Subject:
|
Re: 3T cube orientation
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:24:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1188 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Hassenplug forwarded:
> Kerby Hughes wrote:
>
> > Besides being completely upside down, does it matter that
> > the cubes are "tile-side up"?
I'd agree with Steve - anything other then "bottoms up" should be OK.
> > I can get the pieces "flat" in the squares, but
> > I'm wondering if I need to redesign my dropper to
> > make sure the cubes end up a certain way.
Well then you're doing better than me at this point. Stupid grading... stupid
stomach flu... stupid requirement of actually having a livingroom the kids can
safely walk through...
Just to spell out another "this shouldn't need saying but..."... no cheating,
correct? I can't move the opponents cubes, or move mine after they're placed,
etc. In thinking about strategies an minimal cell checking, it occured to me
that detecting cheating could be a really hard problem for some robots, and
would slow things down a lot.
How do we signal "won/lost"? To get credit for a match, does a robot have to
signal that it understands how the game ended?
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 3T cube orientation
|
| (...) You keep saying that. I've taught Matt to play Tic-Tac-Toe. I think he's doing better than you, at this point. (...) I think that shouldn't need saying. (...) I think it's up to the builder how/if it signals the game is over. It would be cool (...) (19 years ago, 14-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
4 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
|
|
|
|
