[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: Mazes, NanoMouse, etc, etc...



Title: Message
Judging by the responses I thing the view of the establishment to a reduced size maze can be summed up as "thanks, but no thanks".
 
However, I feel I should at least defend the idea before letting it slip quietly beneath the waves.
 
The main criticisms seem to be:
 
    a) The mice would be too difficult to build
    b) The small parts for the mice would be too expensive
    c) There is no need to have a full maze
    d) That a second maze size would fragment the community.
 
Taking them in order...
 
Just because the mice are smaller doesn't necessarily mean they will be more fiddly to build; just that they require a little more thought in their design.  I remember at MINOS 01 someone said that when the original micromouse concept was proposed it was deemed "too difficult" now the complaints are that there is no significant challenge and ways were being sought to make things more difficult (e.g. Duncan's notorious 13 bit algorithm), and hence more interesting. Though I'd hardly call the work being done to squeeze the last ounce of performance out of the mice trivial.
 
Smaller parts are not always more expensive, or necessary - different layouts can significantly reduce the size. Similarly, when the competition started, the controller was necessarily complicated, bulky and power hungry. Now the same function can be performed by a couple of chips. Though I will agree that to get the kind of performance Dave Otten gets from his mice requires more complex hardware.
 
Whilst I agree that it is possible to test most aspects of mouse performance on a "test maze", it's not an ideal situation. Acceleration profiles and sensor accuracy are difficult to test on a small maze. Also, competitions are few and far between. Having built a mouse, it would be nice to be able to run it properly on a full maze and really see how it performs.  For me a full size maze is out of the question so I'd have to wait for a competition to really see it go.
 
Having said all that the last point is, I'm afraid, the killer. I can't deny it, having two maze sizes would divide efforts and potentially damage the community. On that issue I must concede defeat - a second, incompatible, maze size just wouldn't be in the interests of the micromouse community as a whole.
 
I like to thank everyone who took the time to respond to my suggestion. It's nice to see that there are still plenty of people passionate about the subject to defend it so well.
 
I may still build a small maze and a mouse to go in it, just for my own amusement of course (and to see if it can be done).  However, I don't have any plans to set up a rival league!
 
Mark