Metal armour rule

[Craig_Anto3]

On something like Anto
it only really has the front panel as armour, the wedges or forks out the front are Anto's weapons (a static weapon is a weapon as much as a spinning disc is) and the rest is all structural so surely made our of metal Anto would qualify as a legal robot if it was a single billet of metal

That said I'm making a titanium Anto and the chassis/shell which covers only 3 planes so it will be legal to the rules as they stand

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

I know the rules are standing as they are, but I think they need to be made clearer, perhaps re-written (again)

[leo-rcc]

Can anyone give me the motivation to keep rule k please?

[peterwaller]

Craig there is no mention of three planes just that the continuous metal shall not protect more than 1/3 of the robots perimeter. As your armour /weapon is all in front of the robot it really only protects one side and I believe less than the 1/3 the rules specify.
Leo the motivation was to stop people from building robots machined out of one piece of solid bar that would be impervious to weapons. True that spinners have now progressed to the state that they can do damage or at least launch them out of the arena but any possible use of axes, hammers or crushers would be just about impossible. We haven't had any that can really deal with plastic yet let alone titainium.

[Craig_Anto3]

I've never read it like that before, the key word is PROTECT
Thanks Pete
I have a cunning plan

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

lol, yeah, the key word is protect Craig. And as most of Anto is motors with wheels, I'd argue that only the front of it is "armour".
Still ambigous though.

[teamocean]

I have just been re-reading this discussion and one thing occured to me- seeing as the main motivation for keeping rule k was to stop people building ants from metal billets (which is fair enough). Although the ants that started this were made from 0.5mm aluminium sheet- which is just as damageable as polycarb or anything else.

Maybe at some point there could be another look at this ruling. I would suggest something along the lines of banning the use of milled billet chassis but allowing the use of bent metal sheet providing that it is less than 1mm thick or something like that.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what you all think.

Thanks

[Craig_Anto3]

but whats wrong with a billet ant?

[teamocean]

Personally, I don't have a problem with ants being made from billets although it seems from what people have been saying that the main reason for keeping rule k was to stop this.

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

I voted against keeping this rule, and will do so if it comes up again, but it was passed to stay as it is, so if someone else wants to take up the mantle of chief arguer, thats fine. But I'm tired of being at the center of these things, lol.