Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:06:17 03/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 19, 1999 at 18:35:34, James B. Shearer wrote: >On March 19, 1999 at 15:40:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 19, 1999 at 01:08:35, James B. Shearer wrote: > > <snip> > >>> This is a bit different than your original statement. Also it still >>>seems a bit onesided. Don't some of the people running clones find and report >>>bugs to you? With a little coordination the numerous crafty clones would >>>provide you with more data rather than less. >>> James B. Shearer >> >>I would guess 1% of the 'clones' on the servers do this. which means 99% of >>the games are 'lost'. Which is not a problem normally, but if crafty sits idle >>most of the time, as it does now, it makes a difference. > > Well most of these games are of no interest to you being played by >weakened crafties or against weak opponents or against other crafty clones. As >for the rest how easy do you make it for clone operators to provide feedback? >For example you could add an option for play on the servers which produces a log >of whatever games are of interest to you and ask operators to use the option and >send you the log files periodically (or perhaps this log could be emailed >automatically). First, I am probably the only 'crafty' that runs with logging on. It costs a couple of percent in speed, and takes a bit of disk space, but without that, I get little info from just the moves, and I have to waste more time to annotate the game to get a log. Everyone disables logs (at least everyone I ask) to save disk space. Because when they encounter a problem, I always ask for the log file and get a "I run with log=off" And yes, some play a lot of weak players, but we have about 1/2 dozen 'crafty' clones on ICC that always stay at 2900-3000, and GM's play them all spreading the games around. In fact, 'crafty' probably gets a bit less traffic because it is _very_ strong, and if you have a choice of a 3000 program running at 800K nodes per second, or a 3000 program running at 200K nodes per second, the logical choice is _________? :) > Robert Hyatt continued: >>that was the only point. Best scenario would be a queue... you want to play >>crafty, you get 'crafty' if it is free, if not, you get crafty1, or crafty450, >>or whatever... that would totally solve the problem, but would require a lot >>of work to the server code, or it would require some sort of 'bot' user that >>would make all crafty's 'close' (not accept _any_ matches). Then everyone >>matches the 'bot' and it notifies the proper 'crafty' to issue that challenge >>to the player... > > This is not desirable from the player's point of view. Crafties are >not completely interchangable. I would guess most players would prefer the >challenge of playing the real crafty but if not that should be their decision. > James B. Shearer probably right for the most part. Some play oddball openings, etc...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.