trader-evade-e1 was trained against pirate-attack-e1 alone, and it shows:
| opponent |
deaths |
pirate-attack-e1 (its training partner) |
0% |
| the scripted baseline |
18% |
Worse against the dumb opponent than the clever one — the signature of
specialising into a single pursuit curve rather than learning to evade.
It is also not wired into the game: brains.ts has no trader-evade import
at all, and an armed trader flies the defence policy (jameson-defend-g1). So
this is not "swap a better brain in", it is "train one worth wiring".
What to do: rotate the opponent. --pool is refused for evade (it
consumes the trader slot, which is the genome under test — see run 18), so the
route is repeated --opponent runs against a mix of pirate-attack-g3,
pirate-attack-r2 and the scripted AI, or a pirate-side pool added to
evolve.ts.
Done when: deaths are comparable across all three opponents rather than
near-zero against one, on held-out seeds.
Context: docs/TRAINING-LOG.md run 18 and its postscript.
trader-evade-e1was trained againstpirate-attack-e1alone, and it shows:pirate-attack-e1(its training partner)Worse against the dumb opponent than the clever one — the signature of
specialising into a single pursuit curve rather than learning to evade.
It is also not wired into the game:
brains.tshas no trader-evade importat all, and an armed trader flies the defence policy (
jameson-defend-g1). Sothis is not "swap a better brain in", it is "train one worth wiring".
What to do: rotate the opponent.
--poolis refused forevade(itconsumes the trader slot, which is the genome under test — see run 18), so the
route is repeated
--opponentruns against a mix ofpirate-attack-g3,pirate-attack-r2and the scripted AI, or a pirate-side pool added toevolve.ts.Done when: deaths are comparable across all three opponents rather than
near-zero against one, on held-out seeds.
Context:
docs/TRAINING-LOG.mdrun 18 and its postscript.