Editing revision 56 of Olympic/Votings

Robo Home | Changes | Preferences | AllPages

Editing old revision 56. Saving this page will replace the latest revision with this text.

Votings:

Please vote like this:agree/disagree/no opinion

5th turnament and bots allowed per country has to be voted nation-team-intern before put in here.

|Rule                                    |/Germany      |/USA      |Total           |Comment
|just open source bots                   |1 / 1 / 0     |0 / 3 / 2 |1 / '''4''' / 2 |
|bots from active robocoders only        |0 / 2 / 0     |4 / 1 / 0 |'''4''' / 3 / 0 |
|bots allowed per country                |              |          |                |Unclear what a yes or no vote means here
|calculate best country(av. rankings)    |2 / 0 / 0     |          |'''2''' / 0 / 0 |
|''abnormal 5th tournament''             |              |          |                |Unclear what a yes or no vote means here

----
To clarify my (Swedens) vote some. I think the particpating bots can be ekpt under the lid until the games start. Then their source must be included in the bot jar and no updates are allowed until after the games. -- [[PEZ]]

I would say a champions league would be the most interesting. And for that event we could allow three or for bots per country. -- [[PEZ]]

Changed "bots from active robocoders" to "bots from active robocoders only". I assume that's what was meant by it, I think we can all agree that bots from active robocoders should be allowed :-)  --[[David Alves]]

It seems unfair to me to vote by countries and not by people... If you count by people there are 2 votes for open source and 3 against, but since those 2 people happen to be the only people on their teams while the three are all on the same team, the vote becomes 2 to 1 in favor of open source. --[[David Alves]]

Maybe we can form a group of electors that will vote for the countries. =) -- [[PEZ]]

It's funny that this is exactly what the EU has been arguing about in its attempt to form a Constitution, and it was also the argument that for a long time kept the U.S. Constitution from being ratified.  The solution?  Bi-cameral voting!  Hehe.  One vote for each country in the one house, and one vote per representative in the other house.  Thus the vote is 2-1 and 2-3, and we're in deadlock. :) -- [[nano]]

Excuses for the time that is taking for me to gather the brazilian team votation but we are in two, so each vote counts a lot! :-) -- [[Axe]]

@[[PEZ]];I would say a champions league would be the most interesting. And for that event we could allow three or fuor bots per country.

That would mean: ( 3 bots (champions league) + 5 bots (around 5 events ) )*4 (class weights)=32 bots. IS THAT NOT TOO MUCH ???!!! --[[deathcon]]

It's too much if you assume all 32 bots are different. And what I meant is that I think the champions league tournament form is so good that I can sacrifice many of the other events. The 1v1 event could be held as a champions league as could the Melee and Teams events. And I also said we could ''allow'' 3 or 4 bots per country in this tournament form. Not that you would ''have'' to come with such a big line-up. Doing it the champions league (or face2face) way the Robocode Olympic Games will not be just another RoboRumble. And we wouldn't need a survivalist event either. Because, "There can only be one!". I like. -- [[PEZ]]

The idea of Robocode Olympic Games was to create a turnament where robots are written in teams.And you will agree with me that only the best of the best sportsmen take part at the olympic games.So i think its not a good idea to run this turnament for every class weight - turnaments like MiniLeague (or what was its name) were created for that.He have to find a rule that makes all nation teams having same chances.Every team should have the same number of bots participating and this number must be not to heigh ( not every team can write 30 good bots ) and to low ( it doesn't make sense if 15 people write just 2 bots ).So what about this: 
* 2 bots per event 
* every bot's code can get as long as it has to be
* around 5 event that have to be elected
Do you agree with that?If you did we would have to vote for events and things like open source.
--[[deathcon]]

That would mean I have to make 10 robots. I doubt I can do that. In the real Olympics nations send a different number of participants to many events. Five events sounds reasonable, but I would like most of those event to be in the form of an elimination tournament like the ER champions league and face2face. That will bring in that element of luck that will make the games fun to follow. -- [[PEZ]]

Agree with PEZ, I would preffer many competitions, run by direct elimination, and countries going to the ones they choose. But I think also there should be a maximum number of bots per competition and country (ie. 2).

It would be interesting also to have "strange" competitions (like Point Blank or Fast Fire or Sample Melee or LongThin or whatever you can think) so we don't end up only finding the same bots we meet in all competitions (I think the fun is to rewrite the bots for the Olympics, not to just take the best bot you have and put it there - BYW, that's why I vote for open source bots). -- [[Albert]]

I would like to see different events that would mimic olympic events. Example races through a course. You could use specific droids robots as obstacles and robots would not be allowed to leave a start line until a certain time has passed. As for the opensource issue. I agree all bots should be open sourced. That would help prevent cheating. :) (Not that I think anybody here would cheat :) Also what about team olympic events? They have to have a place there somewhere. BTW. If anybody is looking for another Canadian robocoder e-mail SoupThatIsThick@hotmail.com. I lurk but I'm active.
. -- [[SoupThatIsThick]]

Obstacle course... sounds fun.  I might give writing that a go over the next week or so.  Shouldn't be too hard, an Obstacle class, which goes to a position and waits, a racer class which goes to the start line, and then gives control over to its subclass, and a referee class which scans across the finish line to see who wins.  Easy! -- [[Tango]]

No, I don't like the idea that these Olympics should not be about blasting other bots better than they blast you. In the real Olympics the events exist also outside the games. And it is also the same competitors in most events as it is outside the games. What differs is that in the games it is a window of opportunity that closes quickly, while outside the games the competitors have much more time to show what they are worth. That's why an elimination cup would fit. Depending on the numnber of participants in each event the games can go on for a couple of days. I can just imagine the adrenaline if one of my bots make it to the semi finals and I'll have to wait a day to see how it does there. -- [[PEZ]]

Yeah we should really run only turnaments that exist outside the games.And i prefer a K.O. system too.
As we dont have set up the maximum number of bots per country .... yet i would say why shouldn't he allow all nations to write a fixed number of bots ( for example 10) that may be all 1v1 bots , melee , mixed up ... further would i prefer ''''5 field-events'''' : 1v1 , melee , team , champions-league and one unnormal .Anyone against this (why????) 
--[[deathcon]]

Maybe a moving and dodging event would be interesting, too?  (I was thinking of the other way some olympic events are, individual events where they try to get the best score according to the "panel of judges"). -- [[Kawigi]]

Another interesting idea would be a sort of "King of the Beach" tournament. Each team would put forth it's robot to be combined with all other robots put forth in a Round Robin Two vs. Two tournament. This would creat a situation where all bots would be paired once with all other bots and fight anothe and would face off against another pairing randomly. Each bot would score 50% of the teams score for that pairing. After all parings were ran, the bots would be ranked in order of score. Do not read into this every possible pairing against every possible other pairing (we could do that too if we wanted but thats not what I am imagining). We could use CoopRobot to this as well and might qualify as [[deathcon]]'s "un-normal" event :) -- [[jim]]

Truely we have to discuss/vote for our turnaments but i don't think we should have to many unnormal events - like the real olympic games ( am we not real =D ). So can we say 5 events ( 4 traditional ones and one unnormal).Lets vote how many bots per country are allowed, the open source thing and what unusual turnament we should run as 5th.Then we can fix the date our robolympics will take place and the '''robolympics can start''' .I like [[nano]]'s idea of bi-cameral voting.That seems to me very fair.Moved old votings to [[/OldVotings]]--[[deathcon]]

I like unnormal events. It would give new bots and new players chances to excel, I think. I think it would also allow for many new concepts instead of just the tweaking of old concepts. After all, what would the Olympics be without curling? -- [[Alcatraz]]

I would make it simpler to decide which tournaments are held: If someone is willing to run an unnurmal tournament, and he anounces it with enough time, then fine: The Olympics will have it! -- [[Albert]]

To that end, I propose that an event listing and signup page be started at Olympic/Events, so that new events may be added and described, and countries may announce their intention to enter them. -- [[nano]]

Summary:
Consciousness check: 9 - 8 =
This change is a minor edit. Send email notification that Olympic/Votings has been changed.
(Visit Preferences to set your user name.)

View other revisions
Robo Home | Olympic | Changes | Preferences | AllPages