On removing bots worse than SittingDuck

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revision as of 7 September 2017 at 08:49.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

On removing bots worse than SittingDuck

Edited by author.
Last edit: 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.

    Xor (talk)03:52, 7 September 2017

    Anyway, I think we should not remove any bot except your own without discussion, unless those bots are violating rules or completely broken (e.g. invalid package).

    Now, maybe we may add another rule: If your bot is worse than sample.SittingDuck, it may have some serious errors, therefore may be removed to reduce load for everyone who runs roborumble.

      Xor (talk)05:50, 7 September 2017
       

      There are also some bots that try to do as badly as possible, so do worse than SittingDuck by not getting survival bonus etc.

        Skilgannon (talk)09:49, 7 September 2017