Semifinal 
Some comments will be added later
  
Deadline: Saturday, November 19, 2005, 9pm CET
 The Rules
 
This time the coresize is larger than usual. But that's not all. Your warrior must
start with the following sequenze at pGo:
pGo   spl   1,  0
      spl   1,  0
      spl   1,  0
      spl   1,  0
      spl   1,  0
      mov.i #0, {0
      
;your warrior code starts here:
You'll have 32 processes for the battle then. As the spl-instruction is forbidden in your code
that are all processes you will have ;-)
  
This time p-space is allowed without any restrictions.
  
The parameter setting are:
  
| Coresize | 16384 |  
| max. Cycles | 150000 |  
| max. Processes | see special rules |  
| max. Warrior Length | 200 |  
| min. Distance | 200 |  
| p-space | allowed |  
| Restrictions | spl is forbidden, see special rules |  
| Rounds | 1000 |  
 
  
The commands for pmars is:
  
| pmars -s 16384 -c 150000 -p 32 -l 200 -d 200 -r 1000 |  
 
 Fixtures and Results
 
| Roy van Rijn vs. S. Fernandes |   
  
Fizmo's Comment
  
Again Roy is the clear favourite in this match. Nevertheless it will be pretty hard for him, because
S. Fernandes has a very good run in this tournament as well.
  
The Comments
  
Roy van Rijn:
Ok, 32 processes and no way to get more...
Not even a split, so we can't make a paper :-(
I don't know SF very well, but I think he makes a lot of scanners. 
This oneshot should kill scanners...
This round its easier to make a clear
oneshots are good against clear too.
Did I make the right decision? Will I really get in the finals!?? 
Now there is nothing left to do but hope for the best! 
May the best coder & anticipator win!
 
S. Fernandes:
Roy seems to instinctively place numerous processes into a 
variety of components scattered through core, with deadly 
efficiency. Roy shouldn't have any problems adapting to 
this round's restrictions and will probably come up with a 
stone/clear/imp. 
I've never written a multi-component warrior before. I'm 
going to have to learn quickly to stand a chance against 
Roy. I'll try a stone/clear/imp. 
processes - 13 stone, 11 clear, 8 imp 
 
The Results
  
Roy van Rijn sent a oneshot, while S. Fernandes a stone/clear/imp. 
It was a very close match with a slight advantage for the oneshot.
| # | %W | %L | %T | Name | 
Author | Score | % |  
|  1 | 48.4 | 47.4 |  4.2 | 
Alacrity | Roy van Rijn | 149.40 | 100.0 |  
|  2 | 47.4 | 48.4 |  4.2 | 
Sandstone | S.Fernandes | 146.40 |  98.0 |  
 
  
| Battle SF1 | Result | 
|---|
 | Roy van Rijn | 149.4 |  
| S. Fernandes | 146.4 |   
  
| Chip Wendell vs. Zul Nadzri |   
  
Fizmo's Comment
  
Chip is the clear favourite in this match after defeating John Metcalf in the previous round. 
Could he defeat now also Zul Nadzri?
  
The Comments
  
Chip Wendell:
32 processes but no SPL? Ooh, this is gonna be interesting. And fun.
First off, I can rule out several strategies:
- No papers. Hoppers are possible, but they're too vulnerable to stones.
- No scanners, because they won't have any papers to prey on.
- No qscans, without throwing away all but one process.
- P-space? Again, hard to do when you're starting with 32 processes.
- Vampires? Probably not, because prisoners can't be stunned.
That just leaves stones and imps. Therefore, a stone/imp will probably be 
best. Unfortunately, this conclusion is pretty obvious, so I'll need to 
make sure that my entry can beat other S/I's.
By now, Elven King has proven itself as a very versatile and deadly 
warrior, so I'll again start with that. I need to make lots of adjustments 
this time, though: new coresize, no SPL, a booting scheme that can redirect 
a lump of 32 processes. Then, I start sifting through variations: 3-point 
or 5-point imps, A- or B-imps, various anti-imp bombs, different process 
balance between stone and imp. I'm sure learning a lot about imps and how 
to kill them!
Finally, I run a big round-robin among all the variations, and pick the 
one that beats all the others. After some final tweaking, and filling in my 
extra operands with core-coloring, it's ready. OK, Zul, do your worst!
 
Zul Nadzri:
Just got out from the hospital after minor surgery, virtually 2 days to prepare.
Pick up my recently kicked off the hill warrior 'The 9th Process'.
Changed the step and add a 3-line bomber.
Get a pspacer, believe whatever in there, and sent to Fizmo.
No time for coding in J-factor (John) but surely could give a good name.
BTW, no valid excuse for losing this round except Chip is more skillful than me.
 
The Results
  
Zul Nadzri sent a p-warrior switching between dwarf and scanner, while Chip Wendell sent
a stone/imp. The Zul's scanner in his warrior can't defeat the stone/imp which results
in a victory for Chip Wendell.
  
  
| Battle SF2 | Result | 
|---|
 | Chip Wendell | 189.6 |  
| Zul Nadzri | 105.6 |   
  
 The Second Chance Tournament Tree Fixtures
 
There is a second chance for all players who wants to continue the CSEC2005:
  
As there are just three player left I decided to let them run round-robin, while the best two will play
in the Second Chance finals for the 5th place in the CSEC2005.
  
| Nenad Tomasev vs. datagram vs. inversed |   
  
The Comments
  
inversed:
I was deciding between submitting this, 
pspacer and dodger. This thing seem to be
most balanced. It consists of 3 stones, 2 clears
and imp spiral. My biggest fear are dodgers.
 
Nenad Tomasev:
the start of the code, regulated by the rules of this round, is a little 
tricky ... noone needs 32 procs in the same spot, so some separation is 
necessary. I think that I've found a nice and quick way to do it. Of 
course, one can choose to kill 31 porcs and to make a one process scanner... 
or maybe leave 2 procs and make a double scanner - better against stones?
since there is no spl - papers are impossible - and some pseudopapers, like 
hoppers, completely useless and expencive in terms of code size and speed. 
since there won't be any papers, the strength of scanners drops, because 
they've lost their primary source of food. stones can achieve greater speed 
with smaller code. thus, stones are, IMHO better here.
 
since the coresize allows imps, it would be a shame not to use them :). 
Especially since imps are very hard to kill in core of this size, without 
previous stun by spl's or a really long bombing phase - which is hard to 
accomplish, since you can't allow a selfhit by a dat, like in most good modern 
stones. I think that it is a little better to use jmp bombs, since opponent 
may be using several attack modules, and such bombs would slow down the 
remaining functional parts. ... of course, one can attempt to make a bomb 
dodger here, it could score well. one could also stick to coreclears... I 
decided not to do that. I've made a stone imp, whose stone uses jmp #1, >1 
(in case someone is crazy to use an unprotected djn stream) and jmp #step, >1 bombs. 
and operates in 0.6c speed, which is, I think, fast enough. I also give some 
procs to imps - 12. the stone gets 20. I use a vector table launch to set 
everything up and running and to make sure procs in the stone are well placed. 
The stone uses a mod-8 pattern with the best mod-8 step according to optima 
score. I think that it will be hard to kill this one... I don't think that it 
can lose much, although I'm certain that it can lose - after all, it isn't 
optimaxed (of course).
 
I spent 15 mins per warrior in the last few rounds. 45 mins this time. So, I 
expect a nice score - even if it loses, I expect to see a tough fight.
 
a thought: maybe I should've airbagged the stone
a thought: I think that using pspace is bad, because you need to use it before 
you kill some procs, since you don't know if you'll need them and that slows 
down the "thinking" process... boot and everything else wastes enough time 
already, so no need to give your opponent the edge if you don't really have to 
The Results
  
Nenad and inversed clearly reaching the finals of the Second Chance defeating datagram who have
played a great tournament with his final 7th place in the CSEC2005.
  
  
| Battle | Result | 
|---|
 | Nenad Tomasev | 227.55 |  
| inversed | 118.70 |  
| datagram | 67.75 |   
 The Off-Topic Round-Robin Results
 
					 |