Better, Simpler Programming Contest

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by atul:
Just occured to me, wouldn't it be reasonable to be able to assign some arbitrary value to different units, as in 'this is better than that'?

Good idea. My problem is this:

Only one person has voted. What does this mean? Is the problem not interesting enough, or already too complex?

At any rate, giving each unit a "value" and changing the problem definition to maximize "value produced" instead of minimizing "resources wasted", or do some combination, would be interesting. And probably more useful.

Anyone else have a thought on that subject?

[Torvak]

Why make it a contest and not some kind of board project. Call it board forge or whatever and i think more people will participate.

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by Torvak:
Why make it a contest and not some kind of board project. Call it board forge or whatever and i think more people will participate.

Hmmm. What do you mean by "Board Project"? A single conglomerate effort of everyone who wants to participate? The main problems in that case are that only one language could be used, and disagreements might arise, etc.

Is the "Contest" nature turning people off?

[Saber Cherry]

MORE GENERIC CONTEST RESTATEMENT

You have 3 resource types (gold, res, and holy), and some number (n) of units. Each unit and resource has a specified value.

The goal: Make a production queue that maximizes value, within resource constraints.


Example:

Your province has the following resources:
Gold 120, Res 88, Holy 4

This is specified in the input file like this:

code:

---

resourcetypes=3

resource=gold quantity=120 value=-1

resource=res  quantity=88  value=1

resource=holy quantity=4   value=10

---

The province can produce 4 types of units, named a, b, c, and d. They are specified in the input file like this:

code:

---

unittypes=4

unitname=a gold=5  res=3  holy=0 value=5

unitname=b gold=7  res=12 holy=0 value=8

unitname=c gold=12 res=2  holy=1 value=17

unitname=d gold=22 res=21 holy=0 value=15

---

The program will find a combination of a, b, c, and d that maximizes value. In this example, you get 5 points for building each "a" and 17 points for building each "c". You also get 1 point for using each "res", 10 points for using each "holy", and lose a point for using each "gold".

In other words, your total score, for this input, would be:

5*(#a built)+8*(#b built)+17*(#c built)+15*(#d built)-1*(#gold used)+1*(#res used)+10*(#holy used)

Sample Output:

code:

---

a=3, b=1, c=4, d=1

gold=92, res=50, holy=4

value=104

---

(these resource numbers indicate the number used)

value=15+8+68+15-92+50+40=104, unless I made an error.

The score would then be calculated according to the equation, with a higher score better. The value of resources and units would, thus, be arbitrary, so that the algorithm could be used to optimize the queue for any resource-using game!

[ March 03, 2004, 06:24: Message edited by: Saber Cherry ]

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
I disagree. I try to end my turns having used all my gold. Carrying gold over does not earn interest, and unless you are saving for something, going many turns in a row without spending all your gold will generally put you at a competitive disadvantage. If all units were 0 resources and 0 holy, an ideal solution would spend all the gold, so you could have troops - not save all the gold and build nothing.

Carrying over RESOURCES doesn't earn interest either, and don't even get to keep the resources! While obviously, there's a point at which you are clearly underspending to the a level where you're not competitive, if you're fully utilizing your resource output to create an effective army even without draining all of your gold, there's nothing wrong with this: Keeping a gold reserve is actually beneficial, since in the event of an emergency, you'll have resources you can draw on: If you've already spent all your gold on troops, you can't hire mercenaries(which can appear anywhere in your empire, making them a very good emergency response force), build a lab or temple, build a fort, etc.

[Graeme Dice]

How do you want us to account for the extra three or so resources that are left at the end of each purchase. Should we apply them to the next turn as happens in game?

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
How do you want us to account for the extra three or so resources that are left at the end of each purchase. Should we apply them to the next turn as happens in game?

To clarify, the contest changed from the first post to the redefinition, at Atul's suggestion.

Just optimize for a single turn, and do not exceed the limit for any resource - nothing carries over. However, depending on the values assigned to the resources, you get points or negative points for the amount of each resource you use - so the specific amount of each resource you use is still quite important.