a paradox of motivation
It occurs to me that tournaments cause a paradox of motivation. Once the tournament is underway, nothing I do affects it. I want Steamhammer to defeat its strong opponents, giving them losses so Steamhammer can pull in front. If I have to lose some games, I would prefer to lose to the weaker opponents which pose no threat of placing higher.
In development, I don’t ignore the strong opponents by any means, but I have been concentrating on building a firm foundation, getting the basics down solid. Compare: Last year, Steamhammer scored many upsets against stronger players and many losses against the lower ranks. Today it is the other way around; Steamhammer can barely touch Iron or McRave (in last year’s edition it scored an upset over Iron), and it only now and then drops a game to the bottom half. Steamhammer has gone from upset-prone to consistent. I haven’t been trying to beat the top bots, I’ve been trying to play better. I put extra effort into analyzing Steamhammer’s losses against the weakest opponents in AIIDE, for example. It’s the opposite plan from trying to beat the current #1.
Well, I don’t plan to change course. I just thought the paradox of motivation was interesting. As soon as there is nothing I can do, my goals change.
Comments
McRave on :
MicroDK on :
Jay Scott on :
Jay Scott on :
Tully Elliston on :
Scourge behavior vs carriers in the midgame doesn't look right - lots of avoidance and taking attrition. Since carriers are slow, the scourge should have just ploughed straight in.
Tully Elliston on :
Jay Scott on :
Tully Elliston on :