2i) Clusterbots

A discussion forum for proposed changes to the AWS rules (2014)

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
playzooki
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:34 pm

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by playzooki »

also the external driver rule means that people wont be making cool 3 or 4 part clusterbots :P

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

I'd like to see the it added to the rules that cluster bots must start each fight how they fit in the cube.
Also, thinking about this, 99% of ants don't fit in the cube the same way they go into the arena! Most go in sideways or on the diagonal. So why should it be one rule for clusterbots and another for ants? If this rule was ever enforced, I'd argue ants should have to do that same, and no-one wants that.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

Hogi
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm
Location: basingstoke

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Hogi »

good point well made Dave. a clusterbot is still an antweight, it's just an antweight that consists of more than one seperate parts.

as for hexbugs, i see no real reason for banning them. apart from the frequency rule they are compliant with the current rules and i don't think their infrared radio set ups interfere with any other radio system commonly used. sure, it would be excellent to fight a self contained cluster that was actually designed to be an antweight clusterbot rather than two fleas with the two flea cluster rule being an added bonus but i don't think we should make it mandatory that all clusters are self contained.
Daniel Jackson.

Team Hectic.

Many antweights

Super antweights: territorial.

Fleaweights: fleadom fighter, gaztons.

Featherweights: hectic (under construction)

Occashokka
Posts: 433
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:34 pm
Location: Stroud,Gloucestershire

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Occashokka »

Wow,quite some heated debate on this one!
Team Badger
Has a 3d printer now yay
-£4.82+VAT (intact)
-cool modulated printed thingy
-not yet built nasty mean spinnt thingy

I'm gonna build something huge and stupid, try and stop me :P

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3190
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by peterwaller »

Is it permissible that a cluster can fight part or all of a fight joined together. :roll:

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

That's an interesting question!

3 ideas spring to mind.
1) classic cluster with separate units
2) separate units joined together by some kind of tether
3) one unit, say 4WD, where the front wheels are independent of the back (with their own receiver, speedo, battery etc.)

In my mind, only the first would count as a clusterbot, but I'm not sure the rules specifically ban the second...
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

Hogi
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm
Location: basingstoke

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Hogi »

the deffinition in the rules is a robot that consists of more than one separate parts. to me, a robot that is tethered but is capable of separating into two or more separate parts still CONSISTS of more than one separate parts and is therefore still a clusterbot provided that all parts are capable of independant controlled motion. that's my understanding of it anyway.
Daniel Jackson.

Team Hectic.

Many antweights

Super antweights: territorial.

Fleaweights: fleadom fighter, gaztons.

Featherweights: hectic (under construction)

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3190
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by peterwaller »

That's about how I read it so I think I might have a go.
If it proves too difficult to have controlled separation or it is considered not to be within the spirit of the cluster rules it will have to be a single robot and replace a roller.

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

I always liked the idea that clusterbots had to start as one robot and 'become' their separate parts upon activate, a la Robot Wars. But that proved to be problematic with antweights as people very quickly found ways around it that made it rather pointless to have as a rule IE just sitting the two fleas on top of each other, or having one contain the other with its weapon, or simply have an incredibly fine tether that would break the minute any of them moved.
But I am all for allowing anything that adds a bit of ingenuity into what has become a bit of a muddy classification, as long as it complies with what rules we do have.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3190
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: 2i) Clusterbots

Post by peterwaller »

These could well do much if not all of the battle joined all be it loosely.

Post Reply