Paddlewalker - CC10 Amphibious Vehicle

Level: CC10 - Paddlewalker
by Thegide and Luos_Desruc

PSNID: Luos_Desruc

Here's a sneak peek at our CC10 contest entry. I wanted to engineer a vehicle that did not rely on rocket propulsion, like so many of the other CC10 entries. A huge thanks to Luos for his hard work in designing the environment in which to showcase this contraption!

Sorry the text bubbles aren't readable :blush:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLgFLURmwEU

So does that mean I got a sneak sneak peak? :p The paddlewalker is so cool!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobotCrash

So does that mean I got a sneak sneak peak? :p The paddlewalker is so cool!

---

Yeah, pretty much, Robot. Thanks man :)

Wow, awesome creation! This almost makes me want to stop being lazy and make the vehicle I've been thinking about, just to compete with this (though I still haven't solved a major water motion issue with it). :)

Looks really cool. ^^ I like the splashing with the legs when its in Water-Mode xD

Totally amazing! Keep up the awesome work!

I hope you win, to be honest most of the other entrees are just dissapointing, but this is outstanding :D

Well the contraption is ok but quite slow and the level is far too long and detailed.

They did say in the rules try to make the level no more than a minute or two as they had lots to play through and that it was only the contraption they were interested in.

I really hope they don't forget they said that and give you the win based on the level design because that would be unfair.

Played it. Really cool.
Original. Stable.
The enviroment and the old peeps are beautifully made.

Hey, if your contraption becomes a finalist, contact me and I will vote for it.
I will surely forget about CC10, but if you become a finalist and need votes, message me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistervista

Well the contraption is ok but quite slow and the level is far too long and detailed.
They did say in the rules try to make the level no more than a minute or two as they had lots to play through and that it was only the contraption they were interested in.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nuclearfish

What does the level need to include?
Minimum - your vehicle, some land, some water and a scoreboard.
Preferred - all the above, with some nice visuals, a background, some music and maybe a character explaining how to use your vehicle. You don't need to go overboard with the level because the only thing we judge is the contraption

---

The level ended up being longer than intended due to environment design, but it was only for fun. We felt the contraption deserved a suitable thematic showcase, and so we built according to the "preferred" specifications.

However, your point is valid and this has been addressed. For consideration of the judges, there is now a warp directly to the machine, and the first complete transition can be completed in roughly one minute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistervista

I really hope they don't forget they said that and give you the win based on the level design because that would be unfair.

---

I have the utmost confidence that our judges can adhere to the scoring criteria.

This one is a clear winner, and the level itself looks great aswell!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistervista

Blablablabla blablabla
blabla blabla jealousy, blablabla, nitpicking.. blablabla..

---

(This is the third place you are posting this.. so it must be even deeper than I imagined)

"Far too detailed" is the LAMEST excuse I have EVER heard.
Go take a pint and stop bothering us m8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thegide

II have the utmost confidence that our judges can adhere to the scoring criteria.

---

Going by previous contests I'd say that's pretty much the case. Nuclearfish always stresses whilst it's nice to have more than just the device in the published level, it's just the contraption that will be marked, and this is a fine contraption :)

I did have a cheeky look at the video yesterday and it does look pretty cool - I've not been . I was secretly hoping you'd made a walker that swam (paddled) using it's limbs, but that's probably too much to ask, lol.

Oh, and the whole level does look rather sexy - I'll be sure to check it out next time I'm on.

The contraption looks great!! The transforming effects were simple, quick, clean, yet pretty neat. Good luck with the contest! (I'm in the US so I can't participate. *sob*)

Excellent vehicle! Have you tried fiddling with it to make the walk cycle a little faster?

@ Luos :

Quote:

---

"Far too detailed" is the LAMEST excuse I have EVER heard.

---

What are you talking about. It's not an excuse for anything. It was a simple observation. No need for you to come back with snide remarks just because someone speaks the truth and you feel guilty.

Easy now! I think use of the word "excuse" may come down to minor language issues, I'm sure the jist of the sentiment got through, critisising a contraption entry for being too detailed does sound like you are looking to pick fault with it and struggling.

And I wouldn't go arguing semantics and then immediately follow it up with something like "you feel guilty". Guilty about what? Making it look detailed? Why on earth would anyone feel guilty for that?

Play nicely children :)

Here's the post in contention...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistervista

Well the contraption is ok but quite slow and the level is far too long and detailed.

They did say in the rules try to make the level no more than a minute or two as they had lots to play through and that it was only the contraption they were interested in.

I really hope they don't forget they said that and give you the win based on the level design because that would be unfair.

---

That the level is too detailed was just one of three points that mistervista made. I think what mistervista was getting at was, in the context of a Contraption Challenge, that the level needn't have so much work and effort put into it when only the contraption itself is being judged and he was concerned that the judges might look on the entry more favourably than they might of otherwise because of it. Thegide and rtm223 addressed this concern by writing that Nuclearfish is careful to only judge the contraption itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rtm223

I was secretly hoping you'd made a walker that swam (paddled) using it's limbs, but that's probably too much to ask, lol.

---

Well, it's not out of the question. I had considered adding elongated rear-facing "toes" to help the legs paddle. The big problem is that the use of paddles (including the flywheel) for motion in water is pretty inefficient. In order to get decent water movement speed, I really had to crank that motor bolt up. To get a substantial force from the legs, they would have to be moving at blazing speed I think. But as they are they probably contribute slightly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayneh

Excellent vehicle! Have you tried fiddling with it to make the walk cycle a little faster?

---

I can improve the speed of the walk cycle. Since this has been suggested a couple of times, I'll try some tweaks on it tonight. I had it configured at a speed that Gramps would have been comfortable with, but since you young folk are in such a hurry I'll up the horsepower :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thegide

Well, it's not out of the question. I had considered adding elongated rear-facing "toes" to help the legs paddle. The big problem is that the use of paddles (including the flywheel) for motion in water is pretty inefficient.

---

Have you tried a solid, circular wheel rather than one with paddles? Obviously it looks wrong, but it will up your efficiency.

edit: Although... You could just fill in the spaces with invisible material, that will up the volume moving through the water and give you greater resistance