 | | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
(...) cant.... stop..... must.... not..... hit reply.... button...... (...) wow bruce, keep it up. I'll have enough sig files to last for years. but seriously, you know as well as I do that very few of us have the ability to build and code this. I (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | team Magno NOW accepting applications
|
|
This in an open call for applications / résumé's for people who want to be on the winning team for R15 Team Magno is currently heading up an advanced team of two hardware and two software developers to fill 4 spots to compete in R15. The Successful (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
(...) no THAT'S a neat idea for the mock game? cause really we can all build a project X robot. (except for those few people who have NOT built a project X robot) so why bother with the hardware. we could have a trial game of software or even some (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect 4 game objectives?
|
|
(...) Cant...... stop....... must... not...... hit...... reply button....... Chris "It is a very clever strategy IMHO, and I applaud Chris for thinking of it." K.C. (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: [rtlToronto] rtlToronto14 Raiders of the Lost Part Photos
|
|
(...) Calum, thank you. well done. Now all the people's can bask is the glory that is a GREAT robot. Mine. I like the nickname you entered for my robot. I think I'll send my robot FedEx to steve slightly modify the code and enter it in his sumo (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
(...) hey Calum, are you there?? (shrug) oh well I'll just talk anyway. Calum, why don't we just ask everyone to make the robot using only RED bricks. ---...---end silliness---...--- the modular robot just MIGHT happen. But that's something that (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
(...) Isn't that the reason we chose this game...because somebody wanted to do something more software oriented? Didn't we all say that the actual mechanical part would be reasonably simple and the challenge was the programming. So, if we're not (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
(...) <snip> I like that idea Calum.... I know I'd be one of the hardware guys: at this point I haven't a clue as to how to program the bot. So basically, you're suggesting forming teams.... do-able methinks. I would love to learn how to program (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
(...) Because in this game, Bruce, there are a lot of people who won't be able to do the software part at all. Breaking apart the software AND hardware doesn't discourage any innovative or unique solutions. You can have a really cool way of scanning (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
(...) Gee...I wonder why we don't do that for every game? Oh, I remember, we’re strongly independent and we encourage innovative and unique solutions to a problem. How many times have you argued that exact point? (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Modular Connect 4 robots?
|
|
Hey guys, I had an idea. What if people built their robots in a modular fashion? There's always a mechanism RCX and a logic RCX. The logic RCX runs the game engine and tells the mechanism brick what todo. Everything is functionalized into "Drop at (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>: (...) Wouldn't you only have to look ahead one step at a time? The opponent only has 7 choices on any given turn. It's pretty much impossible to say like playing a computer in chess, figure out how the game (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
(...) To give some reference for plausibility, a look-ahead will reveal (I think): Look-ahead | Max Possibilities ---...---+---...--- 1 | 7 2 | 49 3 | 238 4 | 1,120 5 | 4,263 6 | 16,422 7 | 54,859 8 | 184,868 9 | 821,283 So, you're entirely right. (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: My Star Destroyer has died. :-(
|
|
(...) A mini Star Destroyer, what a cool idea. There are several people a way on vacation this week who are quite used to seeing the Star Destroyer there. I should build your mini one and put it up as a replacement. :-) Derek (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: My Star Destroyer has died. :-(
|
|
(...) snip (...) Hopefully TLC is listening. Sounds like there may need to be some changes, before hoards of unhappy ISD owners riot. Derek, I offer you my regrets for your bent technic beams and the loss of your ISD as a whole. May I offer you a (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: My Star Destroyer has died. :-(
|
|
(...) Oh it's well worth building, and there's no problem with keeping it together for say a month. Mine however has been build for almost a year now. Unfortunately it's not designed well to be assembled for that long. But it's a beautiful model and (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: My Star Destroyer has died. :-(
|
|
(...) I purchased 2 of the ISD's for parts only. After reading the stories about disasters and near disasters, I am glad I never built one. However, it is a great looking model. Steven Weiser (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | My Star Destroyer has died. :-(
|
|
RIP. Well someone mentioned to me recently that they had read about people having problems with bent beams after having their Star Destroyers built for a long time. So today I decided to inspect my Star Destroyer. I took one of the lower panels off (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
(...) I don't believe so! (...) You bring up a good point we haven't touched on yet. If we do opt for an IR "your turn" signal (which, from what I've been reading, is what we're steering away from now), we'll have to assign numbers to people to use (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
|
(...) Speaking of fitting stuff into 20 RCXs, is there a limit in this game for how many RCXs can be used? If not, doesn't that kill the idea that we can put the RCXs fact to face, to communicate with the opponent? Dang. I liked that idea better (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
