Subject:
|
Re: 3T
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Sun, 11 Dec 2005 01:45:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1227 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Bryan wrote (through Steve Hassenplug):
> Question: What clearance is there for the robot when it is playing?
I've been assuming that everything outside the 27x27 area on the opponent
side ("top") and the left side are OOB. I'm willing to relax that, as it makes
some things very tricky (at the very least, it leaves very little room to
evaluate & access the "upper left" cell of the board). I've also been assuming
that I can build right up to the edge of the raised 27x27 platform on the near
(or "bottom") and right sides. A standoff from the 27x27 field is easy enough on
the right edge, but my current plans do use structures build right up to the
"bottom" or near side of the platform.
The real question is does the below "standoff" exemption mess up anybodies
plans?
> If this isn't defined, I would like to push for an 8 stud
> clearance to the edge of the grid (with the exception
> of the 1 brick high area next to the grid that allows the
> robot to connect to the base plate).
8 studs on the left and right edges should be possible (although a lot larger
than I'd thought about), but I'm not sure it's needed on the "top" and "bottom"
of the board - do you want it there as well? And I'd say the "one brick high
exception" for connection be raised to four plates, so it's level with the edge
of the playing field along the robots own side at least.
Steve wrote:
> See if this page answers your questions:
> http://www.laflrc.org/3T/
Steve, as details get hammered out, can we keep them on this page?
On the "how's it going" front, I have a neat nearly studless
magazine/dispenser... but things bounce too much, and roughly 1/10th of the
cubes "placed" end up not flat but skewed onto one edge of the cells. Result -
I've gone to a much trickier solution (but, hey, I like it better anyway... if I
can get it working). So another request for a clarification: I vote either the
cubes must be deposited flat in their cells, or perhaps allow fudging (humans
can "flatten" a slightly misplaced cube, perhaps for a slight time penalty).
Also, while I'm not to concerned about the scoring (I'll be happy to get it
working)... First priority, winning if possible. Second, fastest speed (should
the RCX keep track of the cumulative time between handoffs? Can the robot do
anything while it's "off board"?). Third, do we still want to try for a clearing
the board bonus?
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) Eight studs from the last cube should be ok. Right now, the board already has four, so another four would be all right. I have mine built within the four stud area, but I know some of you guys will need the extra space. (...) I'll talk with (...) (19 years ago, 11-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 3T
|
| Bryan doesn't know how to post to LUGNET, so he asked me to post this for him... (...) See if this page answers your questions: (URL) (19 years ago, 5-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
