Subject:
|
Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:41:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
608 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Derek Raycraft wrote:
> Vitali Furman wrote:
> > With the turn out of rtl 19's entries, I think that there sould be some sort of
> > rule this time, that says that your entry much be a robot. Meaning that it
> > should have an RCX that it uses, and some motor/sensors that it uses. As this is
> > a robotics event.
>
> Unfortunately I couldn't make to 19, but I didn't see any designs that I
> thought should be rejected. The ring bots were an excellent concept,
> but I expect they're the ones people most complained about.
>
> I don't see anything wrong with a bot like this. We hold contests where
> there is a problem to be solved and you come up with what you think is
> the best solution.
>
> The ring bot is not a perfect solution. Put two of them up against each
> other and not much is going to happen. Don't build it strong enough and
> David's bot will plow right through you.
>
> I was building a robot for the last block stacking contest that didn't
> use an RCX. Would you have disqualified me for that? Unfortunately I
> wasn't able to finish it in time, but properly tuned it would have done
> quite well.
>
> There are cases where we'd have to say, no, that's just too far outside
> the spirit of the contest. Like Jeff E's fish sticker sumo bot. Very
> funny, but...
>
> I think the mechanical or battery box only designs are a very important,
> and quite acceptable design strategies for our contests.
I'm with you Derek - the object of the contests is to come up with the best and
most creative solution. And the ring "bots" were definitely creative.
My take on this is that the ring bots were a little too close to Jeff E's fish
sticker sumo bot. And it was BOTH good and bad to see such a simple creation
beat Dave's massive bot.
For a repeat of this contest, maybe we should stipulate that the bots need some
type of propulsion, whether RCX, motor, wind-up motor, capacitor, etc.
Any time the rule book gets longer, and more restrictive, it supresses
creativity. Because of the lack of restrictions, and the nature of the game, I
think rtl19 had one of the greatest variety of robots.
Eventhough Dave's bot was probably the best robot, and the one most people
thought would win - the contest proved that the "best" doesn't always win.
John
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
| (...) As it turns out, a fish sticker would not win a sumo compeition. While it's a good strategy to not-lose, it would also not win very many matches, and would finish in the middle of the pack. (...) My suggestion would be a minimum weight (like 1 (...) (19 years ago, 19-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
| (...) how about gravity??? see, you cant just say your bot ~NEEDS~ something just to make it a bot. you need to add a challenge that will make it easier to USE the RCX then not. For the BoP game, if you didnt want to see the tower robots, make a (...) (19 years ago, 19-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
| (...) Unfortunately I couldn't make to 19, but I didn't see any designs that I thought should be rejected. The ring bots were an excellent concept, but I expect they're the ones people most complained about. I don't see anything wrong with a bot (...) (19 years ago, 19-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
49 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
|
|
|
|
