Talk:Winning percentage by weapon type
From Combat Robot
I hope the community (and Mark) approve of the edits I have made. The entry is now in the third person, and is clearly referring to the (awesome) externally published 2005 analysis article. I abandoned the use of quotes and just assumed that in this case we have permission to plagiarize even if we're changing wording. --Mooreshire 13:02, 6 May 2010 (PDT)
- Nice job! - Run Amok 08:50, 7 May 2010 (PDT)
By all means, do continue your research in the other weightclasses. This is good stuff, I guess.
66.184.239.66 17:47, 14 December 2005 (EST)
Regardless of this page's results, the current top-ranked hobbyweight at http://www.botrank.com/1/12.html as of 12/14/05 is a spinner.
71.1.72.178 20:25, 14 December 2005 (EST)
Couldn't all the time you've spending proving that wedges win more often be better spent doing something more productive, like adding new articles, or cataloging the giant backlog of robot combat history?
69.244.213.105 18:52, 15 December 2005 (EST)
The general perception in the community was that spinners win more than wedges. That turns out to be false, at least for beetles and hobbyweights. I didn't set out to prove anything, just to find the truth. That was worth my time.
As for cataloging robot combat history, I've researched and compiled tournament trees for the early U.S. Robot Wars events from scratch, and have the largest on-line repository of historic tournament trees in existence. I think I've contributed more articles to this wiki than most as well. Maybe you could do something with your time other than telling me what to do with mine?
Let's see an analysis of the types of bots that are taking medals home next, eh?
69.244.213.105 00:27, 16 December 2005 (EST)
Read the last paragraph of the article.
Right, acknowledge their success as a footnote. All hail technicalities!
If you were really interested in a fair, balanced analysis, there would be another page-and-a-half on how much they actually win- as it's common knowledge that a better built active-weaponed bot will beat a better built non-active-weaponed bot.
69.244.213.105 19:26, 16 December 2005 (EST)
Prove your claim and write a wiki article about it.
For what it is worth, I found this article fascinating and the methodology as well. Of course the results of this simple analysis needs to be taken in context, there are variability points all around and factors that significantly effect the outcome of battle (experience of driver, last minute mechanical issues, etc.). But I think the point here is that with enough data eventually these factors will diminish and the results will stand on thier own. Personally I suspect that since the amount of data is so small that the statistical errors are easily greater than the differences you are seeing. So while I consider the work you've done here 'very' interesting I don't consider it conclusive. I encourage you to continue doing analysis like this. I suspect you might also be able to factor in driver experience - that would be an interesting comparison.
Thank you. I don't intend to continue the analysis. Adding further data would incorporate older results which would pop yet another variable to the already confusing mix. I believe a point has been made: contrary to common belief, 'bots with and without active weapons have similar combat records -- an active weapon does not guarantee success.
This is an excellent article. With extension to other weight classes, and a bit of data visualization, even more new builders could be encouraged to forsake improving the state of the sport in favor of an improved win-loss ratio.
69.244.214.168 05:47, 2 October 2008 (PDT)
My sarcasm detector just went off. There have been several times in the course of human history when people in power supressed the truth in the belief it would mislead the people and lead them in the wrong direction. The most well known of these times were called 'The Dark Ages'.
Scientific inquiry and publication of the unbiased results are the foundation of individual freedom. If you're fond of witholding the truth in order to push some personal agenda, you're living in the wrong century.
