Rolling Depth

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revision as of 30 June 2019 at 01:18.
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.

Rolling Depth

In Basilisk, the only change I made from 3.2 to 3.3 was increasing the rolling depth by multiplying my bins by .99 rather than .95 every time a wave hits, and it gained me 2 ranking places!(From #8 up to #6). So, I was curious, what rolling depths do other people use in their guns? Also, are 1000 round battles good for testing rolling averages? I like 1000 rounds since it lowers the margin of error, but it might distort my results because it's long term learning, not fast 35 round learning. Thanks!

    Slugzilla (talk)23:52, 29 June 2019

    For non-adaptive movement, not using rolling average works as well, and if added a little, it performs better against multi-mode movement. But for adaptive movement, very fast rolling average is generally used.

    1000 rounds battles are certainly not as accurate as running 30 * 35 rounds battles (1050 in total), that's why roborunner is invented, which you may have a try.

    Btw, I'm using the whole rumble (1100+ robots) for gun testing now, ~5000 battles * 35 rounds = ~175000 rounds in total, which takes me ~2 hour on i9 8 core.

      Xor (talk)02:18, 30 June 2019

      You might also try to weight non-bullet waves (the one where you don't actually fire a bullet) with a factor 0.1 or 0.2. For non-adaptive movements this should not impact scoring, but for adaptive movements it really increases accuracy. For mini Grimmig and micro I don't use rolling depths, for GresSuffurd I use two same guns, one without rolling depth and one with 0.9 (I think) to handle the wavesurfers. Currently my testing is just a handful of battles against my old self to tackle bugs. I try to only make changes that are logical (to me) and don't change to much at the same time.

        GrubbmGait (talk)03:18, 30 June 2019