This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - R0B0SH4RK
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 104
381
« on: July 04, 2011, 02:46:41 AM »
Nothing too special, just another MW VS.  DSA, 100cm discs, the works. Setup is pretty simple, just 3 20cms and a 40cm extender. Turning actually isn't a big problem, despite the near-vertical chassis. Comments?
382
« on: July 04, 2011, 02:20:12 AM »
Collision meshes are there, dude.
383
« on: July 03, 2011, 11:10:15 PM »
@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.
I thought you didn't think it was true?
Skepticism =/= denial, my friend. And I've been talking from both sides of the release it/don't release it argument an awful lot here. For someone that's fairly indefferent as to what you guys decide to do, I've got myself quite involved. I still can't get over the fact that your voice sounds JUST LIKE someone I know.
384
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:56:14 PM »
@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.
385
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:50:18 PM »
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3
I am not saying they are easy to tell apart, I am saying that all we have to do is outlaw both Hax Mode and BFE and the whole problem goes away. I can't think of a situation where being able to tell the difference between the two of them would be of much importance.
Funny, I've been saying the same thing too. Although the dialogue between you and I has never been what should happen, but the consequences of a or b happening. Oh well. @MNB: It took two guys who have logged unholy amounts of hours in the stock game eight years to finally figure it out and release that it's possible. It's entirely possible that it takes years for others to figure it out too, and somebody else may not figure it out at all. For the whole community knowing how to enter hax mode, it may be now or never. We just don't know.
386
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:35:00 PM »
3 minuete matches
Minuete matches? Do you mean minuet matches? If so, that would be interesting... A minuet, also spelled menuet, is a social dance of French origin for two people, usually in 3/4 time.
387
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:31:20 PM »
[lame French joke]
Nah, he was too busy SURRENDERING!! AHAHAHAHAHAAA
[/lame French joke]
Holy crap, almost typed "busty" instead of "busy" >.>
388
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:27:00 PM »
That bot reminds me so much of Inf that it's not even funny. Good job.
Also, did it take you long to get that exostack on Zealot? Because it's pretty damn tight there.
389
« on: July 03, 2011, 10:21:44 PM »
@ Sage: Nothing to do with a fundamental trust thing, just skepticism. Nothing personal, just business y'know. @ S32:
OR you could have mentioned ACAMS's arguments that releasing this glitch would make BFE/AAM absolutely impossible to check for. Hence, it would be possible for people to blatantly cheat, and we'd never know the difference between hax mode and what we have long considered illegaly built robots.
This makes zero sense. Unless there is a tournament that allows BFE and not Hax Mode, or Hax Mode and not BFE, then there is no complication. We use common sense to screen out BFE, and we can do the same for Hax mode. If there was a tournament where one was legal and not the other (namely Hax mode allowed, BFE not), then all you have to do is look out for bots that have traits that can't be achieved via Hax Mode (such as an incredibly small chassis or random floating components).
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3 @ S32: I could be nasty and yell and swear and fling insults right back at you, but I won't. It's pointless. Waste of both of our times. The whole point is to keep things away from people to spite them.
If this is what you believe is happening right now, than you're far more cynical then I've ever given you credit for. The "social circle" you're currently referring to consists of the two people who figured the glitch out, no more. I don't consider that much of a "social circle" at all. And as far as I can tell, Sage and Scrap are spiting no one, especially not you. If they started distributing it to select members, encouraging its use in tourneys, and then making a huge deal out of it then yes, I can see where you're coming from, but right now it's still at the "hey guys lookie what we just found out! Ain't that cool??" stage. "What's f*cking happening right now" isn't keeping Hax mode a secret to spite members, "what's happening right now" isn't "purely disgusting," "what's happening right now" is a bunch of guys trying to decide where we go from here, and ultimately, Scrap and Sage are entitled to do as they please with their discovery. They can release it to the public, or they can lock it away and make sure it never sees the light of day again. I will throw in one caveat though: if they choose to keep the secret and either of them enters a bot into a tourney that has used this glitch (if it is actually a glitch), then EVERYBODY has the right to the knowledge because at this point, it stops becoming something cool that they found and starts becoming priveleged information. At this point, you can start screaming "elitist!" and I'll be right there beside you. But now is not the time to be angry, or even really care. It doesn't effect either of us or anyone on this forum. I'm in a class where by default all forms of elitism used at large are there to put me and everyone I know personally down.
Well, it's a damn good thing that we're all just pixels on each others computer screens, otherwise socio-economic classes might actually matter here. Point is, don't sweat this one man. Just relax and see where this goes from here :) EDIT: Holy crap LiNcK, that made a lot of sense. Foul language removed....user warned
390
« on: July 03, 2011, 08:17:42 PM »
@ S32: OR you could have mentioned ACAMS's arguments that releasing this glitch would make BFE/AAM absolutely impossible to check for. Hence, it would be possible for people to blatantly cheat, and we'd never know the difference between hax mode and what we have long considered illegaly built robots. By the way, why is elitism so bad? They put in the time and effort and brainpower to figure it out, not you. They're entitled to do with their knowledge what they see fit. If Sage and Scrap don't release the methods of how to do it, as long as they don't use it themselves, their discovery has absolutely no effect on us whatsoever. Why  , I have been able to do that for years......but it is cheating because you have to edit the files.
That is the goose hax.
^ Why did NOBODY acknowledge this quote? I'm curious about this now, please explain. @ Sage: I didn't doubt you before, but to tell you the truth, the second video made me pretty skeptical. How can you activate a process that is from what I understand similar to snapper loading through a voice command? To me, it looks like you've just written a script or program that is similar in nature to NC's movepixel tool, which has allowed you to "activate" Hax mode. In other words, I don't think it's legit. And until I see convincing evidence otherwise (i.e. you show me how to do it), I don't think I can trust you guys on this one. Sorry, man 
391
« on: July 02, 2011, 05:46:29 PM »
Easy solution: Scrap and Sage don't release how to do it to the public. Problem solved.
392
« on: July 02, 2011, 03:43:25 PM »
Nifty for power? Can't quite figure out the insides from those pics.
393
« on: July 02, 2011, 01:29:24 PM »
I don't really see how Hax Mode will ruin stock. Most of you seem to be equating stacking directly with how good the robot is. Following this logic, more stacking = better robot, therefore unlimited stacking = unbeatable bot. This could not be further from the truth. All stacking does is minimize weight spent on the chassis, therefore providing more possibilities for other components. An inefficient use of these components will still yield terrible bots.
I built R4 coming up on 6 years ago, it was 4-5 years old when I entered it into BBEANS. Exactly zero components on it were stacked, and the razors were only attached with some really basic eFFeing. Yet, it widthstood the test of time and took out almost all comers, including Inf's Absolute Chaos, the supposed "unbeatable" 36HS that used tons of stacking, eFFeing and sloading. This should be all of the proof that you need that good design still beats good stacking.
The "Death of Stock" argument also fails to put Hax Mode's applications on all bot types into the equation. Sure, we'd get spinners with more spikes, but we could also have popups with stronger defense, rammers with more impressive weaponry, quicker, more compact VS, and who knows what other effects on building. With new possibilities, we might actually be able to balance the playing field a bit for Rammers and VS. We don't know.
Bottom line: I don't see what the big deal is whether or not it's released for public use. I'm confident that Scrap and Sage will refrain from using this glitch for tourneys because they're concerned with the integrity of Stock. If it isn't released, it really doesn't affect the rest of us at all. And if it is released, it won't rape Stock to the extent that we're all afraid of. It's not a really big deal, guys.
394
« on: June 30, 2011, 02:47:52 AM »
I dun liek it D:
Don't know why. Possibly because of the ice picks, awkward wedge, and caster spam. Really, do you need 16? 10 seems like more than enough. Maybe you'll have weight then to replace the ice picks with irons or maces or something for a little more defense.
395
« on: June 29, 2011, 02:42:21 AM »
A bit late catching up on CC4 matches, but: great match Naryar, that had me on my toes. (Also, I always check the first page before reading comments so nothing gets spoiled.  )
BUT NOW I GET R0B0 D: If it was any other popup in the tournament, I'd be confident, but Fire Ant is too wide and flat. It's just gonna slide under Whipscorpion and take off motors.
Likewise, just watched the matches. Anyways, I see a lot of Whipscorpion sliding up the outsides of the wedges, bouncing harmlessly away, and Fire Ant swinging at nothing but air. I think I can win, but if you can last long enough, maybe you can wear down my defenses or score a WBP. We'll see.
396
« on: June 27, 2011, 06:38:02 PM »
MW juggler, nothing too spectacular. Might be an entry into RoboLeague. Possibly along with a Skrzak update too.  *Totally did not shamelessly klone one of Geice's setups*
397
« on: June 27, 2011, 03:50:37 PM »
Looking at the anchors, using anything other than RADs to power the weapons would lift it too far off the ground for shiny wheels to reach anyways. Nice! Would it be better with maces, though?
Not in this case. Maces are primarily used as defensive components, since their large collision meshes protect extenders far better than iron spikes or razors. Irons are actually more damaging IIRC, but maces are usually used on HS to protect extenderwork.
398
« on: June 20, 2011, 02:53:42 PM »
he needs more stuff dedicated just to looks, like he did with his battleaxe popup thing.
No... no he does not.
399
« on: June 19, 2011, 02:45:27 AM »
Saw it in theatres. Massively underwhelmed. I hated it.
Then again, I usually find Tarantino films to be really, really, exceedingly dumb, so I really shouldn't have been surprised.
400
« on: June 19, 2011, 02:02:08 AM »
Does that mean my bot also has "the correct wedges", as said by Somebody?
I have no idea what he (Somebody) meant by that. I think he's just crazy :P WOW!
I updated this bot with less jokey weapons and IT'S REALLY GOOD!
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)
Successful troll is successful. And has no idea how he's done it. I'm sure Sage (that feeeeeelthy cheat) will like that one.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 104
|
Show Posts