![]() |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
|
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
As usual, if you're designing your robot to take advantage of a single definition that's not even in the rules, and you have to ignore the common sense meaning of several aspects of the rules to do it, then you're setting your team up for a high risk of a big disappointment.
Most robots are designed to balance on top of the bridge. 179 designed a robot to balance under the bridge. They thought outside the box, but within the stated intent of the rules. The trollbot does not balance on or under the bridge. I guess that's a subtle difference? It's very obvious to me. |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
|
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
Seeing that the same answer was given twice, one would think that it's a safe bet to bank that the answer will hold true - but this isn't the case, since the GDC has once again gone back on one of it's answers in the Q&A with a team update. Can we really even trust the GDC anymore? In any case, we might just be beating a dead horse. The troll bot that I've seen should still be quite competitive even with a traditional balancing strategy. Oh, and something to lighten the mood a bit. Stumbled across it in my internet travels: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/364ww4/ |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
You can kiss that customer goodbye though - ;o) |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
|
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
|
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
But I think you are missing (some of) the point of FIRST. They do not give us 6 months to try all kinds of cool ideas (which I would like). Why is the build season only 6 weeks? - to put the design teams under "quick turn" pressure like that seen in a "real-world" environment. They impose serious design constraints and rules/requirements - again like the real world. So (though I love to tinker and try wild new stuff also) I do not frustrate the students by advising such an approach given a 6-week window. |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
[2008 - EngiNERDs - Team 2337] ![]() -Clinton- |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Hey guys I want to add two things to this discussion.
1. If you want to use common sense thinking instead of the rules 179 is clearly not "balanced" like most people expected at the start of build season. The only difference between their out of the box thinking and "troll-bot" out of the box thinking is that troll-bots would aggravate the game design (and lots of teams that didn't think of them) by having a really sweet ROI. Whereas swamp thing is different, but not particularly better, than other designs. 2. Here's one more thing to think about. If there were teams that built troll-bots, the GDC just bilked them out of $5000. This isn't just fun, they payed to be able to play the game they were given. |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
I guess we too can agree to disagree. |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
Good luck this year! |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
We can argue, agree to disagree, split hairs, compare philosophies, but what's done is done (unless it is undone once again...). We don't have to be happy (or sad, depending on your design) about it, but all this enthusiasm and energy could be powerful. I want to know what the new "gamebreaker" is. Or, if I designed and built a trollbot what suggestions the community might have with only 6 days left?
My suggestions would be to try and decrease my footprint as much as I could, or perhaps devise a 179 inspired method of getting on the bridge, or have a ramp appendage. As many have said, many teams planning on building trollbots may lose little if any value to their alliance even with the changes. |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
Quote:
I wonder ... now that the ball shield isn't part of the bridge ... can I somehow use that area to keep my opponents off of thier bridge? |
Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
This entire thread (minus the side discussions) boils down to one simple question:
Should we build robots based upon the intent of the GDC or should we build robots based only upon the rules written by the GDC? While the latter is easy to determine/judge legality of a design if the rules are written clearly, the former is much more difficult. What is the actual intent of the GDC? Unless you're on the GDC, it's nearly impossible to know for sure. We can take educated guesses, but different people will likely think the GDC had a different intent when reading the same rule (As evidenced this year with this team update). If the GDC decided to add another set of footnites to the manual, such as a green "Intent Box", I'd be concerned that all teams could follow the intent and come up with very similar robots and strategies. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 20:13. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi