Subject:
|
Re: rtl21 - Can Stacking
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Mar 2006 16:14:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
787 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Calum Tsang wrote:
<snip>
> One of the reasons why I wouldn't want to do 3T is primarily because we did a
> similar mechanical game called ProjectX. We even needed higher resolution as we
> demanded people to mesh the ends of studs into each other to score a point.
I have seen some of the Project X stuff... Very, very impressive.
> That and I think (and I'm talking out my rear here) the game is deterministic
> based on who starts, right?
Somewhat correct. If both robots play correctly, each game ends in a draw, no
matter who starts. In these cases, we're basing the winner on total time each
robot takes to play its portion of the game.
> But Vitali is right--we do too "harvesting" games where you drive around. I was
> thinking of maybe rope ladders or something. Maybe that marble balancing game
> with (gasp) line following. Guess we'll discuss AFTER rtl20.
>
> Calum
Not getting up there too often for your games I can't speak from much
experience, but I understand the concern. I just wanted to let him & the rest
of you know that while tic-tac-toe sounds easy, it isn't something I would
consider an "easier" challenge. I think it is tougher than C4, and King of the
Hill, which I built robots for, and a few of your other games that I looked at
but didn't compete in.
John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: rtl21 - Can Stacking
|
| (...) One of the reasons why I wouldn't want to do 3T is primarily because we did a similar mechanical game called ProjectX. We even needed higher resolution as we demanded people to mesh the ends of studs into each other to score a point. That and (...) (19 years ago, 3-Mar-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
