2015 AWS Rule Debate?

[Hogi]

a clusterbot will make the top three if i have anything to say about it. it will just need a lot of perfecting before it gets there . i do agree though, walkers have been undisputedly more succcessful than clusterbots. i will probably still have four robots in my team whatever the rules say but with my level of building, it would be highly unlikely that i would come up with a walker entry that'd be any good. i think removing clusterbots from the fourth entry would do a lot more to limit the effectiveness of creativity than it would to boost the amount of creativity.

[Rapidrory]

Eh, as i said, it's more a topic for discussion than something to necessarily be implemented.. And cluster's can do well; My MiniTinny Cluster came joint 5th at the last AWS, and it lost it's final fight largely because I forgot to turn the flipper back on I'm not saying walkers don't do well if they're well made, but the complexity of building one usually outweighs the benefits, unless you want to build it as an interesting technical exercise, which would be my main incentive if I was going to. I probably still won't build a walker in the near future as my team is already full... unless of cause Bad Idea comes in grossly overweight

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

Walkers don't have to be that complex. I believe Andy Hib still has the file to 3D print the same leg system I use on Dibby. If he made it commonly available again then walkers become easy.

[Hogi]

that would be great! i would deffinitely build one if i could have the mechanisms 3D printed.

[AntRoboteer]

Antivation Cluster 2? I look forward to pushing it OOTA again!

No chance!

And also, I would not go for a walker regardless of how available the mechanism is because they are so prone to failing and also the only way you could use the extra weight is really to have a spinner which I'm not prepared to do. Clusters will always fill my fourth slot as long as the rule permits.

[BeligerAnt]

In any rules debate I always go back to the existing rules to check that we are actually using the rules we already have!

5h) All teams must be self-contained in terms of driver, transmitter, robots and battery packs, i.e. these cannot be shared with another team.

Most of the people advocating clusters and seeing it as their "right" to enter 4 robots seem to be conveniently overlooking this rule!

This one was introduced many years ago when there was a flurry of clusters (even before your time R C Dave!) and it led to problems and arguments with drivers swapping around and people trying to avoid fighting themselves.


Returning to the "toy car" debate, I must say I'm no fan of hexbugs (pointless and just not funny), but why is Spall less of a "robot" than an off-the-shelf ready-to-run robot from Shockbots?

At Shockbots we are gearing up for the launch of our next product range- Nanobots! These micro fighting machines will be available within the next few weeks- Ready to run out of the box with a charger and transmitter included for just £50!

(from Facebook)

I can see very little distinction between a ready-to-run "robot" and a commercial R/C toy. Would anyone care to explain the difference to me?

[Hogi]

this is probably a job for Will as he's the boss of shockbots but i think basicly the difference is that a shockbots kit is designed and constructed with the single purpose of fighting in an AWS ( or similar antweight combat competition ) however other off-the-shelf rc verhicles are toys designed purely to be entertaining rather than to engage an antweight combat robot in arena combat so whereas a shockbots kit is designed to do what we as the robot community want it to do, a toy is designed to do something completely different.

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

Gary, every time you bring that rule up, we debate it and come to the same conclusion that you are allowed to 'borrow' a driver for a clusterbot, so maybe its about time an exception was put into that rule. It would have happened last time it was debated if any of us actually had access to the rules to host new versions now Oliver has gone to the dark side.

And the proposed banning of commercial vehicles has already been given a clause that allows kits specifically designed for robot combat, so that is the difference between a Shockbots kit and Spall.

I find kits a bit annoying personally (there are already 3 near enough identical ones signed up for the Reading AWS!) but to ban them is to deny the kids who bought them the chance to compete, which I don't like. Hopefully it'll lead onto them making their own at some point.

[teamocean]

As has already been pointed out the Shockbots robots are designed to be competitive robots as an entry into the sport for those who may not necessarily have access to the tools and equipment to build their own robots.

The Nanobots are exactly the same- if I was to build one and enter it no one would think twice- same as if I sold one to just one person. I can see no difference from selling a kit to someone as paying someone to build a custom ant. At the end of the day its the same thing.

[AntRoboteer]

What I love about the Shockbots kits is the fact that it is possible to rework them and make them unique. For example, at Ant Freeze, at first I didn't even know ExuberANT was a kit. I believe your kits are awesome, Will, and inspire creativity; keep it up. I have no objection at all in seeing kit robots enter.