Number of rounds and battlefield size
The highlighted comment was created in this revision.
I would prefer if the number of rounds were kept at 1 instead of 3. I don´t care if the client keeps uploading data most of the time. The time taken to stabilize the scores will be fast either way.
I would also prefer if battlefield size were 800x600. So NeoRumble becomes a benchmark for RoboRumble 1v1.
I can upload all battles again in the case of a database reset.
A point of the neoroborumble was to make it a new rumble. Not just the roborumble but shorter.
I wanted to prevent wholesale moving of robots from the roborumble to the neoroborumble. Changing the size means people at least had to go in and adjust bots in which the field size is hard coded.
I really jsut like 3 battles more. 1 battle doesn't really tell you enough about its early behavior, except if it got unlucky position or not.
I like 3 much more myself, but it is opinion based.
But mostly because 1 seemed to hit the server hard and fast and constantly which is not so good for the poor server. 3 seemed more acceptable in the time it took before uploading again.
Telling me that 'you don't care' doesn't make me want to change my mind so much.
Additionally the neoroborumble was mostly made for new (robot) participants. So they didn't have to go through the pain of fighting the rankings with 600 other, possibly very older robots.
I was going to remove the some of the seed robots after more got added, but that never happened really.
Increasing the number of battles per batch from 10 to, maybe 350, can workaround the issue of constant uploads.
Testing locally, I noticed 1 round and 3 rounds have a lot of difference. Combat does about 45% average against Seraphim in 3 rounds, and about 18% average in 1 round. Uploading lots of battles averages out unlucky positions.
And its funny to see the client console scrolling with a lot of battle results popping up fast.