Subject:
|
Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Sep 2005 21:27:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
618 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno wrote:
> At one time we did have an unofficial rule were you DID have to use an
> RCX. that has pretty much changed with Rob's "monkey bot"
>
> we have seen that cool solutions can be had without using the rcx.
>
>
> the best way to "force" an RCX event is to have a game that NEEDS the
> RCX. meaning define the game so that its easier to use an RCX then to
> build a ring or gravity type robot.
>
> if you REALLY want to see RCXen, then you need to suggest ways to make
> this existing game NEED an rcx. (1)
>
>
> Chris
>
> 1. WITHOUT needlessly saying that the bot MUST have an IR beacon, OR
> other false standard, just for the sake of using the rcx.
If one of the rules will be that you have to have a hole in the wall into which
the bricks will be loaded, then we might need to use the RCX to actually locate
the hole.
I think that by making that one of the rules, it might make it a little to
challenging, as you need two autonomous robots to co-operate. Also it might
limit the variety of robots, as everyone will have a similar hole, and a similar
dispenser. That might make it a less interesting.
I suggest that we continue with the idea that your container can be any size and
shape as long as it is max 10 studs of the ground.
Vitali
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Mating Game - moc up
|
| (...) At one time we did have an unofficial rule were you DID have to use an RCX. that has pretty much changed with Rob's "monkey bot" we have seen that cool solutions can be had without using the rcx. the best way to "force" an RCX event is to have (...) (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
|
|
|
|
