http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/30_day_battle_records/reply_(30)&feed=atom&action=historyThread:Talk:RoboRumble/30 day battle records/reply (30) - Revision history2024-03-29T08:54:55ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.34.1http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/30_day_battle_records/reply_(30)&diff=28501&oldid=prevMN: Reply to 30 day battle records2013-02-02T14:46:27Z<p>Reply to <a href="/wiki/Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/30_day_battle_records/reply_(29)" title="Thread:Talk:RoboRumble/30 day battle records/reply (29)">30 day battle records</a></p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>Isn't the server which sends battlesnum back to the client? Which is deprecated with the improved priority battles list we have now.<br />
<br />
How I think a good rumble protocol would work:<br />
<br />
- Client requests and downloads the participants list from the wiki server.<br />
<br />
- Client uploads participants list to rating server.<br />
<br />
- Client uploads number of battles per iteration and downloads priority battles list from rating server. (can be done in the same request which uploads participants)<br />
<br />
- Client downloads missing participants.<br />
<br />
Run battles. If there is any error downloading priority battles list, fallback to random battle generation.<br />
<br />
- Client uploads all battle results at once, keeping data structure as close as possible to how it is returned from the API. Server returns an OK or ERROR after the upload. If an ERROR occurs, keep the results for next iteration.<br />
<br />
2 main differences are bulk uploads in the end and priority battles download in the beginning.</div>MN