Subject:
|
Re: Connect Four game issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:25:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
511 times
|
| |
|
|
> 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.
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 down to coding from there.
There is no incentive for innovative design in the actual robot. Which
seems counter to the reasons we put on these games.
So this game really becomes a computer science challenge and not a
robotics challenge
> 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...
I like the idea of adding the Chess Clock to the game. This will add
some mechanical challenge back into the game.
A Chess Clock has two count down timers. They are set to the same value
and as I'm taking my turn my clock counts down and my opponents clock is
stopped when I finish my move I hit the clock and it stops my clock and
starts my opponents clock. If you run out of time before your opponent
you loose.
This also limits game length. If you set each robot to have 3 minutes
to play with, then the maximum possible length of the game is just under
6 minutes.
This makes it advantageous to have a quick board reading and chip
placing robot. Saving time is important, because you'll loose if you
don't get 4 in a row before time runs out. It also puts a time
management element into the software. You have to judge how much time
you are willing to spend thinking about your move. It also lets you
spend more time thinking about some moves, then say an arbitrary 1
minute per move rule, at the expense of having to make quicker moves
later on.
I would be willing to build a timer robot out of a control lab and a
laptop for this game. It would plug in between the two robots and
detect the passing of turn and keep track of the time each robot is
spending on their move.
If we design our interface between the to robots correctly the use of
the timer could be optional, we could just drop in a pass through block
when the timer is not needed. It could very easily be a passive device.
Derek
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | RE: Connect Four game issues
|
| (...) 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
|
| 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
|
| (...) 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
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
| (...) 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
