| |
Hi bruce. I hope you don't mind. BUT I'm posting your message here so
that other people can add their ideas. this will also cut down on
massive e-mails
> Hi Chris, Calum
> I've started working on ideas for my next block stacking robot. Key to my
> design this time will be strength. It was a major pain trying to re-build my
> last robot before the start of the competition! I received the pneumatic
> kits from Lego Shop at Home, and have been testing various ideas...a lot of
> fun.
>
> I have a couple of questions / comments about the rules:
>
> * Can 2 or more stacks of blocks touch each other? For example, if a
> robot deployed 2 stacks of 5 blocks, are the 2 stacks allowed to touch each
> other?
my take on it was the only thing that invalidated a stack was your
robot. In other words, a stack touching another stack was the same as
2 separate stacks. just like a stack touching the outer wall was the
same as one stack. heck.... in theory someone could build a
pyramid.... I'm just not sure of the way we add up the second row of
blocks.
> * If you use pneumatics with an air tank, does the robot have to
> pressurize the tank during the competition or could it be pressurized by
> hand before the competition starts?
SURE. to me this is the same as using another batter pack to run other
motors. you have to turn the pack on before the game starts (just like
your tire spinning deal)
BUT during the run if your tank runs out of air.....
that's why my stooopid bot was so heavy, I had to build a moving on
board compressor.
> * I assume we can still use non-Lego string. If so, I might replace
> the reasonably weak chain with string.
YES, the two other non-lego elements that are allowed are non-lego
string, and non-lego rubber bands. BUT in the interest of pretending to
be fair, try to find and use string/bands that mimic the real lego ones.
My theory behinds this one is that string and rubber bands are more
expendable and are not as easily replaced.
If your robot shows up with that cheap white turkey tying string, and
needs 18 feet of it.... well, in my humble opinion..... that's not fair
cause we all know lego never made string that long.
same goes with the rubber bands.... if a bot shows up with a 10"
diameter cogged fan belt....... again we all know lego never made this.
> * When it comes to scoring, I was wondering if we should count any
> stack the robot deploys, even if it is subsequently knocked down by either
> of the robots. Perhaps we should say the stack has to remain standing for at
> least 5 seconds. Changing this rule would allow a little more latitude in
> design / strategy (robots that build multiple short stacks vs robots that
> tend to deploy one stack near the end of the competition).
hummmmm, here I'm going to want to hold firm to the what we decided. I
think the original rules make for a valid game. if your bot is quick
and makes a lot of little stacks then you have a fair chance against
Dave's robot. who will make only one big stack and deploy it at the
end.
there is every chance that a "Dave type" robot will miss several
stacks. and leave enuff small stacks to out number one big one. as
well if two "Dave type" robots go at it..... then all is well.
> * I'm still interested in using multiple RCXs, however, I think the
> value of the 2nd RCX is overshadowed by the 1/N scoring method. Creating a
> tall stack is just about as hard to do no matter how many RCXs you use. How
> about trying something like this. (the Multiple RCX column is 0.75 * the
> single RCX column...obviously the .75 factor could be changed to any number)
NOPE. I think allowing the multiple RCX was enuff of a concession to
those who only have one RCX.
In my mind a robot that needs 2 rcx to make one tower is only half as
good as a robot that can do the same tower in 1 rcx.
It is with these last two points that I would really like to get
feedback from the group. As always these games are only loosely
organized by Calum and Myself. so if the majority of people want to
change the rules then that's what we'll do.
Chris
Lego Walker now @
www.members.home.net/cmagno/technics/index.htm
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: rules
|
| In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno writes: Hi Bruce and Chris, I agree with what Chris posted on... (...) What, you never got set 4789, the Lego Technic Fan Belt Accessory Pack? Sheesh. :) Seriously. No fishing wire. That's all i'm worried (...) (24 years ago, 8-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
