Subject:
|
Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:25:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1554 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Bryan Bonahoom wrote:
> now I just want to kick all of your butts in
> the competition :)
Fair enough. As it stands right now, my robot is best suited to entertaining
the kids while the "real" competitors fight it out :-).
> If the board had been designed with 6x6 cells (instead of 5x5)
> then it would be 1) easier to tile the bottom and 2) just easier :)
True: and if we had used 3x3 cubes, I could have fit it in a smaller package
:-). Personally, I wouldn't have used the 4-plate high walls between the cells.
Good thing *I* didn't get my way, because those walls allow a lot of novel
solutions I'd not thought of.
> (I hope you guys know I am kidding)
Yes. Well, you're kidding about all but kicking our butts - THAT I'm certain
you're completely serious about ;-)
> I think I can get the reliability up to around 98% - which should be
> pretty good.
Agreed.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: | | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| I still might construct a 6x6 cell version of the board for use with kids (if my robot is easily adaptable. This would probably improve my drop reliability to about 100%... I actually sat and played 23 games without modifying the robot last night. (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 3T Board Change Suggestion
|
| UNCLE - I give up - okay already - now I just want to kick all of your butts in the competition :) Just because I didn't show up on January 2nd... I see how you are :) (...) Just goes to show that there was an error in the board design. If the board (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
16 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
|
|
|
|