Bots and Simulations > Bot Tavern

Overall league thoughts

<< < (14/27) > >>

jknilinux:

--- Quote from: bacillus ---In conditions this extreme, even a tiny difference in these rules can make a decisive difference. I say we make a few 'benchmark' bots first, then fine-tune the costs so they aren't too harsh (we might learn to survive in a desert, put not in an active volcano   )
--- End quote ---

OK, how about Bacillus's ant-bots, bouncer, a MB (PY's Inchworm2? Kinda old, but if there's a better MB that only uses ties to move, use that), ... any other IBbots that would qualify? We should also try the sim with a non-complex F2 bot, so long as it qualifies, and make sure that an IBB can actually survive better than a kill-all bot. If not, maybe continue decreasing bang efficiency..

Who would like to run the trial sims? I can't this week or next week... or any time soon. Sry.

Rules 0.5:

- Add 20 random shapes at beginning of tournament.
- No memory shots.
- No venom.
- No viruses.
- Size 12 field.
- Walls (non-toroidal)
- Low veg repop threshold, Veg repop 1, long repop delay.
- Transitory fluid resistance.
- F1 costs, with slightly higher movement costs, no/low code execution costs.
- Only negative tieloc values allowed.
- Decreased bang efficiency (30%?)- I like this idea, encourages MBs and sophisticated movement strategies
- Veggies fed based on kilobody
- (?) Lowered age costs
- (?) Lowered tie costs
- (?) High veggy cap
- (?) F1, or slightly lowered, per-bot costs

Note that poison and shell are still allowed, but should have very high costs.



Controversial?:

- low age costs? I think lowered age costs will allow more complex MBs to be made, since they don't have to constantly repair themselves. However, it will also encourage some sort of Big berthas... But, if all the bots on both sides use this strategy, then there's nothing problematic with it- we should still be able to encourage complex behavior among the Big Berthas.

- Decrease tie costs? If we increase tie costs it's just another obstacle to making IB MBs.

- High veggy cap? I like this idea.

- I don't like increasing per-bot costs either. (Also works against IB MBs)

- Also, not exactly controversial, but we need to decide on exact settings in most instances.

Perhaps all the controversial rules can be decided upon when we do the test runs.

Also, what does higher movement costs do? Charge extra energy per bang or charge extra for any movement?


A new idea- Make bang efficiency 0.


Moonfisher-

Decreasing bang-efficiency means it takes more energy to move the same distance using .up, .dn, etc... but tie-based movement systems are unaffected. Decreasing it to 0 means that the only way for a bot to move is through ties.

Peter:

--- Quote ---- Transitory fluid resistance.
--- End quote ---
I would go for thick fluid resistance. It couses higher movement costs. You can see that in the sim I posted. Normally a maxvel acceleration would get you pretty far, this one barely gets you one bot length further.

It seems that bots with normal movement costs are going to fail in this league. I already created a multibot that moves faster with just and only ties.
I am having trouble letting it properly turn and behave properly with etches and shapes. But it will become a nice benchamark that will probably defeat my former posted bot with ease.

Peter:

--- Quote from: jknilinux ---- Transitory fluid resistance.
--- End quote ---
I want thick fluid.


--- Quote ---OK, how about Bacillus's ant-bots, bouncer, a MB (PY's Inchworm2? Kinda old, but if there's a better MB that only uses ties to move, use that), ... any other IBbots that would qualify? We should also try the sim with a non-complex F2 bot, so long as it qualifies, and make sure that an IBB can actually survive better than a kill-all bot. If not, maybe continue decreasing bang efficiency..
--- End quote ---
I think the extra fluid resistance will kill most F1 or F2-fighers. I tested my own multiply4 in the sim I posted. It fails miserably. The combination of lesser veggies(hungry), shapes(shape, eat shape) and etches(etch hurts) will kill most. Any bot wil have to try to effectively look for food. In the above posted sim, the situation is pretty extreme for most bots.

I think most bots will have to be made special for this. In my new MB I had to build some extra genes to have it survive in F1-conditions and extreme friction conditions.


--- Quote ---- Decreased bang efficiency (30%?)- I like this idea, encourages MBs and sophisticated movement strategies
--- End quote ---
We can always look at this, but with thick fluid phycics I doubt it will be needed. Bots burn much energie to get a little forward. Try the bot in the sim I posted in F1-conditions. Bot loses complete motion control, a little step in that sim is in F1 a few times the sim round.


--- Quote ---Note that poison and shell are still allowed, but should have very high costs.
--- End quote ---
Somebody any ideas about these costs?


--- Quote ---- low age costs? I think lowered age costs will allow more complex MBs to be made, since they don't have to constantly repair themselves. However, it will also encourage some sort of Big berthas... But, if all the bots on both sides use this strategy, then there's nothing problematic with it- we should still be able to encourage complex behavior among the Big Berthas.
--- End quote ---
At some time permanent waste will ruin any bot peformance. Time will waste any bot, maybe we don;t need costs.


--- Quote ---- Decrease tie costs? If we increase tie costs it's just another obstacle to making IB MBs.
--- End quote ---
I don't think that is needed.


--- Quote ---Also, what does higher movement costs do? Charge extra energy per bang or charge extra for any movement?

A new idea- Make bang efficiency 0.
--- End quote ---
I would say right now, no. I think it is good enough with the extra fluid resistance. We can fiddle later on.


--- Quote ---Decreasing bang-efficiency means it takes more energy to move the same distance using .up, .dn, etc... but tie-based movement systems are unaffected. Decreasing it to 0 means that the only way for a bot to move is through ties.
--- End quote ---
I have a bot only moving by ties. Still I think bang to zero is a little extreme.

bacillus:
If you want to use my antbot, I think the third-to-last version is the best to use.

ikke:
I would like to add some points: total energy managed by day/night cycles as opposed to population caps to keep the system in check. Furthermore, a system with energy per kilobodypoint needs to have the nrg per turn level reevaluated. I use 8. A modified algae minimalis also helps. In my evo sims algae have evolved reproduction not based on energy but based on bodysize (8000-10000) This encourages farming.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page