Author |
Topic: Important question: May botbash (Read 1639 times) |
|
IdahoEv
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1753
Gender: 
Posts: 405
|
 |
Important question: May botbash
« on: Apr 30th, 2006, 3:33am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
I am preparing the next botbash challenge, but I have an important decision to make, so weigh in if you have an opinion.
In order to make sure that people test the new challenge against all the bots (no fair that Bomb gets all the love), I will assign a point value for each bot in the ladder. You win the points for a particular bot if you maximize the challenge criteria for that bot. (i.e., if it were the same challenge as April - shortest game in turns using only 3 steps/turn - then Swynndla would be winning the points for bot_Bomb2006CC and OLTI would be winning the points for bot_Bomb2005blitz).
The winner at the end will be the person who has accumulated the most points.
Since there are now an awful lot of games to be played, I'm thinking this needs more than 10 days.
How much? 15 days? The whole month? Too short, and it rewards people who can devote their lives to it for a week. Too long, and we all get bored.
Opinions please...
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Swynndla
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1821
Posts: 235
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #1 on: Apr 30th, 2006, 6:18am » |
Quote Modify
|
A month seems reasonable to me (but then again don't listen to me, as I won't be taking part in it, as I'm going to concentrate on starting my bot, as otherwise I'll never start it, and I'm the type of person who can only concentrate on one thing at a time ... so far my bot only exists in a few thought I have while tying my shoes).
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
IdahoEv
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1753
Gender:
Posts: 405
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #4 on: May 1st, 2006, 5:45am » |
Quote Modify
|
Ahem. Excuuuuse me hosers... reading my challenge webpage before I've posted it. 
I had not posted it yet because I haven't settled on the rules yet, or even decided that what you saw will in fact be the challenge. (Else you would have seen a post at midnight PST).
The reason is that the challenge is pointless unless I can find a way to invalidate bait-and-tackle. Otherwise there's no 'challenge' to it at all: since the entire reason was to force people to learn to attack with a strength-inferior force, barricading the enemy phant rather defeats the purpose, no?
I am deciding between (1) kludging on an additional rule that makes forming elephant barricades impossible, or (2) going with one of my other ideas. And so far, every rule I can come up with to outlaw bait-and-tackle feels very artificial and unsatisfactory.
The best anti-barricade rule I have so far is this:
1) If the opposing elephant is on your 1st or 2nd rank, it must be allowed TWO adjacent, empty, non-trap squares at all times.
2) If the bot moves so as to create a violation of the above rule, you must on your next turn move so as to end that violation. Failure to do so (for any reason) will invalidate the game for challenge purposes.
You see what I mean by "kludgy"... Do you think that rule is livable, or should I just use one of my other ideas and come up with a fix for a later month?
|
| « Last Edit: May 1st, 2006, 6:08am by IdahoEv » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
IdahoEv
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1753
Gender:
Posts: 405
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #5 on: May 1st, 2006, 5:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
on May 1st, 2006, 4:19am, Arimanator wrote:| I have a question : Has the may challenge officially started, yet? |
|
Quite definitely not!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #6 on: May 1st, 2006, 6:17am » |
Quote Modify
|
Oops, sorry!
|
| « Last Edit: May 1st, 2006, 6:19am by 99of9 » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
unic
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1878
Gender:
Posts: 63
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #7 on: May 1st, 2006, 6:26am » |
Quote Modify
|
For a different challenge - how about seeing what bots can be beaten without an elephant (i.e. the elephant has to be sacrificed at one's first step)?
... somehow, I doubt we'd see the top bots beaten under that restriction (though Swynddla might prove me wrong ), while I'm quite sure the bottom bots can still be beaten.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
IdahoEv
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1753
Gender:
Posts: 405
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #8 on: May 1st, 2006, 6:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
on May 1st, 2006, 6:26am, unic wrote:| For a different challenge - how about seeing what bots can be beaten without an elephant (i.e. the elephant has to be sacrificed at one's first step)? |
|
Oh, that's most definitely on the list of eventual challenges I have in mind.
But I'd like to try some slightly less drastic restrictions on the phant first.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #9 on: May 1st, 2006, 7:53am » |
Quote Modify
|
The difficulty in clearly stating a "no blockade" rule shows the trouble developers must have in coding to avoid blockades. It occurs to me that the rule as currently stated could be thwarted by blockading the opposing elephant into a 2-by-2 box. It would always have at least two squares to move into, right? But maybe that would allow for ways to dig out of the hole, so it wouldn't actually be a blockade, and the rules shouldn't be amended to prevent this.
Indeed, I foresee a problem with partially blockading an elephant so that it meets the letter of the rules and it is free to leave (shoud it choose to leave) via a roundabout corridor, but because of the way that particular bot works, it chooses not to. Is that against the spirit of the competition, given that the elephant is neither literally blockade, nor restricted beyond what the rules permit?
Well, maybe it won't be an issue, because there will be plenty enough points to chase among the bots that voluntarily advance pieces to their doom.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #10 on: May 1st, 2006, 7:56am » |
Quote Modify
|
on May 1st, 2006, 6:26am, unic wrote:| For a different challenge - how about seeing what bots can be beaten without an elephant (i.e. the elephant has to be sacrificed at one's first step)? |
|
I'd like to see this one as well, unic. I'll wager we will see it if people manage to beat BombCC with the current restriction!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
IdahoEv
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1753
Gender:
Posts: 405
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #11 on: May 1st, 2006, 8:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
on May 1st, 2006, 7:53am, Fritzlein wrote:| It occurs to me that the rule as currently stated could be thwarted by blockading the opposing elephant into a 2-by-2 box. |
|
Yes, that's what I'm worried about. But, an elephant can generally destroy a box from the inside if it has room to move, so for now I will leave it as is.
If people discover that a phant can be more loosely barricaded ... well, then we will have learned something new, and that's the point. If it gets really bad, I can amend the rules, but I think we can try it this way for a while.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Swynndla
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1821
Posts: 235
|
|
Re: Important question: May botbash
« Reply #12 on: May 1st, 2006, 3:36pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on May 1st, 2006, 5:45am, IdahoEv wrote:| Ahem. Excuuuuse me hosers... reading my challenge webpage before I've posted it. |
|
I apologize Evan, for being a hoser. 
But on the plus side, I discovered your home page and your blog!
(Also, I like how the rules for the challenge are now more open source)
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print