Antweight Rules Proposal

All things antweight

Moderators: BeligerAnt, petec, administrator

User avatar
Shakey
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Reading

Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by Shakey »

Hello,
As you know there has been some effort to update the official rules behind our AWS's in varying forms. However it has become somewhat of a slog and weighed down by various things, legacy and semantics.

What I have done is taken a run at a more complete rewrite on the ruleset. The aims of this are to clarify and simplify producing an overall easier to follow ruleset. By rewriting this way rather than one at a time it helps the rules be written more cohesively and work together better.

This has been seen by the same group that was working through one at a time and carries tweaks from them and now feels mature enough for the general forum. It is not a simple rewrite for the same purpose but actually carries functional changes that were intended (Or at least strong suggestions) for the main ruleset the most significant of which are:
  • The walker weight bonus is now opened to all non rollers. This means stuff like hovercrafts would be allowed extra weight.
  • Following from above the fourth team slot is now inclusive of any non-roller.
  • A robot is considered to have lost AT THE START OF an immobile count if the count successfully finishes.
  • An addition reflecting the recent debate (see Combatant vs Cosmic) regarding completely destroyed robots taking a win. (See rule 4k). Note it is not even asking for controlled motion from the destroyed bot just wanting 'any' motion.
I'm not imagining this to be perfect or even debate free but it's time to open it up to discussion generally. Please have a read and reply with your thoughts:

https://nutsandbots.co.uk/antrules/

Thanks,
Shakey
Last edited by Shakey on Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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!

User avatar
Kyro
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:36 am

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by Kyro »

i think this is fair.
Team Rocket
Esper(4wd flipper)
Mantis (4wd grab 'n' lift)
Dominus (Vert SPINNAAH)
Breakout(modular cluster)
Remembering Rex (antweight cassius)
Fennec (4wd flea) former world champion

User avatar
LimaHotel
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:30 am
Location: Mold / Chester

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by LimaHotel »

This is pretty much exactly what I had in mind regarding rule changes for an immobile bot winning a fight. I'm happy with this!
Jiggy Sawdust
Jammin' Good with Weird and Flippy
The Pushbot from Mars

User avatar
MarkR
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:46 pm
Location: Reading Hackspace
Contact:

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by MarkR »

In rule 4h), the "leaving arena without contact" rule, should it be written that a maximum of two restarts per robot will be allowed? As far as I know, we've applied this consistently in recent tournaments.

I've never seen a case where the same robot left the arena a third time without contact though, it's usually been clearly stated by the EO, but I've not seen it happen.
Robots: Betsie - RaspberryPi controlled flipper bot with gyro stablisation - too clever for her own good?
Stacie - tidy flipper; 4wd driven by hair bands

User avatar
Shakey
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by Shakey »

MarkR wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:32 pm
In rule 4h), the "leaving arena without contact" rule, should it be written that a maximum of two restarts per robot will be allowed? As far as I know, we've applied this consistently in recent tournaments.

I've never seen a case where the same robot left the arena a third time without contact though, it's usually been clearly stated by the EO, but I've not seen it happen.
Good catch!
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!

User avatar
GeorgeR
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 9:53 pm
Location: Bath, Somerset

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by GeorgeR »

Overall that looks really good, I particularly like the walker expansion, more unique antweights is definitely a good thing. There are a couple of things I would change though;

1) on rule 2g I'd add heat based weapons as well as flame weapons (for those that haven't seen it, at BBB someone runs an ant with a soldering iron grabber, to melt/burn through opponents). This seems a common restriction in other rulesets, and from a safety point of view I don't see why flames would be disallowed, but red hot bits of metal are OK.

2) while I like the idea of rule 4k, I think that idea would be better implemented by adjusting 4j to include robots that are immobilised as well as ones in the pit -
"4j) If opposing robots have left the arena or been immobilised simultaneously etc......"
Combined with the new bit in 4c (regarding when immobilisation begins) it would achieve the same aims but with a more concise and elegant wording. While I know it's not the intention, I think it currently reads a bit like "if we don't like the result of a fight, we'll simply ignore the rules"


Minor suggestions aside, I'm really glad an updated ruleset is in progress, it's long overdue. Many thanks to Shakey and everyone else working on this behind the scenes, it's greatly appreciated.
Team Zero - AWS 58 Champion!
Zero - rambot - - Axiom - axebot - - Valkyrie - drum spinner
Blueprint - rambot - - Vampire - horizontal spinner - - Particle - ???
RBMK - quad spinner gyro walker - - Duality - dual spinner gyro walker

User avatar
GeorgeR
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 9:53 pm
Location: Bath, Somerset

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by GeorgeR »

Another quick thing, on 4c, shouldn't the immobilisation be retrospectively considered from when the robot stopped moving? (rather than when the judges started the count)
You wouldn't want someone to lose because the judges were a bit slow start the count.
Team Zero - AWS 58 Champion!
Zero - rambot - - Axiom - axebot - - Valkyrie - drum spinner
Blueprint - rambot - - Vampire - horizontal spinner - - Particle - ???
RBMK - quad spinner gyro walker - - Duality - dual spinner gyro walker

User avatar
Shakey
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by Shakey »

GeorgeR wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:40 am
2) while I like the idea of rule 4k, I think that idea would be better implemented by adjusting 4j to include robots that are immobilised as well as ones in the pit -
"4j) If opposing robots have left the arena or been immobilised simultaneously etc......"
Combined with the new bit in 4c (regarding when immobilisation begins) it would achieve the same aims but with a more concise and elegant wording. While I know it's not the intention, I think it currently reads a bit like "if we don't like the result of a fight, we'll simply ignore the rules"

Another quick thing, on 4c, shouldn't the immobilisation be retrospectively considered from when the robot stopped moving? (rather than when the judges started the count)
You wouldn't want someone to lose because the judges were a bit slow start the count.
I actually somewhat agree but for practicality reasons not tying it to immobilisation is to help make things clearer. If you consider it from when the bot stops moving rather than start of the count it gets very prone to argument especially if a robot is still moving somewhat and there's debate if its controlled. The start of a count is a very clear marker to draw and consider. And going from that marker would make it difficult to ever get a robot immobilised and another in the pit 'at the same time'. Overall it's meant to not be too difficult on the judges to implement and deal with. If the judges are being slow on the countout you can prompt them to start it.

4k is somewhat subjective but I don't really agree with the "we'll simply ignore the rules" interpretation. I thinks it's pretty clear that the bot in the arena has to be dead for this to be considered, it's for a very specific scenario and can't just be used on any old fight. It essentially instates a KO as an overriding win condition, it's not a free pass to change any result. Though on the "if we don't like the result of a fight" that is the reason this rule exists, for when the technical winner and the common sense winner are not the same.

On a note though 4k is difficult to word, wording suggestions for it are appreciated.
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!

User avatar
GeorgeR
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 9:53 pm
Location: Bath, Somerset

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by GeorgeR »

Reading through it all again I've mostly changed my mind - the suggested way does make more sense, particularly with the clarity on the start of the countdown.

With 4k, I think my unease came from the use of the term "overturn the fight result", maybe it would sound better if the end of that rule read "then the judges will decide the winner of the fight."

I'll try and have a think about the full wording of 4k, I definitely appreciate the challenge of writing clear, simple, but unambiguous rules.
Team Zero - AWS 58 Champion!
Zero - rambot - - Axiom - axebot - - Valkyrie - drum spinner
Blueprint - rambot - - Vampire - horizontal spinner - - Particle - ???
RBMK - quad spinner gyro walker - - Duality - dual spinner gyro walker

User avatar
Shakey
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Antweight Rules Proposal

Post by Shakey »

GeorgeR wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:33 am
With 4k, I think my unease came from the use of the term "overturn the fight result", maybe it would sound better if the end of that rule read "then the judges will decide the winner of the fight."
I see what you mean with that bit, definitely a tweak needed.
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!

Post Reply