Thread history
From Talk:LifeNext
Viewing a history listing
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Viewing a history listing
| Time | User | Activity | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06:04, 5 July 2018 | Xor (talk | contribs) | New reply created | (Reply to Wave Danger) |
| 15:02, 3 July 2018 | Dsekercioglu (talk | contribs) | New reply created | (Reply to Wave Danger) |
| 09:34, 3 July 2018 | Xor (talk | contribs) | Comment text edited | |
| 07:01, 3 July 2018 | Xor (talk | contribs) | New reply created | (Reply to Wave Danger) |
| 23:10, 2 July 2018 | Dsekercioglu (talk | contribs) | Comment text edited | (Made the question more clear) |
| 23:09, 2 July 2018 | Dsekercioglu (talk | contribs) | New thread created |
- I was testing my robot against LifeNext and when I opened the debug graphics something caught my attention:
- If I understood correctly, after some low danger LifeNext stops drawing circles that represent danger. However, in some cases the wave starts with one wide dangerous area and then it splits into two small dangerous areas.
- Is that the intended behavior?
Dsekercioglu (talk)
LifeNext was too old, I couldn't recall what's intended exactly. However, it's known that LifeNext has a lot of bugs ;) In my test bed, it even performs worse against Scalar which yet has no knn. Anyway, thanks for reporting the bug, I will do some investigation later.
The virtually wide/split dangerous area is just per debug graphics limit — you can't paint too much due to robocode graphics performance. It's actually not really affecting anything.
First of all, thank you for your response. Actually distance between bullet and robot may be better than just bins since robot width stays the same no matter what the distance is.
Dsekercioglu (talk)
