2.7.2
I don't understand, why would you ever ignore a bulletHitBullet?
I wasn't sure about making a club, but I've been watching for it, and you're at 90.02 APS with 1866 battles and 922 pairings. Congrats. =)
And you were only a few hours behind...
I think with that 'light flattener' it would make sense for it to have very deep rolling depths, similar to a 'typical' VCS gun, considering how often flatteners get new data.
This first version was k=min(50, num data points / 5) of the last 1000 data points, all weighted equally (no chronological weighting, still divide by inverse distance). I still have a fair bit of tweaking to do, so hoping to squeeze another .1 or so out of it. But with my luck my first guess will be impossible to optimize further. =) This was an improvement of like 0.3 in my 500-bot test bed, but of course that's quickly halved with all the 99% bots that I don't test against.
Of course, I was thinking 1000 was about 1 round of data, when it's actually ~20 because it's not using virtual waves. Doh! Guess I'll try dialing that down a lot. =)
Congrats indeed!
Regarding "why would you ever ignore a bulletHitBullet?", based on the version history it sounds like this was done as a hack to get better HawkOnFire score. It makes sense to me that this would work for that because sometimes HawkOnFire doesn't *exactly* aim at GF=0.0, but if you start trying to dodge a slightly-off-zero location, you're more likely to just barely get hit on the other side of slightly-off-zero.
Yup, Rednaxela hit it on the head. HOF shoots fairly off-center surprisingly often, so I relied on my pre-seeded GF0 to dodge. It only ignored BulletHitBullets if there weren't any hits yet (ie, dodging the GF0 was successful).
Holy wombat! You guys set the bar very high :). Congrats!
90+APS on 900+ competitors is, well, very impressive.
