Contest: touch the floors

[NightStryke]

If I were running the challenge, then I would disallow those because the target doesn't start in the correct zone when I hit "start".

Well, I'm afraid that all I did was use the black-hole glitch to move it outside the work area; the effect of the glitch and what I do with it have no bearing on the matter. It's nothing but a glitch, just like an exploding contraption; you can't allow one and disallow another.

[sccook]

Bottom Line: It's just a game. The rules (including glitches) are part of the game.

No, they're not. They're deviations from the rules;.

No they are not deviations. They might be different than what the designer intended, but they are part of the game.

Moving the target outside of the construction zone (or into the construction zone for Back & Forth) is completely different because you are changing the starting point for the level. Explosions start with the target in the correct zone.

[sccook]

you can't allow one and disallow another.

Since this is not my challenge, you are correct. But I doubt that anyone running a challenge would accept your solutions...at least I certainly wouldn't.

[NightStryke]

you can't allow one and disallow another.

Since this is not my challenge, you are correct. But I doubt that anyone running a challenge would accept your solutions...a nd in any event, I certainly wouldn't.

You're making some rather ridiculous requirements here. They're both glitches. It does not matter what one can do with them. They're. Both. Glitches. They both allow one to do something with the game that was not intended. How does the goal object not starting in the work area differ from the goal object defying the game physics and passing through other objects?

[sccook]

How does the goal object not starting in the work area differ from the goal object defying the game physics and passing through other objects?

In one case, the FC designer is intentionally bypassing the starting point of the level. In the other case, the FC designer is starting with the intended initial conditions, using the allowed pieces, and then allowing the program to do its thing. Seems like the difference should be pretty easy to see.

The fact that under certain conditions the program does something other than the game designer intended has to be accepted or someone has to redesign the game. This is either difficult to do, or the game designer has decided to allow it. In either case, explosive glitches ARE part of the game as it stands today. Changing the starting point of the level is CHANGING the game....big difference to me.

EDIT

The easiest way to explain the differences between the two glitches is that one is playing the game and one is changing the game. There is a big difference to me between those two approaches to solving a level.

[NightStryke]

In one case, the FC designer is intentionally bypassing the starting point of the level. In the other case, the FC designer is starting with the intended initial conditions, using the allowed pieces, and then allowing the program to do its thing. Seems like the difference should be pretty easy to see.

You're splitting hairs in order to support your own argument. Really, in one case the designer is intentionally bypassing the work area, and in the other case the designer is intentionally bypassing the physics.

The fact that under certain conditions the program does something other than the game designer intended has to be accepted or someone has to redesign the game. This is either difficult to do, or the game designer has decided to allow it. In either case, explosive glitches ARE part of the game as it stands today. Changing the starting point of the level is CHANGING the game....big difference to me.

They're part of the game like a loophole is part of a law - it's there, and it should be fixed, but until it is it can be used, and using it is foul play. You know the way it was intended to work, but you're exploiting a weakness or oversight in it. And changing the starting position is no different from changing the physics, which - again - is what an exploding contraption does.

I really don't see where this "big difference" is. In both cases, one has to intentionally set up a contraption to cause a specific abnormality; in both cases, the contraption violates an intended rule of the game. The only difference you're drawing is that in one case the goal object is inside the work area and in the other it's outside, but all that it being outside means is that it's outside of the intended work space - just something else not intended to happen.

Take this level, for example: http://FantasticContraption.com/?levelId=27447
Normally, it would be quite impossible, but it can be completed with the aid of either glitch:
http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1689011
http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1689026
Now, how much of a difference is there between those two solutions? In one case the ball phases through a static wall to get to the goal area, while in the other it bypasses the wall entirely, but they both achieve the same goal of getting past a wall that would be impossible to get past through legitimate means - whether or not the ball started in the work area doesn't change that.

[sccook]

I really don't see where this "big difference" is.

It's really simple and the difference is not splitting hairs. In one case the FC designer intentionally cheats and changes the game. In the other case, the FC designer simply plays the game that is given. Note that the intent of the game designer is immaterial....he/she produced a game to play, warts and all. However, the intent of the FC designer to use the inconsistencies in the game is the difference between having fun in an unexpected way and cheating.

[WhyT]

I'll take Tube for 5 please.

2/2 In 5 Pieces.
http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1697094

[WhyT]

WOW! Sccook you just can't admit when you are wrong.

Do you even know how the Black Hole Glitch works? You mere put ALOT of part together. Then click the start button. After that by using nothing more than what the game has given you. You can then move the pieces where ever you would like. Thus Night has only used one of the "warts" to accomplish the same thing others have.

It really is saying one bad apple is allowed while another bad apple isn't.

And this is the exact reason as to why all other contests don't allow ANY glitch. Because it truly is unfair and take all the skill out of the game.

[WhyT]

While we are glitching. Does this count? I wasn't for sure if it was on the approved glitch list.

http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1697458 2 walls and 8 pieces.

[sccook]

You can then move the pieces where ever you would like.

In other words, you can then cheat. Thanks for agreeing with me.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cheat
v.intr.
2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game

One glitch meets this definition, but explosions don't

[WhyT]

But to purposely use a known glitch to defy physics (In a physics based game no less) is not cheating?

[sccook]

But to purposely use a known glitch to defy physics (In a physics based game no less) is not cheating?

No it's not...and evidently the OP in this thread agrees. mtdewd's FC is still listed on the front page.

By moving the target outside the construction zone, you are violating the first rule of the game...which is to build in the construction zone (Back to the definition of cheating). When you use an explosion, you have not bypassed any rule or changed the basic game level....you are simply playing the game.

[mtdewd]

Well, I seemed to have started a philosophical debate.
For the record, it was a joke.
Here's a legitimate 4 of 6 for U Turn:
http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1703528
This should satisfy NightStryke- I spent a lot of time working on a design that legitimately does something.

sccook- I don't think the piling of brown sticks is a bug/glitch. I think you can only do that if you connect them at one end. Then they are free to rotate around each other like any other object.

As for the rest, for normal competitions, I would allow chain breaking and through the walls, but not explosions, pinned pieces, or moving the goal piece (outside the building area). Why? Personal preference.

[remy]

sorry for my late response;
i WILL disallow glitches. i thought of it as being an exploding contraption like
http://fantasticcontraption.com/?designId=1258004 (now u-turn best)

all glitchy designs are now declared false and will not be listed, although i like them. we all play this game and it's no fun to see your sweet contraption being beaten by some geeky glitchy designy this means: exploding; out of boundaries; in ground, and all things i forgot suck!

GLITCHY DESIGN ARE UNALLOWED

[Fryer Tuck]

http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1711906

For bonus 9. 1/1 floors.

And it's green, too!

[sccook]

it's no fun to see your sweet contraption being beaten by some geeky glitchy designy this means: exploding; out of boundaries:

You can do anything you want on your challenge, but it is generally harder to solve a level using explosions that it is to build some kind of machine. I say this after going through the basic (and some bonus) levels on the Cannon challenge thread. So if your "sweet contraption" is beaten by a cannon, the odds are that the explosive designer spent alot more time tweaking the explosion than you did building your FC.

[Fryer Tuck]

So...are the scoreboards going to be updated, or....

[NarutoManiac]

yay the bonus levels

[Skips]

Bonus 7 2/2 only 2 pieces

http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1860385