I'm not seriously considering that - I'm just thinking out loud.

- Don


2009/6/16 David Fotland <[email protected]>

>  If more than one venue is mandatory I probably won’t be able to join,
> since I want to spend my limited programming time making the engine
> stronger, not programming multiple time controls.  Please allow me to play
> with just a singe time limit without changing my cgos interface code.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Don Dailey
> *Sent:* Monday, June 15, 2009 7:02 PM
> *To:* computer-go
> *Subject:* Re: [computer-go] New CGOS - need your thoughts.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Jason House <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Given all the negative reaction to nested time control, I have to say I
> like it. The pool won't be diluted as long as there's an obvious main venue.
>
>
> A good compromise might be to have only 2 venues,  one such as David
> suggested and another one that is quite a bit faster.
>
> Another possibility is to make BOTH venues mandatory - but my fear is that
> some programs may not be able to play fast enough and would always time
> out.    Or they  may not implement a proper time control algorithm and thus
> would not be able to adapt to 2 different time controls without being
> reinitialized with different parameters.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Jun 15, 2009, at 7:20 PM, Don Dailey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  I've been working on the new server and I'm almost at the point where
> I can think about time controls - and since this is primarily for
> developers, I would like to get your thoughts.
>
> First, a brief explanation of how the time control works.   When the
> client starts up it will inform the server of which venues it is
> willing to play in.   It must choose an available boardsize and then
> any of N different time controls.  Initially, N will probably be
> 2 or 3.   For each board size,  a time control is called a "venue."
>
> Let's assume there are 3 venues for boardsize 9x9.  The time control
> for each venue will be significantly different from the others.
> One will be very fast, one will be very slow and there will be one in
> between.
>
> Each time control will be in sync with the others and the process will
> be recursive.  So the basic scheduling algorithm is to NOT start a new
> round for a given venue until any players who have registered to play
> in this venue and are currently playing in FASTER venues are available
> for scheduling.
>
> In addition to this, new rounds are not scheduled for any particular
> venue as long as the next slower venue is stalled waiting for these faster
> venues to complete.
>
> I hope this idea allows more choice and keeps players busy a greater
> percentage of the time by allowing them to fill dead space with fast
> games.
>
> Each bot can choose which venues to play in.  If you only want to play
> fast games, then you can.
>
> Now the questions I pose to you are these:
>
> How many venues for each boardsize?   (two, three, more?)
>
> What time controls should they be?
>
> It's almost certainly the case that certain combinations of time
> control venues will work together better than others.  There will
> always be the issue of waiting for games to complete and in fact this
> may make the problem a bit worse for those programs that only want to
> play in the longest venue.  I suggest that each venue is spaced at
> least a factor of 2 apart in time.  For instance 1 minute, 2 minutes,
> 4 minutes, etc.
>
> My own suggestion for 9x9 is to have 3 venues of 1 minute, 5 minutes
> and 15 minutes per game per player.
>
> It's also not too late to change our minds and not have venues if we
> think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
>
> - Don
>
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to