| |
On 8/18/06, Calum Tsang wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno wrote:
> > Rob Antonishen wrote:
> >
> > > Would a bad move equal an immediate loss?
> > >
> > > For example, if my bot failed to mark a square but signalled it was
> > > done, would that be an immediate loss?
>
> > I would say yes.
>
> 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 of X or O must be.
>
> Calum
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>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: TTT - Question
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: TTT - Question
|
| (...) 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)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
