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 - Urjak
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 144
541
« on: July 03, 2011, 08:29:22 PM »
So then nobody will bother using BFE if you can do that.
And then what? We just ban Hax Mode and we will be fine.
542
« on: July 03, 2011, 08:25:12 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.
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). Well, I won't go that far. I will say that if his reason is solely to keep it to himself and his close group, he may do so because he did discover it.
People have the right to be selfish with the things they discover, which is fine if the person is willing to admit to that. It's just all the other stuff about ruining the community or for the better of us all that I have problems with.
I think you misunderstand me. I was saying that people who know the glitch have no grounds to say that its disclosure would ruin stock, as this would have them acting as if they know what is best for the rest of us. I fully believe that Sage and Scrap have no obligation to reveal the glitch.
543
« on: July 03, 2011, 08:12:38 PM »
123STW is aboslutely right, there is no good reason to keep secret. If I ever discover how to do Hax Mode I would release it in a heartbeat. If stock crumbles as a result then so be it, at least we don't have a bunch of "elite" deciding what is and isn't good for the rest of the stock builders.
The key here is that only when the glitch is released will we have any idea what the effects will be. Glitches that have more potential than Hax, such as BFE and AAM, haven't ruined stock and yet they are not all that hard to learn (someone even posted a BFE guide a while back). Thus there is no reason to believe that revealing how Hax Mode works will harm or even change Stock in any way.
544
« on: July 03, 2011, 01:46:36 PM »
The only difference (or at least the only one I recall) between this video and the one removed (I saw it before if was removed) is that in the first one scrap (or whoever was doing) alternated between tabs, as if snapper loading. Is that part of the secret?
EDIT: And another thing. I tried replicating the same size chassis they had (largest possible baseplate, height around that of an HP Z-tech), and got around 170 kg with aluminum armor. This is 33 kg less than what the video shows (with titanium armor the weight goes over 207 kg). This leads me to believe that there are other components somewhere that we don't see.
Or maybe I am just over-complicating this and my observations are irrelevant. Ah well, can't hurt to try.
545
« on: July 02, 2011, 10:21:37 AM »
tl;dr GTFO
I am saying that this whole thing is unnecessary. I was under the impression that we were going to discuss or "argue" the systems we came up with. If that is not the intent of this thread then I am sorry for my mistake and will refrain from further posts.
546
« on: July 02, 2011, 10:15:42 AM »
My submission of revision is thus follows:
All batteries, CO2 canisters and Control boards shall be grouped under the the "Power" title.
All motors (spinning, drive and burst) shall be grouped under the "Motor" title.
Motors can only have one stack. This is a stack at 100%. So a two wheeled bot can have two extra motors and wheels, making it a 4 wheeled bot. This is the maximum. Alternatively, a drum weapon or any other can be used.
Batteries can be stacked 3 times. A nifty/nifty/nifty is as valid as a black/CB/Small CO2.
Other baseplate components cannot be stacked into batteries or Motors. They can be stacked indefinately.
Weapons, Motors and extenders outside the chassi can be stacked to whatever degree.
Why this? We never did this for BFE (I believe someone posted a GUIDE for it a little while back). Why not just use common sense as to what could be stacked by hand and what couldn't. I mean if this is the direction we all want stock to move in anyway then that's fine by me, but Hax Mode should not be the thing that "forces" us to do so.
547
« on: July 02, 2011, 10:09:08 AM »
Neither of those rules above.
I say do what we do for BFE, and have stacking allowed within reasonable limit (this is of course subjective, but I think we can all agree that certain stacks aren't possible. If it is in the grey area, give the person the benefit of the doubt and let him in.
548
« on: July 02, 2011, 10:06:33 AM »
A chassis that can fit 5 ant and a large control board is 1.5sq x 1.7sq and 0.338182 height.
Good god... do you memorize that? :P
549
« on: July 02, 2011, 09:58:09 AM »
Other than the fact that Sage and Scrap have the right to tell anyone they want, there is no good reason for this glitch to remain secret. We already have BFE. And how exactly do we regulate BFE? By using common sense. We look at a bot and can generally tell if someone uses BFE.
All the n00bs here could easily learn BFE by lurking around these forums and experimenting, and yet stock hasn't died yet. That shows generally that people are honest, and that they want to have worked hard on a robot and pit it against other fair robots. If Hax Mode is released, the only expected effect, depending on how easy the glitch is, is that people will be able to build bots more quickly via stacking those 2 supervolts or Nifty. Come to think of it, this might actually slightly increase the number of bots built because it removes the tiresome amount of time to stack certain components.
In conclusion, this glitch really should be released to the public, if for no other reason then to keep an openness between members to not keep cool or unique glitches to ourselves. That's something I don't think a forum for an otherwise dead game should do. Just my two cents.
550
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:55:21 AM »
Stacking is illegal in DSL to begin with. So what difference would that make?
Unless it also allow no collision externally, but even then nobody is going to allow this as a justification in DSL anyway.
In case someone wanted to make a for-fun DSL bot that didn't follow the realistic rule.
551
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:47:33 AM »
Cuz, like, I don't play stock?
Assuming the glitch is unique to stock...
552
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:42:25 AM »
True, but if we can't use it why release it in the first place.
Because to many people it would be incredibly fun to make some cool non-tournament bots with it.
553
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:39:42 AM »
No.. if we release it BFE will become untraceable.
That makes no sense. Just outlaw both BFE and Hax Mode, then BFE will not be any more or less traceable. The only way BFE would become untraceable is if you wanted people to use BFE and not Hax Mode, or maybe vice versa, a situation not likely to come up often in a tournament.
554
« on: July 02, 2011, 12:33:30 AM »
@JoeBlo- If we use this glitch, you can tell. It's not like theres another way to stack a HPZ into a black without a burst/servo.
Then... why don't you release it? It seems like what you just said undermines any reason for not releasing it. In all honesty, its usefulness seems rather limited if required to be used covertly.
555
« on: July 01, 2011, 11:14:52 PM »
OMG you SOOO not old enough to be 1337.
I have read and reread this line, and still can't figure out what its actual meaning is...
556
« on: July 01, 2011, 09:36:55 PM »
we will probably end up showing Click and Trovaner but I can't see us ever fully revealing how to do it.
To what end? How are Click and Trovaner any more deserving of it than any other experimenter? It is completely up to you guys who you tell, I'm just saying creating an upper elite who know of it seems a tad bit unfair (I personally don't care, but I'm not sure everybody shares my indifference).
557
« on: July 01, 2011, 05:38:50 PM »
The only thing I kind of don't like about its secrecy is that it would sure be fun to experiment with and build some wacky bots with.
558
« on: July 01, 2011, 11:46:41 AM »
We just might have an Ra3!
What, a game where people can stack anything anytime? Doesn't sound all that fun to me (especially if you plan to call it RA3, as that name carries some series expectations of physics and AI improvement, as well as far superior component design).
559
« on: July 01, 2011, 11:39:36 AM »
Zero Glitch and ZeroG glitch are different.
The difference is what exactly?
560
« on: July 01, 2011, 11:27:40 AM »
From what I understand, this is the zero glitch (or the glitch that allows for stacking to be done without limit), its just that no one ever discovered how to activate it reliably. The zero glitch was known of long before that custom snapper glitch.
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 144
|
Show Posts