Subject:
|
Re: Connect Four game issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:26:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
564 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, David Koudys wrote:
> 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 fashion, no matter which side you place the 'bot on, the
> hopper/dropper for each 'bot would be on opposite ends of the playboard.
Excellent ideas guys. This is gonna be slick!
> As for signals, well, I have no idea.
:)
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 element to this might be benefecial? Or might that
get too complicated?
My thought was this - if we just score on who wins the Connect 4 game, the focus
is more on the software. Project X focused on software and hardware, because
the software had to be clever, and the machine had to be fast.
With the Connect 4 game, it could be sort of like chess - where those guys slap
the timer (however that works). Have someone starting and stoping a stopwatch
every time a robot says "Clear, I'm done, your move" and factor that into the
score. Then again, complex scoring methods have caused headaches in the past...
Iain
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
| (...) 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
|
| (...) 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
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
| 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)
|
72 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
|
|
|
|
