To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.org.ca.rtltorontoOpen lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Organizations / Canada / rtlToronto / 9458
9457  |  9459
Subject: 
Re: C$
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
Date: 
Wed, 1 Oct 2003 16:41:47 GMT
Viewed: 
462 times
  
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno wrote:

I can not see in my mind how not not placeing a chip can be an advantage.

Obviously you don't know what zugzwang is. Its a move you have to make when a
pass would be preferable. This is how nearly all connect 4 games are won. The
winner forces the loser to make a move they would rather not make.


even if you can show me, the thought that someone might program for that
scenario just breaks the KISS rule.

if people want to do that..... then so be it.

BUT keep in mind ANY RULE that automatically disqualifies a robot allows for
"lesser" robots to win.

No. It can't be *that* hard to place a chip can it?? If a robot is crappy enough
to drop a chip, it deserves to lose.


for example:  what if a known GOOD robot has a run of bad luck, and miss's one
chip.  this ~could~ allow a robot made by Calum or Greg to win againts a robot
made by team Rob-dont stress my Gear- S.

Then thats my problem. I should have made my robot more reliable. Missing a turn
messes up the game, so it should result in disqualification.

Rob



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: C$
 
(...) wow Steve, you must be SO PROUD!!! you beat your son at connect-four, for "almost all the games" (...) I can not see in my mind how not not placeing a chip can be an advantage. and even if you can show me, the thought that someone might (...) (21 years ago, 1-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)

35 Messages in This Thread:













Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR