Difference between revisions of "Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/Participants/Keeping worse bots"
m |
m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
3. They don't waste time in roborumble as they die too fast, making a battle almost done immediately. | 3. They don't waste time in roborumble as they die too fast, making a battle almost done immediately. | ||
| − | |||
OK, reduce load is good. | OK, reduce load is good. | ||
| + | </s> | ||
Latest revision as of 09:56, 7 September 2017
There are a few bots doing worse than sample.SittingDuck, but imo we should keep them, at least not removing them in one step.
1. Removing a lot of bots in roborumble in a short period of time disables the comparation between different versions of every bot in APS, survival, PWIN, etc. As they all depends highly on the distribution of the participants. Doing so makes the recorded APS, Survival and PWIN in version history completely useless, and you can't even reload the scores as the score against those removed bots are always counted in inactive versions.
2. They are a great indicator of whether your bot has some serious bug that happens rarely. And we DO need enough weak bots to have the chance to trigger it.
3. They don't waste time in roborumble as they die too fast, making a battle almost done immediately.
OK, reduce load is good.
