Re: Robocode competition at work

Thanks for the ideas everyone! I will probably be mixing and matching a
little bit from everyone! Especially Pez' idea :)
We'll have a short meeting about the competition (we = the organizers) on
wednesday. The actual competition is on the 20th of April.

I will get back to you all on how I/we ended up doing it after the 20th :)

If I have any further questions before the competition I'll email again.

//Tobbe

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Peter Stromberg <[email protected]> wrote:

> **
>
>
> It's work colleagues, right? I would just state the rules and then apply
> trust.
>
> /PEZ
>
> On 2 apr 2012, at 17:24, Jean Felipe Felsky wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I did this to my students and they had some weeks to develop, so my
> problem was even bigger! What I did was to not do a robocode competition,
> but a virtual combat competition. I think there is a link in the robocode
> page somewhere to that... It is the robocode with some changes. They have
> included obstacles and flags and use a team of robots (although, this
> already exists in robocode, right?). In virtual combat you can win by
> either killing all enemy robots or by capturing the flag. You can disregard
> the capture the flag part and then you have robocode with obstacles... and
> the obstacles alone are a big problem to every algorithms out there...
> There was a single competition of virtual combat so far (as I know of) and
> there is none (or just a few) code available... well, everything that
> exists for robocode can be used in virtual combat, but not directly. I
> spent days trying to adapt wave surfing to consider the obstacles and they
> are not working fine yet.
> The experience worked fine for me, no one used a robot that already
> existed, everyone learned a lot and it was a fun experience...
>
> But, anyway in 4 hours I don't think they can learn exactly what a robot
> does.. so, you can also ask questions to find out who really created the
> robot or just copied the code... or you can also just limit known methods,
> like anti gravity or wave surfing... I don't think anyone would come up
> with the idea of such algorithms in just 4 hours...
>
> In any case, let us know how it goes!
>
> Regards,
>
> Jean
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 9:52 PM, Mauricio Noda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> Changing the settings of the battles make it a bit harder to simply
>> copy-and-paste code from other robots. Since many bots have constants like
>> battlefield size and number of opponents hardcoded. But not all of them,
>> and it is still possible to adapt the code inside the 4hs.
>>
>> Maybe enforce a codesize limit? 4hrs is not much time to write a decent
>> MegaBot anyway. The amount of bots to copy-and-paste code from drastically
>> diminishes with a limited codesize. Wave Surfing doesn't fit in the smaller
>> codesize categories. And if any bot becomes too similar with
>> LittleBlackBook or Caligula, well...
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> To: [email protected]
>> From: [email protected]
>> Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 20:27:15 +0000
>> Subject: [Robocode] Re: Robocode competition at work
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> --- In [email protected], "flemmingnlarsen" <flemming.n.larsen@...>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Well, you could put up a requirement that each hour,
>> > each person would need to safe his/her source
>> > file(s) as prove that he/she did the code
>>
>> Thanks! This is a great idea that I didn't think of myself :)
>>
>> > But you might require that the computer is not on the Internet
>>
>> I've thought of this. I'm not sure what the best way of enforcing this is
>> though. There will be wireless internet in the room we'll be in. And
>> everyone has smartphones they can teather to wirelessly... Any ideas here?
>>
>> Any other ideas anyone?
>>
>> //Tobbe
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------
>
> *** Por favor, evite mandar-me anexos em formato Microsoft Word ou Power
> Point. (Please, avoid sending me attachments in Microsoft Word or Power
> Point Format)
> *** Veja por que em (See why in)
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>  
>