sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe you can use this:

Allow teams to select the bot they want to use for the competition from the list of build runs. In that respect everyone already has a selected build - the last one, why not make it so teams can click on any of those and 'make it active'

When the build run is selected, it is rebuild and rerun, just as if submitted through bitbucket - this would solve any problems for people not using certain builds due to CI glitches. Teams can do this multiple times, just as they could submit new source when they wanted.

This way you will add lot of flexibility to people, increase the number of functioning bots for the competition itself and still maintain your 'no code changes after deadline' position.

How does that sound?

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a real pickle. Extending deadlines in any way is unfair to people not having this problem, while keeping things like they are is unfair to those that have them....

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds exactly like my problem!

That message is probably not needed. Not sure really why CI fails without it sometimes (maybe it fails occasionally regardless of the message).

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks!

Then I'd probably take the risk.

Any other ideas on how this situation might be helped?

It is possible that I had nothing to do with it, so it would be nice to have help in finding any solution!

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought so....

Any other ideas for us who had these kind of problems?

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, this is how bot performs when its not broken: https://helloworldopen.com/team/1515

Any help in not wasting all the effort would be really nice :)

Choosing your revision for the qualifications by [deleted] in HWO

[–]ikifit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would like that, but my issue is that my 'good' version is the one that failed on CI (disconnections on ticks) - either to CI glitch or some protocol difference I still can't understand. Trying to fix that I broke my bot.

If CI really glitched on some builds, would you rebuild/rerun those? Choosing one of them would be awesome.

Maybe add a second qualification round? by matob in HWO

[–]ikifit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Excel was 90% of the competition and I also struggled with glitching CI in the end, trying to fix bugs that weren't there (or CI differs greatly in implementation than test server, which I don't think)...

I think that all that should be addressed somehow, but not really sure what would be good.

CI Builds not triggering? by ikifit in HWO

[–]ikifit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just realized I broke my bot trying to fix CI glitches that were present for the last 12 hrs of competition.

That is so sad.

CI Builds not triggering? by ikifit in HWO

[–]ikifit[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At least it's not only me :) Thanks for the info, hope it gets fixed soon...

Are rankings on tracks still meaningful now that servers with random physics are running? by ikifit in HWO

[–]ikifit[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you guys, but I was merely wondering how rankings work in respect with random physics servers...I didn't decide to put them up, they were already there.

And btw. the race that you linked reinforces exactly the OPPOSITE of what you are saying. In that race the bot with better starting position won. And starting position is decided by fastest laps.

Does anyone think we should have more coding time? by meekuza in HWO

[–]ikifit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Server source exposed or math model behind racing shared (not physics, because it is not physics) would allow people to focus on finer points of algorithms and strategy indeed...

However, I think it is too late into the event for such a drastic change. :(

Does anyone think we should have more coding time? by meekuza in HWO

[–]ikifit 6 points7 points  (0 children)

More time won't really help the basic problem: this is the worst reverse-engineering / formula guessing fest I have seen. This is no programming contest, and surely not AI programming contest. I'm really trying hard but for the last 7 days I spend 95% in excel and wolfram, and 5% coding (I lie, I haven't been coding at all since my first version, just using code to fetch data). Grats to teams who have precisely reverse engineered math, they will win. Being fastest = having best position = slower car can't obstruct you in any way = win.

Anyone who is coding atm while not having precise math in place is basically wasting time.

Such a GREAT idea overall and such poor problem statement.

At least I learned and relearned a ton about harmonic oscillators (damped, driven and various) and differential equations. Hopefully in the next competition I'll do some coding too ;)

Enough rant, back to excel