Subject:
|
tic-tac-toe - Clearing the board
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Fri, 4 Nov 2005 14:45:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1041 times
|
| |
|
|
Ok, let me pose this question.
In our Tic-Tac-Toe game, Should we offer a time bonus (subtract some time) for a
robot that can clear the board after the game is over? Assuming robots will play
two games against each other robot, that means each would go first once when playing
the game, and each would go first once when clearing the board. The robot would
have to clear its pieces off the board in both games to get the bonus.
I'm open to going with the majority.
I spoke with Greg, he said "No bonus"
I said Yes
John: No
Kerby: Don't know
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: tic-tac-toe - Clearing the board
|
| (...) How exactly are we defining clearing, and are both robots going to be attempting such clearing at the same time? I have visions of the "clearing" phase being a place we can all apply our Sumo robots... Perhaps a "self-reseting" system should (...) (19 years ago, 4-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | Re: tic-tac-toe - Clearing the board
|
| (...) I'm really on the fence. I just think it may limit either the number of entrants, or the number of competitive entrants. On competition day I'd like to see many (a dozen?) competitive robots, not 3 or 4 that are head and shoulders above the (...) (19 years ago, 4-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: tic-tac-toe bots
|
| (...) It just seems like we would probably be handing 1st place (or the top few spots) to builders who had the time & resources to build 2 rcx robots or 2 separate robots. I'm not sure we should do this. Yes, most people who are likely to (...) (19 years ago, 4-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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
