On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 02:04:47PM -0500, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 08:17:45AM -0800, Tom Holub wrote:
> This doesn't mean that you focus on strategy, and neglect combat. The
> entire problem space must be analyzed. As an example, if the robots do
> not do an extremely good job under low fuel conditions, including such
> things as *not* running, how will they ever deal with LPS against the
> other team?

Why don't you worry about not getting genocided before you worry about
how to crack core.

> The true intrigue is in the methods, and in the consistency. Will the
> 'bot team function well under all circumstances? All circumstances
> definately includes combat. A team that can dog-fight incredibly well,
> but is not as capable in the strategy department, still have an
> excellent chance of winning against a team that cannot dog-fight very
> well, but are quite profficient in terms of strategy. 

No, they won't.

> to adapt, the next best thing is to improve the small points. If a
> robot can kill 3 good players before dying, instead of 2, this may be
> the difference for 3 robots trying to take a planet with 6 defenders
> between succeeding and failing. If only 3 robots are necessary, even with
> 6 defenders, this allows 5 other robots to be doing other, more useful,
> things.

Not if you haven't taught them what is useful or not.

> You know... I suspect you may be believing that I am suggesting I am
> some sort of expert in Netrek. I'm not. 

Gee, thanks for that clarification.

> dog-fighting, nor is it strategic movement of troops. My profession is
> in design, innovation, and implementation of software. Rather than
> sitting out and telling me how twinky I am, you could be very useful
> as a technical advisor, if you didn't have the time, or inclination to
> take part in the actual coding.

How about this--I could advise you to not worry about stupid shit like
trying to improve phaserlocking, because it won't improve the game
play of your robots in any noticable way.  And you can ignore me.  See,
I'm already your technical advisor.

> team. However, it is just possible that I can design the necessary
> infrastructure to do so. With a little input from people such as
> yourself, the chance of success improves dramatically.

Not if you refuse to listen.