Subject:
|
Re: One more rule verification
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:50:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
660 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Calum Tsang wrote:
<snip>
> I would take the block count inbound of the two as the greater of the two.
>
> So if Part A gets 5 unique blocks and Part B gets 3, then the total score for
> the entrant (eg Dave Koudys) is 5. This would be the same as if I got a Purple
> block from Chris in Opening 1, and another also from Chris in Opening 2. I
> would only count it once. So I would say, only count them once.
>
> I would also not consider anything passed between the two Parts as a collected
> block. eg, this is not a loophole to guarantee the delivery or reception at
> least one.
>
> Now...speaking of conspiracies and collusion, if a team named "Design Team
> Sandy" entered in a second robot, well, we'd count her separately.
>
> Calum
This is a pure hypothetical--I'm not saying I'm doing this or not...
If there's this outside shell that has 6-8 transfer openings and there's this
robot inside that comes out when we press 'go', and the little 'bot goes around
and puts blocks in all the other 'bots, but has one transfer opening on it to,
again hypothetically, dock with a Calum 'bot that's not moving (cause the outer
shell isn't moving around), then the count for these hypothetical runamok 'bots,
in my opinion, should be number of unique blocks in both 'bots at the end of the
3 min. 'cause they started in the 1x1x1--in the past, we have allwed multiple
'bots that start within the given space constraints.
But if not, it'll make my life easier 'cause I won't have to put a transfer
opening on my roving 'bot.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: One more rule verification
|
| (...) I would agree with that scoring. And I want to see your rover climb out of a (min) 5" high shell :) So go for it! I do wonder about the definition of "in" though. If you have a stationary outer shell shaped like an open 'U' with three openings (...) (19 years ago, 23-Feb-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: One more rule verification
|
| (...) Well, I want to hear what others (eg Derek, RobA, Iain, Vitali) have to say, as they are more important than my opinion...but... I would take the block count inbound of the two as the greater of the two. So if Part A gets 5 unique blocks and (...) (19 years ago, 22-Feb-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
