DieGracefullyRobotics wrote: ↑
Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:00 pm
As I've said before, sir, I (and many others) believe rule 2b makes ROBOX against the rules. We are currently in the process of accessing that rule to clear up the loophole used and make it as explicitly clear as possible.
Thanks Dave. I'm afraid I don't quite understand that.
I do not believe what has been said is fair at all.
Surely if there is a loophole to be cleared up, I cannot have broken any rules and therefore Robox was competition legal at the time. Please would you confirm that is the case.
Additionally, to reiterate, here is what I understand by 2b and included is demonstration of compliance in the case of Robox:
Rule 2b. Size limits. "Robots may only expand from their size limits once in the arena and only if their expansion is instigated by remote control".
Robots may only expand from their size limits once in the arena
- (note the plural on robots
and size limits
) each botlet must expand from no more than the size of a 4 inch cube before the fight.
Demonstration of compliance 1:
Neither Robox nor cluster partner expanded beyond the constraints of a 4 inch cube before activate.
only if their expansion is instigated by remote control
- Some kind of radio controlled mechanism must be in place to allow of release of any expanding sections on demand of the roboteer.
Demonstration of compliance 2:
The cluster partner used to expand is completely under radio control.
Please would you clarify which bit of rule 2b you believe I would not be in accordance with.