannon 14:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

• Well, it is not exactly 85APS, I think it's a kind of 86.XXXX because both WeeksOnEnd and Komarious get APS 85.xx but still have ELO at 208x. » Nat | Talk » 14:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Noooooooooo!! =) Nice work. I'm still very happy that I found the bug with my latest Komarious changes, even if you snatched the throne out of my hands just as I was taking it! Only a different gun than Cunobelin, or movement too? Did Cunobelin have PM before? I can't see a DC gun gaining that many points over a GF, but over a PM, I could... --Voidious 13:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Cunobelin use Toorkild's gun too so only change is the wave surfing to DC. As Skilgannon wrote in this page, I think he just convert from Cunobelin in an hour. » Nat | Talk » 13:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, what Nat said, the gun has been a multiple-choice PM for a while, and stayed that way. A variation on this gun is what Toorkild is using to dominate the Micro division. It's the movement that switched from VCS to DC, I presume the reason it's better than the VCS is the quicker learning across multiple dimensions. --Skilgannon 13:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh! Wow. Yeah, I think there is something to the quick learning of DC. I've still got some mini-DC code from early versions of LuminariousDuo, maybe it's time to start tinkering. =) Btw, is it at all possible for you to post a TC-challenger version of CunobelinDC? I have commented out TC code in Komarious, I could do the same, and I'd love to know how the guns compare. I think it's obviously your movement that's superior, but benchmarks always help. --Voidious 13:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, here's a modified version of Toorkild, with the functionally equivalent gun. Technically, because it rebuilds enemy movement from advancing/lateral velocity, it will be more accurate in a TC where it doesn't move, but I'm still interested to see how it does =) --Skilgannon 14:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Sweet, thanks. I'll try and run some TCs tonight. --Voidious 14:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)