Subject:
|
Re: tic-tac-toe bots
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Nov 2005 19:40:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
980 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> John Brost wrote:
>
> > actually making a robot do this could be really tough
> > with a single RCX
To address the first point, take a look at the large number of solutions to
the "Project X" challeng in the rtlToronto newsgroup. One of the first things I
built as a new Mindstorms user was a Project X 'bot, *because* I was curious how
to do it with just one RCX. You're right, it makes for an interesting challenge,
but a good one. that said...
> Why does it need to be limited to a single RCX?
Agreed, it doesn't need to be, although (much like the challenge of
compressing Steve's connect four solution into a single RIS kit) it could be a
fun thing to do. But I don't think it's a neccessary limit. Hey, Project X was
*won* by a single RCX solution after all.
> You could make a robot that plays the game
> from one side of the board, and another that
> clears the board from an adjacent side.
Hehe... is there any limit to how, um, violently the game board can be
cleared?
Also, after talking & thinking about this, I'm thinking about building a
robot to learn to play the classic game of 3-5-7 Nim. That should be a fun demo.
Anybody can beat it initally, but the more you play...
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: tic-tac-toe bots
|
| (...) Actually, planning for future events (like 3T) is also good. So, thanks. (...) ... (...) Why does it need to be limited to a single RCX? Of all the people who are likely to participate, can you think of any that are limited to one RCX? Also, (...) (19 years ago, 3-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
