Proposed addition to rules
Moderators: BeligerAnt, petec, administrator
Forum rules
* Only one rule per thread. Any deviation will be moved by the moderators.
* Keep the discussions on-topic, relevant and polite. Anything else WILL be removed by the moderators.
* If you start a new thread (to discuss a different rule) quote the existing rule in the first post so everyone knows what you're talking about.
* The existing rules (version 4.2) can be found here: http://robotwars101.org/ants/rules.htm
* Only one rule per thread. Any deviation will be moved by the moderators.
* Keep the discussions on-topic, relevant and polite. Anything else WILL be removed by the moderators.
* If you start a new thread (to discuss a different rule) quote the existing rule in the first post so everyone knows what you're talking about.
* The existing rules (version 4.2) can be found here: http://robotwars101.org/ants/rules.htm
-
- Posts: 3716
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
- Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
- Contact:
Proposed addition to rules
Hi.
I'd like to add something along the lines of "Any extra driver helping to drive another team's clusterbot must drive the lesser botlet."
In clusterbots such as Salt and Pepper or Warhorses, where both botlets are relatively equal, or even something like Lemmings, this isn't that important. However it struck me that a team could enter a cluster like Peter's Termite Cluster or the Mini Tinny Cluster, and then give the better unit to a better driver who already has 4 in competition. No one has done this yet (I know Peter uses Dan, but he always drives Alsoran) but I'd like to make it so no one could in the future.
Also, maybe something along the lines of "any person helping another team drive their clusterbot may only do so for one other team", to stop one person driving all extra cluster components.
Just food for thought really.
I'd like to add something along the lines of "Any extra driver helping to drive another team's clusterbot must drive the lesser botlet."
In clusterbots such as Salt and Pepper or Warhorses, where both botlets are relatively equal, or even something like Lemmings, this isn't that important. However it struck me that a team could enter a cluster like Peter's Termite Cluster or the Mini Tinny Cluster, and then give the better unit to a better driver who already has 4 in competition. No one has done this yet (I know Peter uses Dan, but he always drives Alsoran) but I'd like to make it so no one could in the future.
Also, maybe something along the lines of "any person helping another team drive their clusterbot may only do so for one other team", to stop one person driving all extra cluster components.
Just food for thought really.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39
Winner - AWS 39
Re: Proposed addition to rules
Good shout, I'm 100% behind that. Well spotted little loophole.
Re: Proposed addition to rules
me too. i drive the lesser part of Peter's clusterbot and the greater part of my cluster so i'd be within these rules if they were implemented and i can see how the addition of these proposals to the rules would give more people a chance to drive cluster botlets from outside their own team.
Daniel Jackson.
Team Hectic.
Many antweights
Super antweights: territorial.
Fleaweights: fleadom fighter, gaztons.
Featherweights: hectic (under construction)
Team Hectic.
Many antweights
Super antweights: territorial.
Fleaweights: fleadom fighter, gaztons.
Featherweights: hectic (under construction)
-
- Posts: 441
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm
Re: Proposed addition to rules
What about two fleas combined in a cluster? It is usually the case (or is in my case anyway) that both botlets are just rubbish anyway and pose no real threat to an ant. However, some fleas are definitely more effective than others (such as pairing up robots like the awesome Fleabite and the original Class Act). Both weigh the same and could potentially be just as lethal in combat (or maybe not!) so how would you judge the 'lesser' and 'superior' botlets in that case?
Just wondering, that's all but I do think the implementation of this rule would benefit us all.
Furthermore, I think each team should have the main driver and a reserve/cluster driver who will drive ALL of the cluster botlets for that team. This would be a bit fairer and would help eliminate confusion as to who drives which half of the cluster on which day in which battle in which situation etc.
Great identification there; well done!
Just wondering, that's all but I do think the implementation of this rule would benefit us all.
Furthermore, I think each team should have the main driver and a reserve/cluster driver who will drive ALL of the cluster botlets for that team. This would be a bit fairer and would help eliminate confusion as to who drives which half of the cluster on which day in which battle in which situation etc.
Great identification there; well done!
Re: Proposed addition to rules
Well if we just say in clusters where one robot weighs equal to or less than 50% of the other. So 100g robot and 50g is an unbalanced cluster. But 95 55g is not. (Percentage can be adjusted).
Also I'm not keen on the dedicated cluster driver as you an be drawn against the cluster drivers robots.
Also I'm not keen on the dedicated cluster driver as you an be drawn against the cluster drivers robots.
Nuts And Bots - For all your components and ready built antweights!
Alex Shakespeare - Team Shakey / Nuts And Bots / Team Nuts:
AWS 44, 45, 49, 51 & 55 Winner - Far too many robots!
Alex Shakespeare - Team Shakey / Nuts And Bots / Team Nuts:
AWS 44, 45, 49, 51 & 55 Winner - Far too many robots!
Re: Proposed addition to rules
I don't see a problem with this. We seem to be forgetting that we enter a team of robots that we are allowed to drive. Sometimes we're lucky and someone else will allow us to help drive one part of their cluster. This is becoming far more frequent due to the abundance of clusters, but it is still a privilege that goes above and beyond what you should expect to get out of an event. If it bothers you that your cluster may get drawn against part of the clusters driver, either don't enter a cluster, or bring a friend to drive the other part.Shakey wrote:Also I'm not keen on the dedicated cluster driver as you an be drawn against the cluster drivers robots.
In general I would be all for measures that cut down on the number of clusters that are just 2 fleas belonging to different people thrown together. In my opinion it's uninteresting, and usually ineffective, only serving to drag the competition out in most cases (and as we've seen cutting down the number of entrants slightly would not at all be a bad thing). I'd rather all clusters were comprised of robots made by one team. They can still be fleas - like Salt & Pepper - but it would also inspire innovative specifically-designed clusterbots (like Warhorses) as well as meaning more walkers (which barely anyone does now since it's easier to put two fleas together in a cluster), rather than most of them just being random flea 1 + random flea 2. I'm sure that's an unpopular opinion, but there you have it.
Edit: I'd also rather do away with the clusters that are underweight ant + useless toy, but I feel that's a different conversation entirely.
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk
-
- Posts: 441
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm
Re: Proposed addition to rules
Some people do not have 2 transmitters and therefore it can prove to be difficult to cluster something two botlets which you have built for your one transmitter. Right now, I have to get the help of another team to aid me in my clustering who had a robot which just so happened to be the right size and weight AND bound to another transmitter which I used out of convenience rather than building a whole new robot and buying another transmitter which would only be used for the purpose of clustering. People should have the freedom of clustering with other robots from other teams but being a driver for several different teams at once is a bit over the top.
On the topic of 'fleaweight' clusters not being wanted or useful, one of the botlets in my cluster (Doktor Power 2) proved to be incredibly effective in the Power Cluster which was not a particularly unbalanced cluster (90g + 60g) This goes to show that 2 seemingly 'random' robots (a pig and a pushy thingy) can work very well together and can be effective contary to some people's opinions. They are not a waste of time or slots on a team - they can be competitive. It also allows people who don't get anywhere near the top 16 and onwards to get more time in combat and get more enjoyment form the event.. It can also prove difficult to immobilise or push off one botlet without the other getting you off as well which makes for an interesting battle.
Futhermore, clusters that are designed to be clusters (if you get what I mean) are not always as effective as 2 flea clusters such as the innovative specifically designed cluster, the Antivation Cluster, which was certainly innovative but its perfomance was not groundbreaking therefore making it prove to be less effective as 2 flea clusters. I think we could just discourage clusters of any kind if people dislike them or encourage clusters of any kind if we all (as I do) like them. We should not be selective about the clusters we do or do not want in competition. Warhorses for example is an excellent cluster but are we really saying that we would rather have two flipper robots that look alike in a cluster rather than two fleaweight flippers that might not but are still in a cluster together? Sounds a tad odd to me - both of the botlets in Warhorses are roughly 75g as far as I know, both fit in the 4" cube together - so what is the difference between them and 2 fleaweight flippers in a cluster?
On the topic of 'fleaweight' clusters not being wanted or useful, one of the botlets in my cluster (Doktor Power 2) proved to be incredibly effective in the Power Cluster which was not a particularly unbalanced cluster (90g + 60g) This goes to show that 2 seemingly 'random' robots (a pig and a pushy thingy) can work very well together and can be effective contary to some people's opinions. They are not a waste of time or slots on a team - they can be competitive. It also allows people who don't get anywhere near the top 16 and onwards to get more time in combat and get more enjoyment form the event.. It can also prove difficult to immobilise or push off one botlet without the other getting you off as well which makes for an interesting battle.
Futhermore, clusters that are designed to be clusters (if you get what I mean) are not always as effective as 2 flea clusters such as the innovative specifically designed cluster, the Antivation Cluster, which was certainly innovative but its perfomance was not groundbreaking therefore making it prove to be less effective as 2 flea clusters. I think we could just discourage clusters of any kind if people dislike them or encourage clusters of any kind if we all (as I do) like them. We should not be selective about the clusters we do or do not want in competition. Warhorses for example is an excellent cluster but are we really saying that we would rather have two flipper robots that look alike in a cluster rather than two fleaweight flippers that might not but are still in a cluster together? Sounds a tad odd to me - both of the botlets in Warhorses are roughly 75g as far as I know, both fit in the 4" cube together - so what is the difference between them and 2 fleaweight flippers in a cluster?
Re: Proposed addition to rules
My sentence wasn't against the idea of fighting yourself. But against the fact that rule would mean that you wouldn't be able to have someone just step in to fight the now driverless cluster that match.EpicentrE wrote: I don't see a problem with this. We seem to be forgetting that we enter a team of robots that we are allowed to drive. Sometimes we're lucky and someone else will allow us to help drive one part of their cluster. This is becoming far more frequent due to the abundance of clusters, but it is still a privilege that goes above and beyond what you should expect to get out of an event. If it bothers you that your cluster may get drawn against part of the clusters driver, either don't enter a cluster, or bring a friend to drive the other part.
On the ant vs. useless toy, yeah it's not quite in the spirit of the rules but where do you draw the line? A Nano can be lighter than some useless toys but actually as proven a nano is still a good contender and can fight back.
Also now you are arguing for the exclusion of entries based on their effectiveness. That's a road I don't want to be going down.
Also finally, some teams are 1 man shows. The ability to draw in other drivers is vital if ever they wanted to cluster as otherwise they simply cannot.
Nuts And Bots - For all your components and ready built antweights!
Alex Shakespeare - Team Shakey / Nuts And Bots / Team Nuts:
AWS 44, 45, 49, 51 & 55 Winner - Far too many robots!
Alex Shakespeare - Team Shakey / Nuts And Bots / Team Nuts:
AWS 44, 45, 49, 51 & 55 Winner - Far too many robots!
- BeligerAnt
- Posts: 1872
- Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: Brighton
- Contact:
Re: Proposed addition to rules
Everyone seems to be ignoring the existing rules:
Many years ago we had a rash of clusters (actually far fewer than now) and ran into exactly the problems that are now being discussed. We were waiting around for people to match transmitters with robots (changing crystals in those days!), people needing to fix one of their own robots when they are called to drive a cluster for another team, people unable to fight against their own robots, etc.
It's a fairly simple rule, and if you only have one person in your "team" you have 3 choices: bring a friend, build a walker or (heavens forbid!) only enter 3 robots.
I know this rule is unpopular with people who want to enter 2 fleas as a cluster, but it's there for a reason.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.
Many years ago we had a rash of clusters (actually far fewer than now) and ran into exactly the problems that are now being discussed. We were waiting around for people to match transmitters with robots (changing crystals in those days!), people needing to fix one of their own robots when they are called to drive a cluster for another team, people unable to fight against their own robots, etc.
It's a fairly simple rule, and if you only have one person in your "team" you have 3 choices: bring a friend, build a walker or (heavens forbid!) only enter 3 robots.
Gary, Team BeligerAnt
- peterwaller
- Posts: 3213
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: Aylesbury Bucks
- Contact:
Re: Proposed addition to rules
Or drive two robots at once.
I could put Alsoran on the left stick and Dominant on the right.
I could put Alsoran on the left stick and Dominant on the right.