Armadillo Run forum

Yeah, I pointed this out in another thread. While what PeterT did with the cloth under the armadillo sort of qualifies as "force," it's certainly not "dark side"

I think what your proposing use changing the rules to eliminate placing any node inside any material, correct?

I don't think that's necessary. I don't consider anything where it isn't generating motion to be "the force". I've submitted solutions (see contest #3) where there were metal bars overlapping to get the most out of their weight, but the popping apart motion they make at the start isn't integral to the solution at all. Arranging the bars to the position they're going to pop out to would work about as well, might need some fiddling, but it's still going to work. It's only a dark side solution if you're blocking the separation of components and deriving power from that. I didn't see any of the solutions this week that weren't clearly labelled as force solutions doing that.

It is a tricky issue though. Although I don't consider Peter's winning lifter to be using the force, it also wouldn't have been possible if placing end points inside other objects was disallowed, and that seems like the most likely future solution we will get from the game itself.

I think there's few enough of us playing for now we can probably just agree that it's only the blatant power generating configs we need to count separately. If we get more participants and there's no patch to address it, we can revisit the topic for a future contest round.

Just my opinion, obviously, I'll go with whatever we all agree on.

In general that seems find to me. Let me ask, what do people think of my "Bit of Force" rubber cannon? BFC pointed out that if you remove the tension it has a little bit of the force. It is additive with tension, and the position makes it a better cannon . In fact there is no really good place to avoid some node-material intersection and still have that cannon work.

I like the way Bob used it to get some inexpensive tension on his catcher, too.

If stuff like this is fine with the majority, I say let's go with it.

Please dont make next challenge so tricky. I would love to see a big void style level with engines and a high budget (giving a high number of possible solutions).

I personally like this direction. This type of level allowed for a great range of solutions, with void types a lot of players figure out the basic setup for the cheapest solution very quickly and then just tweak, there's nothing very radical with them to me.

Look at the start at this last contest's thread. Many people were simply dumb founded at first. We got around it, but this one seemed to offer a lot more solutions in order to grasp the win.

A void type level doesent need to have any basic solutions, not if its big and got alot of ancors, and money available.

I went to a lot of work to avoid intersecting my rubber with the walls, or putting cloth inside the floor (IMHO, if the level design starts the 'dillo in contact with the floor, it means you aren't supposed to be able to insert a solid object between them). I consider it cheating. If it's the general consensus that it isn't then fair enough - in the end I couldn't solve this level for anything like a cheap enough solution and didn't enter anyway ... :/