 | | Re: TTT - Question —Calum Tsang
|
| | | (...) I don't agree with Chris a lot, but I would say yes too. We want to encourage well tested and reliable robot hardware. I also agree with Steve's criteria for a definition of marked by having a light circle of dots to define where solid marking (...) (18 years ago, 18-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: TTT - Question —Rob Antonishen
|
| | | | (...) OK - That was my thinking too, but I didn't want to suggest it up front and potentially bias others. I was concerned that my bot would have to deal with getting a handshake, then NOT finding a mark on the board.... -Rob A> (18 years ago, 18-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: TTT - Question —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | | (...) Just a thought. I suggest you robot search the board, and if it doen't find the move either (A) search again or (B) return "home" and wait (again) for the opponent to play. For the C$ event, I had my robot keep scanning the board, because (...) (18 years ago, 18-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: TTT - Question —Rob Antonishen
|
| | | | (...) I guess one option would be if no play is seen (rescan the board if desired) just signal your end of turn again without playing.... -Rob A> (18 years ago, 18-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | |
