User talk:Rednaxela

I happened to know that the reverse of Rednaxela is: Alexander And there exists a place called Rednaxela Terrace ;)

May I inquire why my user page was deleted?

Well I assume ‎Tmservo migrated the 'blank page' notice on the old wiki to your user page "To infinity and beyond". I am not sure if you had content there before, but if so it was overridden and Rednaxela didn't check if there was history and so just deleted it. As the 'blank page' notice of the old robowiki wasn't something that should be migrated.

So either Rednaxela either made a mistake and deleted it instead of reverting ‎Tmservo's change, OR there wasn't anything there and he deleted it because content was incorrectly migrated from the old wiki.

I am quite sure there were no page like this in the old wiki. At least when I clicked on it the old page wiki was blank.

And yes there were a content about myself and links to my EvBot.

I would appreciate if you or someone else revert the deletion.

The page created and deleted was Beaming, but your real user page is User:Beaming, which still exists.

Hi, I have made this mistakeDeleted Bots and in my roborumble client I can't download Diamond. Can you please run it if you can?So Diamond will be the second again.

As far as I see, you have restored everything back.

But why do you put your messages in random places in the off-topic locations?

What Voidious said. I didn't delete your user page, look at Voidious's links. I deleted a different page that Tmservo mistakenly added in an attempt to migrate a page that did not exist on the old wiki (presumably due to misinterpreting the "To infinity and beyond" message as content when it actually appears whenever you visit a non-existent page on the old wiki)

My apologizes. Indeed, my user page is alive and running. Thank you for pointing it out. I am still new to the wiki infrastructure.

So, it recently occurred to me that the targeting/movement challenges are currently done based on the score outcome, but it really all comes down to hitrate. The thing is, there should be less noise/variability in a measure of only hitrate. So... to facilitate I started writing a tool that uses the "robocode.control.*" APIs to measure hitrate without needing to modify bots to keep track of it, and I'm thinking I ought to expand this tool to gather lots of information from the battle. Anyone have any suggestions of information I should track?

Here's an interesting pair of graphs from 500 battles of DrussGT versus Diamond

It seems that Diamond keeps it's hitrate up into the 2nd round whereas DrussGT's falls sharply right away, but it doesn't fall as far and seems to recover more. I think this type of hitrate graph could be rather interesting for investigating the dynamics of surfers versus adaptive targeting...

During the first round the surfing is very predictable, making the guns learn much quicker; there is also very little data in the gun, so it acts like a very fast rolling gun.

I wonder how these are affected by when flatteners and alternate guns are enabled and disabled?

Also, keep in mind that DrussGT fires lower bullet power (or did, last time I checked).

Yep, I'm aware. It doesn't surprise me that the hitrate is much higher in the first round, though I do find it interesting that Diamond manages to keep the hitrate high for a little longer.

Yeah, that would be interesting. Well, if robots output that information in the terminal, or (better yet) track it in "AdvancedRobot.setDebugProperty(key, value)", it would be easy enough for me to make this tool keep track of it...

That is a good point, though I mostly am planning on doing hitrate analysis for comparing different versions of a bot, with the fixed bullet power of the movement/targeting challenges.

That sounds sweet Rednaxela! I've had the same thoughts about TC scoring being very odd compared to hit rate - it (basically) gives a 100 for anything over a certain hit rate in a round, then scales down to 0 for anything under that. It's one thing I really like about using WaveSim.

Another thing I would suggest adding is energy ratio ((damage done + energy gained) / energy fired). That's what I key off of when using WaveSim, and to me, it seems like the best "real world" fitness measurement.

Another interesting thing to me would be which bot is approaching/retreating most, or which bot is usually occupying center field vs being pushed to the corners. It's generally advantageous APS-wise to keep as much distance as possible, but between two evenly matched bots, the bot with the lower desired distance is sometimes at a huge advantage, since he has a bigger MEA than the bot stuck in the corner.