Subject:
|
Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:53:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
807 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Derek Raycraft wrote:
> > Calum Tsang wrote:
> > > > I'd also be concerned that scoring this way would open the door to to
> > > > "loophole bots" like Rob's (?) at RTL15
> > > > <http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ffaat/RTL15/100_0457.jpg> which,
> > > > while I thought it exploited a clever loophole in the scoring, did
> > > > somewhat disadvantage other bots that more closely followed the spirit
> > > > of the rules....
> > >
> > >
> > > I used to be kind of against this, because I'm sick of loophole pokers (Steve,
> > > JeffE, I'm looking in your direction...) but the thing is, we have better
> > > things to do than to try and outrule everyone. That and Steve never does it
> > > anyways. He's just being a smart-aleck and always backs that up with good
> > > building instead. :)
> >
> > Ok, I can't remember, what did this robot do that was considered a loop
> > hole in the rules?
>
>
>
> I didn't get to see it either. I think we were too busy running our C$ robots
> in the final...
>
> But, I believe it moved all the marbles onto the opponent's square, because the
> penalty for "wrong" marbles was bigger than the points for "right" marbles.
> That's why these values need to be the same.
>
>
> > > Well, I'm going to put up a set of proposed rules. I think what Derek is
> > > suggesting is giving points for collecting home coloured blocks without stacking
> > > them. I'm not sure I'd want to do that, because that's the same as
> > > MarbleSorting2 we did with Dave last January.
> >
> > True it does allow for a pure sorting robot. Maybe we don't want to
> > allow that. I thought it allowed for a good entry level robot. But it
> > could also allow for expert builders to build stinker robots, rather
> > then tower builders.
>
>
> Is a pure sorting robot really bad?
>
> If a robot can build four, four-block stacks (without sorting) it will beat a
> robot that sorts ALL it's blocks.
>
> A sorting robot WILL win some of it's rounds, but NOT the event.
>
> That's a really good way to include people who just can't figure out how to make
> a robot stack the blocks.
>
>
> Of course, if you think it's better to exclude beginners from this event, or
> give them their own little event in the corner, I guess that's up to the group.
>
> Steve
What if we said that a 'bot could enter if it could only scan the Connect 4
board, or drop a chip anywhere and still be counted (though, so I'm told, that's
what some of them did)
The event is block stacking. We've done it 3 times before. If people think
they can't do this competition, then I'm completely for another competition on
the same day. We ran sumo for those that couldn't make a block stacker. We ran
marble sorting for those that couldn't build a C$ 'bot. We can do the same
again--I'm completely for encompassing all levels at our competitions using
multiple events. I'm not for 'dumbing down' one competition to try to include
everyone.
Again, opinions expressed by me do not necessarily reflect those of the rtl
organizers. Further, I'll be happy building a 'bot no matter what the final
decision is.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Onwards to rtlToronto18...
|
| (...) I didn't get to see it either. I think we were too busy running our C$ robots in the final... But, I believe it moved all the marbles onto the opponent's square, because the penalty for "wrong" marbles was bigger than the points for "right" (...) (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
37 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
