Planned investigations

Fragment of a discussion from Talk:GrubbmThree
← Thread:Talk:GrubbmThree/Planned investigations/reply (8)

Jump to navigation Jump to search

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
You must confirm your email address before editing pages. Please set and validate your email address through your user preferences.

You can view and copy the source of this page.

That is true, it is also my intention to do so. I always compare against the older version via Botdetails, it let you see the differences betweeen the common pairings, so that really is the difference, even if only 1000 bots are in common. Just remove the 'd' from versionnumber and press Compare.

Return to Thread:Talk:GrubbmThree/Planned investigations/reply (8).

My main worry here is about difference in liteclient performance. Most of the old rankings were done with ancient version of robocode. It is possible that your old bot was tuned to exploit a glitch without you even knowing about.

Beaming (talk)‎

I do know that some bots don't work very well in Robocode 1.9.2.x and/or Java 8. See f.e. Xiongan.xiongan and tcf.Drifter, they get scores of 0 against GrubbmThree, while on my system (1.9.2.5 and Java 7) they just work ok.

GrubbmGait (talk)‎

There is else but Java 7 vs 8. I ran tcf.Drifter vs. GrubbmThree 0.9d in robocode GUI with Java 8. Drifter constantly wins the match.

So I cannot attribute 100% loss which we see in rumble just to the Java version.

Beaming (talk)‎

I did read somewhere that tcf.Drifter had some problem with the 1.9.2.5_beta versions, maybe someone is running the rumble with a non-official 1.9.2.5 version ?

GrubbmGait (talk)‎

Retrieved from "http://robowiki.net/wiki/Thread:Talk:GrubbmThree/Planned_investigations/reply_(8)#Planned_investigations_5685"