Subject:
|
Re: rtl 20 - mating rules
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Fri, 23 Sep 2005 20:21:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
546 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno wrote:
>
>
> so i guess the slience of the group mean we are ok with the last statements?
>
>
> -12" cubed
> -as yet to be decided HITW input WITH several stud width as part of design.
> -5 min game
> -10 bots on the play area at once
> -multiple entries will be discouraged, or run in a seperate game
> - scoring is based on multipling blocks in to plocks deposited
>
>
> Chris
If we can maybe think about limiting the size to 10 x 10 x 10, or even 8x8x8
(though that might be tough), there'd be much more room on the playfield.
Though if the 'bots are 12x12x12, we'd just have less 'bots at one time--smaller
orgy...
So have we made a decision on the locale of the hole(s)?
I'll try mocking something up (again)
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: rtl 20 - mating rules
|
| (...) WHY? at max, 10 robots at 12" will only ever fill at MAX, all lined up in a row, just over 1/10th of the play area. thats TONS of room. no. i think we can leave it at 12" knowing that only you and Steve will build to the full 12" (...) i think (...) (19 years ago, 23-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | rtl 20 - mating rules
|
| so i guess the slience of the group mean we are ok with the last statements? -12" cubed -as yet to be decided HITW input WITH several stud width as part of design. -5 min game -10 bots on the play area at once -multiple entries will be discouraged, (...) (19 years ago, 23-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
10 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
|
|
|
|
