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 - UberPyro
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11
21
« on: April 28, 2019, 04:46:00 PM »
I agree with Badger here. Also if there's ever modding with lots of custom components we might want multiple installs that don't interfere with each other, though there are other ways around that.
Is there anyway I can see what features are planned for future versions? Anyway, I have some suggestions after building in the botlab for some time. A lot of suggestions and a lot of them are complex, so I don't expect you to agree with all of them or try to implement much of what's here in the near future, I know you guys are busy.
I know you guys are not nearly done with the botlab and that given time you guys will make it great, but talking about the botlab right now as it is, it's still pretty clunky in the sense that it takes a very long time to use the controls and the tools given to you to make the botlab do what you want it to do. First of all, I think keyboard shortcuts would improve the building experience 1000%. Things like pressing x to focus the x coordinate, delete for deleting components, arrow keys/wasd + shift + space for moving things around/rotating, basically all the buttons and fields in the interface should have some keyboard mapping because clicking on everything takes forever. Remapping keys would also be great, i.e. i much prefer RMB to MMB for panning. As it is, it's very easy to make mistakes by putting the wrong numbers into the coordinates or into the wrong coordinates, and it's also way too easy to get yourself into a situation where you move something too far away and can only fix it through editing the bot file. An undue button would be a great help for this, and additionally some way to control the max distance from origin of all the components and toggle the room that you are in would all be huge helps. It's also really easy to get objects stuck inside of others, and there's currently a glitch where some small objects won't be able to be selected unless you exit and join the workshop. A lot of these issues could also be helped by having an expandable tree view of all the components like in the bot file and being able to select components like that. Being able to turn off blur from being too close would also be great. When using the moving sliders, they go in increments of .025, and if the component isn't currently at a multiple of .025 then it snaps to a multiple: there should be some way to turn the snapping to a multiple off, because a lot of the more complex builds will not use those multiples very often. This also applies to the rotation and size sliders. There should be a way to control what interval the moving axes move by, either through a field or through several hotkeys which are each set to common values, i.e. .01 and .005 with .025 as the default. It would be great if there was some way to change the directions of the coordinate system so that it doesn't have to be determined by what the object is sitting on, a lot of the times I just want the normal xyz directions. It would be fantastic if there was a way to copy the x, y, or z coordinate of one object and then set the coordinate to another in a streamlined fashion, e.g. hold x while clicking on another object. It would also be great if there was some way to clone mirrors of objects and flip each of the components. It would be nice if we could smooth components along a certain rotational axis. For the chassis and custom object builder it would be great if we could change the numerical values of the xy coordinates via text field of each of the vertices like we can for objects in the rest of the builder.
edit: also deleting objects doesn't need a warning, but deleting an object plus all the things that connect to it should be allowed and with warning.
22
« on: April 28, 2019, 02:15:47 PM »
I fixed it bois Had to edit the coordinates of the piece in the bot file. I also smoothed out parts of the disk and made the chain on the track closer to the size of the chain in the air. It's actually pretty effective in battle, and somehow the spinner is strong enough to self right, so its basically everything I could have asked for.
23
« on: April 28, 2019, 05:05:28 AM »
Holy sh**, you nd arcane are amazing. My BB rep is sh** compared to this. As for the part going off.. i guess if you moved the chassis a bit to the direction opposite of of the component, you might be able to move it. Maybe set a limit of components direction to 2?
Thanks. I'm not sure about the exact direction and distance of the piece though, and if I move the chassis to get the piece I'm pretty sure I'd lose the chassis then, unless I'm missing something :/. I'm guessing that the only way to go about this would be a bot file edit if that's possible. I'm not sure if I'm dumb and don't know all the controls, but an undue button would be a huge help in the bot builder (I'm guessing that's planned). Also, the main culprit for these errors is because when entering in coordinates, if the number box is focused but not the text itself, and if the number I'm entering leads with a "." e.g. ".350", then the period gets skipped and just 350 is entered. That's how I got the necro.
24
« on: April 28, 2019, 03:21:44 AM »
alright this is to make up for the garbage I posted earlier side by side:  On the topic of the center of mass discussion: if robots IRL are less prone to tipping than robots in game, isn't there a more realistic way to go about making robots more stable? Also, I would think that the change would hurt flippers, since now its harder for them to invert robots that aren't invertible to win. I'm not necessarily opposed to it though, if its the best way to improve the stability of robots because that is something that will need to be ironed out eventually. Edit: so on Nightmare it seems I accidentally deleted one of the spikes (you can see it in the image). I went back to fix it and then accidentally necroed the whole robot by moving a piece to a far away location and then clicking off, so that's that 
25
« on: April 27, 2019, 02:53:48 PM »
It wasn't really my intention, it just became that
I posted because I thought the way it ended up was pretty funny
26
« on: April 27, 2019, 02:18:38 PM »
sorry to pollute all of the beautiful irl bots with something that looks demented but it had to be done I started out trying to build a vs to learn how to use the botbuilder. After testing it in battle it would drive very stable but I quickly got tired of how often it would get flipped over, either from some havok-esque explosion or from touching the wall or something (which for some reason would keep lifting my robot). I tried giving it a srimech but couldn't figure out how to have controls for that along with the disk. So at this point I was really tired and went with the roll cage. It works, though. It still has this problem though where if it backs up into the wall in the test arena, it straight up freezes, probably due to the back stabilizers glitching into the wall or something. It also doesn't work period in the warehouse arena since it just rolls backwards upon spawn until it goes inside of the wall, and then is just stuck there forever. Still is a lot of fun though.
27
« on: April 25, 2019, 12:22:06 PM »
For the AI:
I need some more time to think about it, but off the top of my head here are some of the things I would like to see included:
Some way to know the approximate dimensions / reach of myself and my opponents
Time since my last collision with each other bot
Distance from and angle to each wall of the arena
I haven't looked at the new botbuilder recently but I think smartzones are important and so we need a way to check each of them
Normally distance to each robot is nice to have but that can be calculated from the x, y, z coordinates
There was another game called roboforge which had a well done AI system which I could probably refer to for more ideas, but its super old and I think has trouble running on newer computers.
I'll post more when I think of them.
28
« on: March 08, 2019, 04:42:46 PM »
I know its a buttload of extra work and also that I'm a bit late to the party but I think the most ideal way to program robots would be through a graphical language. Those tend to be much more friendly towards those that aren't familiar with programming (and would also be more familiar to people who use stuff like labview).
If you were to come up with your own icons it would probably be possible to have a 1-to-1 correspondence to miniscript (so at least a transpiler could be easy). Maybe just keep this as a suggestion for when after all the more important stuff is finished.
29
« on: January 09, 2019, 04:44:44 PM »
Great guide, good job drawing over the screenshots and clearly explaining every step you took.
30
« on: January 07, 2019, 11:56:59 AM »
Movement works when you put a wheel directly on the axle of a motor. Movement in the game isn't completely realistic: it's more like the game pushes you in a direction like a rocket when the motors try to spin wheels that touch the ground. The only determining factors in how hard this push is are the motor's "gain" and the wheel's grip. Piglets have a gain of 10, astroflights have a gain of 12 (you can see this by reading the txts). They almost look identical to each other to the game, except astroflights are slightly stronger and lighter.
31
« on: December 15, 2018, 05:35:46 PM »
The skins on your robots are always fantastic.
32
« on: December 15, 2018, 05:31:52 PM »
maybe you could put these robots in the bot exchange so that someone could AI it and test them out against similarly weighted good robots.
33
« on: December 12, 2018, 12:16:30 PM »
Hey, that actually looks half decent. You can spread the wedges out a bit (and also light skirts tend to be fine). Having some regular hammers is also an idea. I'm not sure what the orange batts are going but other than that this looks relatively good.
34
« on: December 11, 2018, 11:26:29 PM »
I don't know why I'm still trying but here's what comes to mind off the top of my head:
1) use edits instead of double posts
2) What is its intended weightclass? What is its armor and weight in kg?
3) Don't make robots have weaponry on both sides. You end up splitting your offensive capabilities and cutting your damage potential in half, assuming you can get more weapons to contact at a time when they are bunched together
4) Why is what appears to be a SHW+ rammer being driven by 4 slimbodies? That must be very slow for its bot type. Also make sure you're following the weightclasses laid out earlier in this thread.
5) Better to orient sledgehammers with the long edge facing the opponent to increase the hurtbox surface (so you can get multiple to contact at a time, a hinge for effe might help).
6) Don't use DSL bar for armor, especially when armor plates fit. DSL bar has a noticeably lower HP-to-kg ratio compared to armor panels, as is the case for all weapons. In simple words, you're using heavy things (weapons) when the lighter things (panels) actually have more HP.
7) Your robot only needs 2 black batteries. 1 if you make it 2 wheeled.
8) Make your robot 2-wheeled since its more weight efficient
9) I'm pretty sure 1 airtank is enough if you only have the icy things
10) What's the point with the heavy side armor if the top and bottom are exposed?
11) Don't bother having the side armor protect the sledgehammers, that just decreases their contact area and what they can hit.
12) While your chassis management demonstrates drastic improvement in this robot, I would suggest actually not having an I-shaped chassis. Chassis weight goes by surface area in this game (to be somewhat realistic) so more convex chassis shapes will always be more weight-to-area efficient.
13) Your robot, as it is, is extremely vulnerable to wedged robots. Add a wedge or think of some strategy to counter wedges (i.e. low weapons).
14) Attaching all of your weapons on dark extenders is inefficient when you could just attached them with baseplate anchors directly, and entertains the possibility that the entire array gets knocked off as a whole. I would use seperate baseplate anchors, unless you want to try eFFeing to mesh the weapons together.
That should be good for a start.
35
« on: December 10, 2018, 05:07:22 PM »
In general I find it hard to continue giving advice in this thread since the same mistakes are made over and over again with no respect to what we said in the past. For example I think the batteries are a pretty straight forward thing to understand. All spin motors draw only 10 amps, so a single black battery can power two of them. Additionally, black batteries have the best electotal meaning that there's no reason to use more of them than what is necessary to meet the amp requirement. However, you seem to have a tendency to stuff extra batteries wherever there is room to, without concerns to the extra weight or the excessive chassis sizes. If you want to build competitive bots that preform well against others then you have to start caring about how you spend weight and take heed to the advice that is littered throughout this thread. That means making the chassis smaller to meet your needs, instead of accepting its size and filling it up.
A short summery of the tendencies include excessive batteries, excessive armor, bad weapon placement, and useless extensions off the robot. For example, the "Shell Spinner" has way too many batteries, a huge chassis, a ninja star that will never do damage (while protecting worse than armor would), and beater bars placed in a way so that there's only about 10 cm of contact area between the plate and the farthest reaching point. Additionally, we only get the weightclass and armor on half the robots, we rarely get the full weight in kilograms, and there's this curious obsession with building one-wheeled spinners that wouldn't show controlled movement or ever be tournament legal, all of which makes it very difficult to provide advice. If you consider your robots "art" and are not interested in advice that would make them better (as suggested by disregarding the basic building guidelines we have laid out), then let us know. Regardless, I don't think I'm going to post more advice here if it means repeating what has already been said a dozen times. If you want to improve, then reread the comments in this thread (and your stock thread) and try to understand Reier's post above. Build by those rules, and we can go from there.
36
« on: December 06, 2018, 03:28:42 PM »
I mean the bot is great but holy krampus that intro text
37
« on: December 06, 2018, 03:19:40 PM »
(I put the weigtclasses here and then got ninjad  ) Your shell spinner does not have a shell. The point is to use the shell spinner plates to protect the chassis and then you can take advantage of the multiple connection points on the plates. Also, the pole spike (whatever its called in IF) on top is wasted weight. The batteries are good and although there are some gaps in the chassis I like the shape. Your rammer: it's kind of hard to see what you did in the picture but it looks like you attached the steel blades off of each other. While this does let you get high amount of damage, if the middle blade is knock off then the whole array comes off. That will make the robot very inconsistent. It's better to use a weapon array in this scenario. Also, the cutting edges at the base should probably be angled forwards a bit. Demolition team: There's a lot of armor in places where there shouldn't be. The backs of the corralling arms don't need to be protected (and its silly that they were protected when the wheels aren't). The top center snowplow is forward in a way that reduces the range of your weapon. Also the tail is better off being an extender. 10mm steel is just wasted weight. In any kind of battle (even against normally-weighted SHW) I would see this robot just loosing by points do to how little the offensive capabilities are for its weightclass. With the way the weapon is designed, if there's any kind of angle when it comes down and hits the opponent, only two blades are going to connect. It's better to go for a horizontal array of blades using the weapon arrays.
38
« on: December 01, 2018, 02:11:14 PM »
Can you give a stronger definition of what an "inexperienced stock builder" is? Would someone like me be considered an inexperienced stock builder? I'm going to guess not.
Also if someone sends in an entry that is too good (e.g. 36 HS on 4 HPZs) does that immediately disqualify them?
39
« on: November 28, 2018, 06:21:16 PM »
Better?
[ Quoting of attachment images from other messages is not allowed ]
I can't tell if this is serious or not but I'll link this again.  Have them facing outwards so that if you hit a component or a bot from the side it actually does damage.
40
« on: November 28, 2018, 06:13:50 PM »
The loss for me was pretty inevitable. Looks like i'm not a champion this time around  Congrats to 090101 for making a flipper that was pretty impossible to get under. This match shows the importance of wedginess. And also not having a gap between the wedge and the front panels of a wedge-based bot. Some of the wrestling throws were pretty funny though.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11
|
Show Posts