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 - TDS
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
41
« on: May 03, 2016, 12:13:24 PM »
Thats a whole lotta wedge, but probably not necessary, if you reinforce the leading edges you could get away with a lot less, its pretty unlikely a spinner is going to straight up punch through the center of your wedge, its virtually always a corner that gets peeled away.
are you going to franklin this year (theoretically?)
42
« on: May 02, 2016, 02:42:23 PM »
all of which besides kerbals (which also doesn't use stock physics) suffer from the same random detonations.
I wouldn't exactly call such detonations 'random' as I would attribute them to stress (as far as havok explosions go, anyway). Surgeon Simulator and Gang Beasts are made to be played stupidly; you do a bunch of stupid things and the models/ragdolls go all wild and floppy and the crappy let's play channels generate laughs. I've never seen universe sandbox or poly bridge go berzerk a la havok explosion, but KSP most definitely does, and I cite this maniac's channel. [/quote] I wasn't aware there was a mad scientist that played KSB with such a mission, but there you are, lol.
43
« on: May 02, 2016, 02:11:16 PM »
You really hate unity for some reason, huh? Kerbal Space Program, Universe Sandbox, Surgeon Simulator, Gang Beasts and Poly Bridge all were made in unity, and they're all well-made game that have physics as a core part of gameplay. Writing off RA3 because of unity is kinda stupid. You say you want less crashes and fewer physics anomalies, and that's what you'll get by moving away from the Havok engine RA2 used. And I'm not 100% but I'm pretty sure unity has insane addon/moddability support compared to the other engines.
all of which besides kerbals (which also doesn't use stock physics) suffer from the same random detonations.
44
« on: May 02, 2016, 01:31:36 PM »
Hey dudes, I'm looking at possibly doing CNC work for people as a way to have more money to spend on more robot stuff :)
Ideally this would be a much lower cost alternative to machine shops, and I expect to be doing a lot of those one or two critical parts that can't be made by hand, weapon discs, machined frame rails, weapon teeth, stuff like that.
Since I really dont care how long a job takes, I'll be forming something of a "this is a pain in an ass" billing scale, charging you for doing things like making soft jaws and such, rather than straight machine time, because honestly this thing is idle 99.9% of the time anyway. and material (I highly suggest just buying scrap drops off of ebay and having them shipped right to me rather than pay shipping three times)
So rather than throw out a "hey do you guys want this" because obviously you do, shoot/post up some pictures of parts/material and what approximately you'd want to spend on it (or did spend on it so I know what to beat) so I can make sure my pricing makes something in the realm of sense when I ramp this up to production.
45
« on: May 02, 2016, 12:20:37 PM »
Besiege uses uses unity, and that's a great physics based building game:
Besiege doesn't use the stock physics really. it took them a /really/ long time to dial it in to where things didnt just randomly detonate (and they still do), but we'll see, I'm hoping to be surprised at Ra3 but it is what it is. I mean all we really want is ra2, with less crashes, better support for addons/programs and more possible "stuff" It really doesn't seem too crazy these days to just zero out forces that you don't want/out of axis which was a major source of physics detonations rather than just try to contain them with really strong "springs".
46
« on: May 02, 2016, 10:56:06 AM »
You're just shooting yourself in the foot with that statement. Yes, people commonly choose Unity for many reasons... I don't see how that make Unity a bad engine to develop on just because it had attracted a lot of low-budget indies developers, even one-man dev.
Really, it seems like its only chosen strictly by people who want to make max profit now that unreal, crytec, ect. are all more or less free. The only other reason I can imagine is "hey we didnt want to restrict the game to only people that bought a pc in the last 5 years" you can do fun stuff in just about any engine, unitys physics always gave me problems in the little that ive messed around with it though.
47
« on: May 02, 2016, 10:31:45 AM »
Gaben is a fat greedy bastard and DRM is ruining games. Don't even get me started with always online bs.
if by always on you mean logging online once a month or so.
48
« on: April 29, 2016, 08:09:57 AM »
That mean we can mod Robot Arena 3?
The developers say that it's possible yes, it's a PC game on the Unity engine after all.
That being said RA3 being based on unity is going to turn people off the game for . . . unity reasons that us knowledgeable ones know ;-)
I'm not convinced you know anything about Unity.
It's pretty much the best choice there is, but it's still very much how the developers will pull it off, given the choices they have.
Watch this Then realize this is the DOOM ENGINE the original 20 year old doom engine People can do crazy, great things if they keep plugging stuff into existing engines, but its a lot of work and most developers prefer just using a better existing product. Unity is commonly chosen for bad, low budget games because of its cost, so it has a rep of being a bad, low cost engine.
49
« on: April 29, 2016, 08:06:54 AM »
Oh, you meant this season just now. Very intriguing, most people aren't scared of flamethrowers in the least, but if we've made them that good, that changes things.
Its not even good, its that if during the course of a fight anything provides an opening like a bent panel or sheared screwheads and fire can get in there you could be in trouble, I dont think there's much design space for flamethrowers, there's the big cloud of fire butane mix ones, and the more invisible but hotter propane ones. I bet if you had temp sensors inside sewer snakes opponents for the past few years its flamethrowers contributed to a few spinner meltdowns too. But yeah by themselves they dont do much, they can just help seal the deal.
50
« on: April 28, 2016, 02:53:06 PM »
Big impacts you say?
Hopefully most of the energy could be deflected, or at least absorbed by (what I am hoping is) going to be side-skirts 
But knowing there are horizontal spinners, it's going to be another Nightmare VS Slamjob to sound like the miserable BB fanboy that I am 
nearly all losses by newer builders aren't because of energy not being deflected or frames collapsing, its because when you get tossed or thrown or whatever, the mass of a plug or wire + the motion is enough to unplug some portion of your robot. Tape or glue everything, then ziptie it TWICE
51
« on: April 28, 2016, 02:44:13 PM »
flamethrowers were the direct cause of /at least 2/ losses
Which ones? [/quote] Currently under NDA, but there were ESC failures caused by flamers. They aren't consistent weapons but they can most definitely take a robot over the edge and into thermal meltdown
52
« on: April 28, 2016, 12:01:07 PM »
Flamethrowers don't actually do anything right?
flamethrowers were the direct cause of /at least 2/ losses
53
« on: April 27, 2016, 10:08:21 AM »
you are about 2 months late to the party TDS :D
There are two things I will never be accused of, being nice and being prompt :P
54
« on: April 27, 2016, 09:43:22 AM »
55
« on: April 25, 2016, 07:59:38 AM »
700 psi?
If you're talking about Pneumatics then I'm sorry but my lifting arm is going to be electronic
Please bear in mind that the robot meant to be a featherweight
He was talking about my robot, which is a huuuuuge hammer, it had issues passing safety because of a check valve so I had to dial it way down. The "easiest" motor gearing is a bit out of date, but will still work, windshield wiper gearboxes usually have decent worm gears and plenty of torque, just be careful with big impacts. Beyond that ballscrews aren't that expensive but require some precision parts so they dont bind up.
56
« on: April 24, 2016, 03:07:49 PM »
Slow framerate? Not sure what to say about that. The trailer seems smooth enough (no frame drops like that RCTW trailer). Did they not have as strong a PC for demonstrations? Graphics set too high?
If true, its most likely that they haven't figured out the exact tuning of the physics, having everything turned up to 100% in a physics engine can pretty much bog down any system.
57
« on: April 22, 2016, 11:46:02 AM »
Well I have a few pounds put towards my nice hefty plate wedge, which I don't exactly need against Ruin. And I may be picking up a other order of AR400 before Franklin anyways... AR400 top plate layered over UHMW maybe? 
I likely won't have an answer for layered armor by then, but there is one in the books :)
58
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:39:11 AM »
You put that much in?? I have two Botbitz 30As for drive that are well hidden and a RedBrick 200A for weapon that isn't well hidden, and some equally unhidden lipos. So we'll see how that goes! Turn up the gas and do your worst. I have some ideas though...
No, I am still in 2002 battlebots mode where you needed 4+ $250 dollar victors, I cant shake it :) Also telling me to crank it up is a dangerous proposition, ruin2's components are rated for 700psi, and thats only because the regulator will only output up to that
59
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:23:54 AM »
I'm making a lifting arm for Ruin2 incase someone wants to grudge match it at franklin *hint hint* :)
Is Franklin a thing yet? I want as many fights I can get for a drive that far for me. You'll be a good test for my shame hoops haha [/quote] Well with another CNC conversion in progress (this time on a 3000lb mill) I hope to be ready for it unlike moto, but no, reg isn't open yet. As much as I'd prefer to not wedge, a fight is a fight and I don't think I want to run the hammer "for fun" but maybe I could just turn down the pressure and/or slap extra armor over your speed controllers, a grudge match for fun shouldn't cost you a bunch of cash in parts. Then again I still can't get out of the mindset of putting ~1k of speed controllers in a bot, lol, here's hoping I dont tap out at the slightest wisp of smoke again XD
60
« on: April 21, 2016, 12:53:46 PM »
Hey, I'm also first-robotting a featherweight right now. A couple quick tips and I have a ton of research I've done if you have any more questions. First point is to take however much you think you're going to spend, and just double it. At least. And have that much saved up before you're going to start buying parts. Next point is to not buy parts at all until your design is finalized. I made the mistake to try to show progress (I'm doing it for my senior project at school) and now I'm stuck with parts that I'm either not using, or forced to use because I don't have enough time to put in anything else. This costs money, and makes me sad.
I'm making a lifting arm for Ruin2 incase someone wants to grudge match it at franklin *hint hint* :)
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
|
Show Posts
