Pages: [1] :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:16:00 -
[1]
When I first started playing Eve... I found it kinda fun that looting wrecks was a 3d version of the travelling salesman... except you don't have to roundtrip.
Once I got a tractor beam... the mini-game kind of expanded quite a bit. Now I didn't need to stop at each wreck.. but I had to figure out a path that got close enough within tractor range and move along that.
Now that I have started salvaging.. the mini-game has changed yet again... now it is good to get to a location where I am in range of a decent number of wrecks so that I can gather them around me so that they are in range of the salvager. Since the salvager can take some time... I don't want to move from my cluster until I have only one ship left... then I tractor it while salvaging and moving to the next location.
Has anyone else found the looting "mini-game" fun? Maybe people hate it.. but I have had fun with it (maybe not months from now). It seems like there are fairly simple heuristics for the travelling salesman... but the tractor beam and salvager complicate it a bit.
Anyone have a guess which variation would be the most difficult to get a working algorithm for? Does anyone think that the tractor beam or salvager simplify it? I kind of wish I had a dev mode where I could set up the mini game and see how long it takes a novice to loot vs. someone who has practiced a bit.
|

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 20:56:00 -
[2]
Solution to this just as simple. Get a dualrepping Dominix. Warp to the field. Aggro everything. Release drones. Sit there, loot and salvage as you pleased, while drones chew through the rats.
Oh, and i can't see how it is related to 3rd party application programming using EVE API. -- Thanks CCP for cu |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 00:21:00 -
[3]
Ahh.. always nice to be greeted your first time on a forum with a troll.
So yeah... it is true that the label for this section is "Eve Technology Lab" and the subtitle indicates that it is dedicated to 3rd party apps. I was hoping to get another eve-playing developer's opinion of the problem and figured my best chance of contacting another developer was this section. Could you suggest another section that I would have been likely to find a developer in? I suppose I could have gone for general or new citizens... but I doubt my chances of finding someone who had heard of the travelling salesman problem would have been very high.
I have not been playing for a super long time... and it would seem to me that you might have battleships spread around you out at 150km. Perhaps when I get more skillpoints... it will become trivial. However.. currently my tractor beam goes to 20km and my salvager goes to 5km. I often have to look at the wreckage and decide on a way to gather everything the fastest. Perhaps I am only saving a minute... but I can imagine that sometimes you save 10 minutes.
The travelling salesman problem is the same as trying to loot a spread out wreckage site... except that you don't have to return to your starting point. You might not have heard of big-O notation... or complexity theory... but you cannot solve this problem in the guaranteed shorted time... but you can use heuristics to solve it reasonably well with a high probability of success.
I am more interested in the difficulty in writing a program to loot wreckage the fastest... not in what a human can do sitting at the console.
|

Johnathan Roark
Caldari Quantum Industries Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 00:51:00 -
[4]
Originally by: baktul
So yeah... it is true that the label for this section is "Eve Technology Lab" and the subtitle indicates that it is dedicated to 3rd party apps. I was hoping to get another eve-playing developer's opinion of the problem and figured my best chance of contacting another developer was this section. Could you suggest another section that I would have been likely to find a developer in? I suppose I could have gone for general or new citizens... but I doubt my chances of finding someone who had heard of the travelling salesman problem would have been very high.
This is a low traffic section, unlikely to get many response here. Also, don't really see any practical way Traveling salesman could be applied to looting and salvaging.
POS-Tracker 3.0 Hosting |

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 02:33:00 -
[5]
Johnathan, I see the application of a Traveling Salesman problem to the specified task, but the real issue is: OP creating a problem for yourself, instead of solving it. If you've done it right, you have no more than 3 (at worst) clouds of wrecks (often two, great if one), if you're doing it any other way - you're doing it wrong. If you like to carefully create a problem for yourself just to ask community "how to solve them the best wayt", I consider it intellectual ************. -- Thanks CCP for cu |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 03:54:00 -
[6]
@Johnathan.. do you know what the travelling salesman problem is?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_salesman_problem
You have a set of points in space and you need to visit each one (and in the original problem return to the starting location). You want to do it as efficiently as possible. If you don't have a salvager or a tractor beam.. you have to get within 2500m of each wreck to loot it. How is this not like the travelling salesman problem?
@Tonto.. I never requested advice with salvaging/looting in game. I never asked for a procedure for how to do it. I even said that I am not interested in how a human player does it... I am interested in how to make a computer do it. And no... its not to write a program to do it... it IS a hypothetical. Feel free not to answer if it really irritates you that an abstract discussion might take place in this forum. Just move on to the next topic if it doesn't interest you.
Both of your posts gave instructions to a human player. You cannot translate that so easily into code. When you look at the screen and see that there are two clusters and perhaps decide to aim between them.. there is a lot going on in your brain... stuff you are taking for granted if you were to try to write an algorithm for it.
My original post was simple.. I stated that looting wrecks without a tractor or salvager is the travelling salesman. I was interested in how the tractor beam and salvager change the problem. I was hoping that there might be a dev out there who has thought of it that way before and would like to chat about it. The heuristics for the travelling salesman most likely break when you introduce a tractor beam. A solution with a tractor beam breaks if you have to salvage. I don't care how you think I should do it in game... I care about the complexity of making a program do it. And if you think it is trivial to write... you probably have never heard of complexity theory up to this point.
|

Johnathan Roark
Caldari Quantum Industries Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 05:21:00 -
[7]
Originally by: baktul @Johnathan.. do you know what the travelling salesman problem is?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_salesman_problem
yes, i know what it is.
Originally by: baktul
You have a set of points in space and you need to visit each one (and in the original problem return to the starting location). You want to do it as efficiently as possible. If you don't have a salvager or a tractor beam.. you have to get within 2500m of each wreck to loot it. How is this not like the travelling salesman problem?
I didn't say it wasn't, I just said it wasn't practical.
Originally by: baktul
@Tonto.. I never requested advice with salvaging/looting in game. I never asked for a procedure for how to do it. I even said that I am not interested in how a human player does it... I am interested in how to make a computer do it. And no... its not to write a program to do it... it IS a hypothetical. Feel free not to answer if it really irritates you that an abstract discussion might take place in this forum. Just move on to the next topic if it doesn't interest you.
You made no mention in your original post about a hypothetical computer problem. Traveling Sales Man isn't limited to a computers.
Originally by: baktul
Both of your posts gave instructions to a human player. You cannot translate that so easily into code. When you look at the screen and see that there are two clusters and perhaps decide to aim between them.. there is a lot going on in your brain... stuff you are taking for granted if you were to try to write an algorithm for it.
I don't think it changes it very much if at all. Duration of how long you stay near cans is the only difference, which isn't something TSM deals with. You may have some slight variance since your talking 5km rather then 1500 meters
Originally by: baktul
My original post was simple.. I stated that looting wrecks without a tractor or salvager is the travelling salesman. I was interested in how the tractor beam and salvager change the problem. I was hoping that there might be a dev out there who has thought of it that way before and would like to chat about it. The heuristics for the travelling salesman most likely break when you introduce a tractor beam. A solution with a tractor beam breaks if you have to salvage. I don't care how you think I should do it in game... I care about the complexity of making a program do it. And if you think it is trivial to write... you probably have never heard of complexity theory up to this point.
Obviously your original post was unclear if you've had to explain it again...
POS-Tracker 3.0 Hosting |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 17:51:00 -
[8]
Well... all I've really learned is this was not a friendly place to look for a like-minded dev.
You said "Also, don't really see any practical way Traveling salesman could be applied to looting and salvaging." It is not a question of applying the travelling saleman problem to looting and salvaging. The case where you are looting without a tractor or salvager IS the travelling salesman problem at least as far as complexity goes. A perfect solution has not been proposed for almost 200 years. It is a classic problem in computational theory and so many computer scientists think about it (obviously neither of you are terribly interested in it or familiar with it).
You say it is not practical. A very simple heuristic that will generally give decent results is to visit the nearest neighbor, loot, then visit the next nearest. It's pretty practical for a computer. Not complicated at all. Practical enough that a human can do it without much thought.
Generally people who have thought about complexity theory would expect an algorithm to be run on a computer.... unless you assume the moment you hear algorithm that I am going to bust out my pencil and paper to solve a problem. I assumed a certain level of experience with algorithms from anyone who could provide a meaningful answer (so far zero answers to my three questions in the original post, just snippy 'you are playing the game wrong', 'you shouldn't post this garbage here', etc.).
The nearest neighbor heuristic fails if you are using a tractor beam. If you have two clusters where each ship in a cluster is more than 5km apart from a neighbor... you will have to visit each cluster and visit each ship. If you have a tractor beam and the clusters were set up correctly... you could just move to one position between them and tractor everything in from one spot. Using nearest neighbor would be wasting time.
Dead thread... waste of time... disregard.
|

Dragonaire
Caldari Corax. New Eden Retail Federation
|
Posted - 2010.03.18 18:38:00 -
[9]
Just so you know I have thought about it while looting but in the end its just a passing thought. If you came up with a practical solution to it then I'm sure everyone would be interested including me I'm not as much of a want-to-be forum monitor that I'll tell you you shouldn't post it here but most people that read this regularly do expect it to be about something at least vaguely API / data dump related or programming/software related to those. Hopefully you'll find some where on the forums where people will both be interested in the problem and not think it the wrong forum to be posting it  |

Celebrain
1st Steps Academy Tread Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 16:43:00 -
[10]
I generally have learned not to bother posting here until I have some theory or idea developed enough to already have (or soon will have) something practical for people to actually use in the game to help themselves do something more efficiently. This thread is the classic example why. There are so few people in the world that care about the purely theoretical, I doubt there's any forum for them related to eve. Kinda sad but that's the state of humanity. |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 17:46:00 -
[11]
Yeah... I suppose it just seemed easier to discuss with someone who had played Eve... instead of trying to explain the game mechanics through text to someone who is interested in algorithms but has never played.
The other problem is I imagine the API does not allow you to control navigation of your ship. I also imagine it would violate the EULA to do so. Soooo... even if it was something of interest.. it would be kind of foolish to even discuss it here. |

AndrewNardella
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 04:34:00 -
[12]
I have found this mini game fun as well. You should try your hand at scanning, it it also a fun mini game.
|

Krathos Morpheus
Legion Infernal
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 05:57:00 -
[13]
I played the game back in the day without knowing the problem as formally formulated and had some fun with it, here is how I did it, and it has more variables than wrecks, tractors and salvagers:
Firstly I used a dedicated ship to salvage. It's the most efficient way. Used the gallente destroyer, 8 high slots. Using mwd, 4 tractors and 4 salvagers (more salvagers would have been more efficient with my skills if capacitor had not been another variable).
I headed to the closest wreck and tractor when at range then tractor every other wreck at range or head to the next wreck and repeat. When the wrecks are in range of salvage, distribute salvagers evenly on the wrecks you have on your tail. If you have more wrecks on range than tractors then approach the closest until you are in range of looting.
You have to introduce stops to let the wrecks get to you and loot when you can't use the programmed stops to do so.
You have to manage your capacitor, using the mwd when the distance is long enough to not overpass the wreck and when not enough wrecks are being salvaged (less than 4). But you have to modify that line when your capacitor is low, slowboating until all tractored wrecks are salvaged, then mwd.
Now that we have put into consideration all eve modifications to the problem, let's go back to the Traveling salesman. We start by choosing the closest wrecks to move, but we don't make long trips changing the direction, I mean if we left no wrecks behind when going towards the closest wreck, then that's the next wreck, but if we left wrecks behind then we group the wrecks depending on their distances using the farer wreck behind to stablish how we make the groups, cleaning the group we are in or if we are not inside a group, we calculate the best route with those groups in mind, going for the closest but without going back to where we come from.
Some of those procedures were made from intuition (wich is the best way to mind solve complex problems, by the way, although impossible to teach to machines). I've tried to put those procedures into medium-level language (between human and computer :P) and maybe they have flaws in things that I computed but I've forgotten or failed to transcribe.
PS: If you look for an actual aplication of this problem in the game, it is in picking up items between different stations and going back. It is in the route planner inside the game, that have a limit on the number of destinations it can calculate in a reasonable time and it is in the out of game map aplications, check that out if you're interested.
I did something a bit more complex when I had to open the map to know the distances, but now I just use the nearest location to pick the items without opening the map, although going for items on the same region and changing regions when I know I am on one of the systems near other regions.
EVEwatch Sidebar soon "It is the unofficial force ù the Jita irregulars. " |

Kythren
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 18:44:00 -
[14]
Originally by: baktul When I first started playing Eve... I found it kinda fun that looting wrecks was a 3d version of the travelling salesman... except you don't have to roundtrip.
Once I got a tractor beam... the mini-game kind of expanded quite a bit. Now I didn't need to stop at each wreck.. but I had to figure out a path that got close enough within tractor range and move along that.
Now that I have started salvaging.. the mini-game has changed yet again... now it is good to get to a location where I am in range of a decent number of wrecks so that I can gather them around me so that they are in range of the salvager. Since the salvager can take some time... I don't want to move from my cluster until I have only one ship left... then I tractor it while salvaging and moving to the next location.
Has anyone else found the looting "mini-game" fun? Maybe people hate it.. but I have had fun with it (maybe not months from now). It seems like there are fairly simple heuristics for the travelling salesman... but the tractor beam and salvager complicate it a bit.
Anyone have a guess which variation would be the most difficult to get a working algorithm for? Does anyone think that the tractor beam or salvager simplify it? I kind of wish I had a dev mode where I could set up the mini game and see how long it takes a novice to loot vs. someone who has practiced a bit.
You Sir, made my day. I came up with the exact mind(not mini)-game when salvaging/looting as well, however I tend to give different priorities to the respective nodes as well, so I wont check a small ship's wreck but rather large ship wrecks since they usually give more money. ----- <sarcasm="inside"> murmur<->eve authentication script(python) http://mumble.sourceforge.net/Mumble, the |

carmo pereira
the muppets
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 19:00:00 -
[15]
hi baktul,
i've started to think about a way to spend less time,
variables: .distance of salvager .distance of tractor and speed .number of wrecks .distance to wrecks .duration of salvagers plus the duration and speed of tractors plus how many targets can u lock
if could set top km range is more easy. 80% range for example: your tractor does 40km, there are 40wrecks, and you are about 80% of the max distance of 28wrecks.
now you calculate in pairs of points.
the middle point from wreck A to B, C to D, E to F, etc... then you have 14points... you do the same procedure, till you got 1 unique point.
that point is the best place to get the minimum distance to all.
what do you think? carmo
----
Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, and the problem is I do not know which half
Lord Leverhulme 1851-1925, British founder of Unilever and philanthropist |

baktul
|
Posted - 2010.03.24 03:35:00 -
[16]
Originally by: AndrewNardella
I have found this mini game fun as well. You should try your hand at scanning, it it also a fun mini game.
Yes.. I have enjoyed scanning. It was fun when I was just a couple weeks in to scan down a battleship doing what I am guessing was a level 4 mission (I am only doing 3's at the moment). Seeing a torpedo explode was fun considering I only had rockets or something at that point. He incidentally had another account flying a destroyer doing the salvaging.
Originally by: Krathos Morpheus
Now that we have put into consideration all eve modifications to the problem, let's go back to the Traveling salesman. We start by choosing the closest wrecks to move, but we don't make long trips changing the direction, I mean if we left no wrecks behind when going towards the closest wreck, then that's the next wreck, but if we left wrecks behind then we group the wrecks depending on their distances using the farer wreck behind to stablish how we make the groups, cleaning the group we are in or if we are not inside a group, we calculate the best route with those groups in mind, going for the closest but without going back to where we come from.
People are apparently quite good at solving the travelling salesman problem. We don't really know how our minds do it.. but apparently psychologists have made note of it. I am betting a lot of it is spacial thinking and the ability to see a mistake fairly quickly and adjust without losing too much time. A computer algorithm doesn't generally adjust as it goes.. it just follows its procedure. So if it is headed down a bad path.. it is doomed. Although.. it all depends on the algorithm.
Originally by: carmo pereira
now you calculate in pairs of points.
the middle point from wreck A to B, C to D, E to F, etc... then you have 14points... you do the same procedure, till you got 1 unique point.
that point is the best place to get the minimum distance to all.
At first I wasn't sure that this would give you the "center of mass"... but after drawing a number of test patterns.. it does seem to wittle down to the center. Does this work for all cases and choices of pairs? I am guessing it is sort of averaging out the x,y,z components of the points. Sorry... my geometry is a bit rusty. The only issue I would see would be deciding where to go next after you are done with your cluster that is in range.
When I first posed the question... I was thinking more of the ideal, perfect solution. I also was not thinking so much of the constraints of Eve. For example... I was imagining you having 1000 wrecks scattered about... not so clustered as a result of game mechanics. My bet is the level designers intentionally setup fields so that you don't have to spend too much time worrying about it. It would be really annoying to have to spend hours cleaning up the wrecks.
I imagine if you were able to sit behind "God" and watch him solve a large scattered field.. there would be lots of tiny tweaks that would shave the seconds off... for example... instead of moving to a center point of a cluster and stopping his ship... he would probably continue to make small adjustments to his position well before the cluster was depleted. Also... perhaps when there are five ships left to loot... and if the next cluster was a decent distance away... go ahead and start moving there and relocate the leftovers as he moves to the new position.
I would think a perfect solution would be kind of insane. However... it might only shave a minute off of the total time that a player would do naturally... and sometimes its nice to sacrifice a few minutes to not have to think so deeply on it (or to brainstorm your char sheet or browse the market during transit times). I am betting there are plenty of simple heuristics that would solve these problems reasonably well. I am doubting we can get optimal though. |

carmo pereira
the muppets
|
Posted - 2010.03.24 14:27:00 -
[17]
Quote: I would think a perfect solution would be kind of insane. However... it might only shave a minute off of the total time that a player would do naturally... and sometimes its nice to sacrifice a few minutes to not have to think so deeply on it (or to brainstorm your char sheet or browse the market during transit times). I am betting there are plenty of simple heuristics that would solve these problems reasonably well. I am doubting we can get optimal though.
ok, i can give you more things to think about,
the same way you pick 20 of 40wrecks (by minimum distance between them), you also may give attention to the distance to the wrecks, time you need to bring the wreck back to you, and time u need to salvage.
for example,
you decide that you are going to salvage 20 of 40 first. in that group you calculate how many time you need to salvage them all. you can do a graph using groups of wrecks (5, 10, 15, 20, 25), and see in total what's the best group to start off, always thinking about the time you need to salvage the rest.
this calcule does not gives you a unique time, or best place to be, but gives u a fair solution. carmo
----
Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, and the problem is I do not know which half
Lord Leverhulme 1851-1925, British founder of Unilever and philanthropist |
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |