Subject:
|
Re: ATTENTION CALUM TSANG & CHRIS MAGNO (was Re: Starting C4 Games)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:45:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
457 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Michael Purvis wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Mario DeFacendis wrote:
> > IMHO, Derek's proposal (although sound) may add another layer of complexity that
> > people will have to deal with and potentially mess up.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that Derek's proposal doesn't seriously
> affect what the interface is, only how it's implemented in terms of the actual
> arbitrator. You still click a sensor to send the signal, and you still listen
> for a click to receive it.
>
> The only difference is that you're not permitted to 'listen in' on the send
> sensor.
Derek's proposal changes what a click of your sensor means:
It used to mean:
Your opponent has played a chip... make your move.
It is now proposed to mean:
You opponent has played a chip *OR* this is a brand new game and you have been
chosen to go first... figure out which is which and make your move.
The *OR* part is subtle, and I can see this tripping people up because it
involves different reasons to scan the board.
Hey, I understand the sublties so I'm officially being a dink and casting my
vote for Derek's proposal, hoping that others won't even be able to get their
robot to start a game properly. :)
Mario
P.S. Note the smiley. I am not a dink. I did raise this concern after all!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
