Top 3 bots are first submissions!?!?

[franperuzzi]

Isn't all the code open to the public? I remember seeing a reddit link to the github site months ago. I clicked the link, saw that the actual contest hadn't started yet, and made a mental note to keep my eyes open for the actual start. If I'd been motivated, I could have downloaded the code, volunteered, or done any number of other things, as you could have too.

I guess what I'm saying is that the only thing separating the people with a headstart is motivation. There is no unfair advantage. If you want a headstart, I suggest setting up a google alert for aichallenge and watching appropriate news sources for word of next year's contest.

[mac]

As already said in this very thread, I'm not so concerned about my final ranking, but I can understand that others are... Maybe a way to at least give proper credit to people who started later and still did good would be to have two ranking pages: one - as it is now - with all the bots. This would be the official ranking.. A second (auxiliary) ranking could be provided with only the bot whose first submission happened after the beta period.

This way people who joined after the beta could still have a taste for how well they did in a level environment (and take the due pride in scoring at the top of this ranking), but being the official ranking the other one, the beta tester that - for as much advantage they might have - made this entire competition possible through they work wouldn't be penalised.

What do the contest organisers think about this?

[amstan]

[mac]

[amstan]

[judeling]

Botz iz Botz.

Having several strong bots to play against early gives you a great measure of progress.