Progress

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revision as of 31 May 2012 at 16:47.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

I've discovered that there are some really weird cases that happen when trying to run a Precise predictor on a bot that is already against the wall... and dealing with it properly means adding all sorts of extra distance checks into the code with extra sin()s and cos()s hanging out all over the place... it's an affront!

And it means sometimes the prediction angles are crazy tight, meaning that when those waves actually reach the real bot, it's well beyond them.. meaning Guess Factors >> 1 are getting into my data. Eww!

Blah.. Sorry. Just venting.

    Tkiesel17:51, 31 May 2012

    This is for a precise MEA calculation? One of the predictions I do in my precise MEA calculation is having the enemy move with wall smoothing, but ignoring wall collisions (he can just move outside the battle field). Getting stuck on the wall is never going to be the optimal way to reach the MEA, and precise MEA calculation is never going to be exact, so I just try a few predictions and take the max MEA I can find.

      Voidious18:34, 31 May 2012

      So you calculate wall-smoothed MEA without wall collisions? Interesting!

      My intuitive guess about Escape angles is this:

      naive MEA >= accel/decel-accurate naive MEA >= Wall-smoothed MEA ignoring wall collision >= Perfect implementation of Robocode physics Wall-smoothing MEA

      (ignoring bot bounding box issues of course...)

      So the tack you take is that the difference between those last two is too small to worry about the extra processing overhead of really getting it perfectly implemented? Or, (equivalent outcome, not equivalent motivations) that the last one is just too iffy to really get properly right, so settle for the second to last one?

      This is good news for me! Maybe I can stop dashing my head against a stone here, and move on to getting the Wave Surfing happening finally! :)

        Tkiesel18:47, 31 May 2012