Subject:
|
Re: tic-tac-toe bots
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Nov 2005 21:41:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
967 times
|
| |
|
|
Kerby accidentally sent this to me...
On Thu, November 3, 2005 4:07 pm, Kerby Hughes wrote:
I kind of have mixed views about this. (Keep in mind that I haven't
actually tried to build anything for 3T yet)
If I was trying to build a robot that could play tic-tac-toe really
fast, I don't think I'd want to have to worry about making that robot
pick up the pieces later, since I'd have to imagine that certain
"fast" ideas would have to be heavily modified (and presumably slowed
down) to pick up it's own pieces.
With that thought in mind, I think that if the rules gave a
"bonus" (time deduction) for cleaning up, I would wonder about how
much bonus would be given. If cleaning up turns out to be really
hard, should cleaning up be sufficient to win? I would assume that
most robots are going to be fairly similar in the time it takes to
place pieces (and a lot of tie games), so I don't know how much we
should lever the bonus.
Having by now come to absolutely no conclusion for myself, :) I'd say
I'm currently in favor of keeping the cleanup bonus, just because I
think it would be really cool to see work. From a contest side
however, I'm not so sure about how the rules should be to make the
competition fair. I also think that putting in the cleanup routine
would add a bit of diversity into the robots with the added challenge.
-Kerby
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
