|
 |
BUT WAIT!
You specify ONLY an INITIAL vector! Kind of like an initial velocity. The ball is then
affected by gravity and bounces & rolls off the surface. Note the rolling hills:
there is
no straight line possible. Then, if /when you miss the hole, you get to specify a new
initial velocity.
In Putt-putt, you would be cheating if you specified the entire trajectory, if you
kept the
club touching the ball the whole time from tee to hole!
I spent a lot of time on this over the weekend. After I implemented Jan's suggestions,
I
found that the algorithm did not correctly handle a ball that had rolled to a stop.
Bouncing worked perfect, but a stationary ball kept falling through the surface.
Rendering
my nth fix as we speak...
Bob Hughes wrote:
> I don't play golf :-)
> Maybe I didn't understand the rules to this idea but I think I'd just make a
translation
> from start vector to end-point like so: translate
> <-450+(900*Movement),5-(5*Movement),0> where Movement is a linear addition over time
in
> a while loop or clock, for example.
> Like I said, I didn't read very thoroughly. And I'm just joking around too.
>
> Bob
>
> "Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanews com> wrote in message
> news:392E6D23.3A1756D3@my-dejanews.com...
> | I have an idea for a game that povers can play where one matches wits
> | against another for coming up with the best algorithm to solve the
> | following "golf" hole-in-one problem:
Post a reply to this message
|
|
