 | | Re: Connect Four game issues —David Koudys
|
| | | In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Ralph Hempel wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) That was the first thing I thought of--if you design your 'bot on a gantry system, your hopper/dropper would have a home position to the "right" facing the gameboard. In this (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Iain Hendry
|
| | | | (...) Excellent ideas guys. This is gonna be slick! (...) :) I just had another thought - when we did Project X, we had scoring that included time, as well as accuracy being factors in determining who won. Does anyone think that adding the time (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Calum Tsang
|
| | | | | (...) I think we decided there's a minimum move time-apparently the more time you have, the more you can calculate out which move to make. (...) There was a request at the table to do a more software oriented game for a change. That's not say (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Derek Raycraft
|
| | | | | (...) This is my problem with this game as discussed so far. There is a minimum mechanical requirement to participate, but no advantage to going beyond this. If your robot can drop the chips into the slots, and read the board you're set. It's all (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | RE: Connect Four game issues —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | | | (...) Nice explanation Derek! It would be really good if the action of toggling the timer could be used to signal the other bot to begin his move. They don;t need to be the same electrical point, but if we're closing a switch for the control lab, (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Derek Raycraft
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well if we make the interface modular enough, we could have a human module and a robot module that plugs into the timer block. The human module could provide a button a person could press to say they have finished their turn. If two people (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Calum Tsang
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Two human modules. Cute :) That's what I figured- a human module is a giant "slapper" wired to a touch switch. I prefer not to use a ControlLab for the arbiter. I agree with Steve-an RCX, or better yet, a Scout. (Two inputs, two outputs, and (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | RE: Connect Four game issues —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Except running more than one game in parallel is awkward.... Oh, I forgot, you guys bought a lot of them without asking me if I wanted one :-) Ralph (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Jennifer L. Boger
|
| | | | | | | Quoting Derek Raycraft <djr@rogers.com>: (...) I agree that a timer increases incentive to build better robots - and it would also speed up the game. I may not be happy with the idea, but I agree. :) Jennifer ps: sorry guys, I know this is your (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | (...) Well, technically I think this is a mechanically more difficult game than Project X (which I did with 1 RCX). the XY gantry system for Project X comes into play for the XY gantry for Project 4, but vertical movement of a gantry system is (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | | | | (...) It should be possible to do this with just an RCX. Each robot has 1 input & 1 output. The referee RCX just watches for when one is done, and it signals the other to start, at the same time, keeping time for each. And without the ref, the (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Derek Raycraft
|
| | | | | | | (...) I choose the control lab as the ref because it's not a legal part to use in the contest, which means no-one looses the use of an RCX in for this game. (Well it's legal, but the computer at the other end isn't) You also have an nice large (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: Connect Four game issues —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | | (...) Steve, I wish you would stop this nonsense. Can't you understand that these RTLers bought a bunch of old Control Lab stuff (without asking if I wanted one :-) and now they are struggling to find ways to use up more of their spare time writing (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Rob Stehlik
|
| | | | (...) I agree 100% I really think we should implement something other than win/lose scoring here. There should be a bonus for speed. I get the feeling that eventually people will get their programs working so well that they are nearly unbeatable. (...) (21 years ago, 15-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| | | | |
