Tweet
I know this caused some unrest amongst competitors when Mentorn implemented such a rule but don€™t bring out the torches and pitchforks yet 
I€™m posting the following suggestion after discussions with some people have highlighted the need to discover how the general robot community feels and whether there is argument enough to put forward a proposal to the FRA for voting.
Basically€¦
The idea is to introduce an active weapon rule in featherweights. The rest of this post will be in regard to the featherweights as that is the class in which I compete and have the most understanding in. If anyone wishes to propose such a rule for other weight classes, feel free.
The proposal would not govern every event, and as such I guess it may be more up to the event organisers and what they want in their shows than the FRA. But essentially, for UK featherweight events that are flagship events, featherweights wishing to compete must have an active weapon fitted. I know this will lead to such questions as €˜Well what constitutes an active weapon?€™ as you could simply throw on an aluminum-arm wielding drill motor or something but that is an area that could be considered if this proposal was to be favoured or advanced at any stage.
I mention flagship events; the best definition I can give of that right now is events such as the UK FW championships or UK FW tag-team championships (although there is no official requirement for that to be held every year, with it more being for our fun). Now at the moment these are both held by Robo Challenge so I guess you could also say that for full-combat events, all robots competing must have an active weapon. But if that was to change for next year, say if Roaming Robots held a league table championship for featherweights as well as heavies, the idea would be that the ruling would still stand (with the obvious exception that no spinners could run)
Using a typical Robo Challenge UK champs event as an example, any robot wishing to enter the main competition would have to have an active weapon installed. It is, after all, the nationwide championship for the FW weight class. There would be no such rule for people wishing to compete in whiteboard events, as there is no prize money or trophy up for grabs, and also since whiteboards provide a good test platform for new weapons, drive systems or armour upgrades etc.
There is also the understanding that someone building their first robot is going to find it challenging enough to get a robot fully working without having the added challenge of a weapon. But I€™d like to encourage those who move on to their second robot to take the plunge and go for a weapon.
I decided after the 2007 Eurochamps that I wouldn€™t enter my robots into an event again without weapons. This was for two reasons; one, because I got fed up of having nothing to do in a battle other than push and, two, because I kept putting off fitting a weapon because I sometimes couldn€™t be bothered with the added complexity. But making a firm decision to go for active weapons has been great. It provides more of a challenge for me when building, leads to more problem-solving going on in my brain (and that can only be a good thing
) and makes it more fun and interesting to control in the arena. Admittedly the forks that Kaizer had at the UK champs were slow and not very effective, but it meant I stuck to my pledge nonetheless to have an active weapon in my robots.
For those concerned about extra cost, yes, complex weapons such as spinning discs or pneumatic flippers cost a lot to get running effectively. But take a windscreen wiper motor, attach it to the threaded rod from a car scissor jack, wire it up to some micro-switches and you€™ve got yourself a setup that can be used for either a lifter or crusher/grabber (or whatever your innovative mind can create) for a relatively low cost. Combined with bits of scrap, simple pieces of box section metal or low-cost plastics for mechanisms/linkages its quite straightforward to get a simple weapon working, and this is another reason for creating this proposal - so that builders will have to explore and expand their skills if they want to challenge in a competition, but at the same time, being of benefit to them by developing their talents.
From an entertainment point-of-view watching box vs box, especially in the featherweights can get a bit dull (although I€™m sure some people will argue the effectiveness of a high-speed, high-torque rambot). Having two active-weapon robots could increase levels of excitement/anticipation/enjoyment for the audience, providing them with a more memorable experience.
And finally (phew!) without wanting to sound bitter, there are several of us who spend a lot of money on robots with weapons with our aim being to be competitive but also fun to watch, and it can be a bit irritating when a cheap-as-peanuts box on wheels that€™s armoured like a tank and could be built in a weekend comes in and wins by just pushing. Good tactics? Good driver? Perhaps, but if we were all to get fed up and build a similar machine for a fraction of our weaponed robot€™s cost just so we don€™t see our money and time pushed into the pit by a cordless drill, would it be good for the sport? I don€™t think so.
Let€™s remember that its is Robot WARS. Robotic COMBAT. You don€™t send a tank into a warzone to wipe out the enemy, without a cannon. Marc Thorpe didn€™t present his radio controlled vacuum cleaner to people to get his idea for Robot Wars across, he presented his radio controlled vacuum cleaner fitted with a chainsaw (and possibly other lethal implements). So let€™s bring the war back, bring the combat back, instead of playing bumper cars.
And just to summarise; this is not a concrete proposal to be presented to the FRA. This is put to everyone to gauge their opinion on the matter. The main proposal is in regard to competition fights and events, not whiteboards.
If there is an obvious dislike for it, fair enough. If there is support in favour of it, I will consider putting it forward for discussion at a meeting based on the views. And the proposal is open to alteration. I have worded it the way I see it, but every section of it is free to be debated and reworked
Thanks for taking time to read this. Please post your comments, feedback etc so that its possible to gain a picture of how people feel about this.
Many thanks
I€™m posting the following suggestion after discussions with some people have highlighted the need to discover how the general robot community feels and whether there is argument enough to put forward a proposal to the FRA for voting.
Basically€¦
The idea is to introduce an active weapon rule in featherweights. The rest of this post will be in regard to the featherweights as that is the class in which I compete and have the most understanding in. If anyone wishes to propose such a rule for other weight classes, feel free.
The proposal would not govern every event, and as such I guess it may be more up to the event organisers and what they want in their shows than the FRA. But essentially, for UK featherweight events that are flagship events, featherweights wishing to compete must have an active weapon fitted. I know this will lead to such questions as €˜Well what constitutes an active weapon?€™ as you could simply throw on an aluminum-arm wielding drill motor or something but that is an area that could be considered if this proposal was to be favoured or advanced at any stage.
I mention flagship events; the best definition I can give of that right now is events such as the UK FW championships or UK FW tag-team championships (although there is no official requirement for that to be held every year, with it more being for our fun). Now at the moment these are both held by Robo Challenge so I guess you could also say that for full-combat events, all robots competing must have an active weapon. But if that was to change for next year, say if Roaming Robots held a league table championship for featherweights as well as heavies, the idea would be that the ruling would still stand (with the obvious exception that no spinners could run)
Using a typical Robo Challenge UK champs event as an example, any robot wishing to enter the main competition would have to have an active weapon installed. It is, after all, the nationwide championship for the FW weight class. There would be no such rule for people wishing to compete in whiteboard events, as there is no prize money or trophy up for grabs, and also since whiteboards provide a good test platform for new weapons, drive systems or armour upgrades etc.
There is also the understanding that someone building their first robot is going to find it challenging enough to get a robot fully working without having the added challenge of a weapon. But I€™d like to encourage those who move on to their second robot to take the plunge and go for a weapon.
I decided after the 2007 Eurochamps that I wouldn€™t enter my robots into an event again without weapons. This was for two reasons; one, because I got fed up of having nothing to do in a battle other than push and, two, because I kept putting off fitting a weapon because I sometimes couldn€™t be bothered with the added complexity. But making a firm decision to go for active weapons has been great. It provides more of a challenge for me when building, leads to more problem-solving going on in my brain (and that can only be a good thing
) and makes it more fun and interesting to control in the arena. Admittedly the forks that Kaizer had at the UK champs were slow and not very effective, but it meant I stuck to my pledge nonetheless to have an active weapon in my robots.For those concerned about extra cost, yes, complex weapons such as spinning discs or pneumatic flippers cost a lot to get running effectively. But take a windscreen wiper motor, attach it to the threaded rod from a car scissor jack, wire it up to some micro-switches and you€™ve got yourself a setup that can be used for either a lifter or crusher/grabber (or whatever your innovative mind can create) for a relatively low cost. Combined with bits of scrap, simple pieces of box section metal or low-cost plastics for mechanisms/linkages its quite straightforward to get a simple weapon working, and this is another reason for creating this proposal - so that builders will have to explore and expand their skills if they want to challenge in a competition, but at the same time, being of benefit to them by developing their talents.
From an entertainment point-of-view watching box vs box, especially in the featherweights can get a bit dull (although I€™m sure some people will argue the effectiveness of a high-speed, high-torque rambot). Having two active-weapon robots could increase levels of excitement/anticipation/enjoyment for the audience, providing them with a more memorable experience.
And finally (phew!) without wanting to sound bitter, there are several of us who spend a lot of money on robots with weapons with our aim being to be competitive but also fun to watch, and it can be a bit irritating when a cheap-as-peanuts box on wheels that€™s armoured like a tank and could be built in a weekend comes in and wins by just pushing. Good tactics? Good driver? Perhaps, but if we were all to get fed up and build a similar machine for a fraction of our weaponed robot€™s cost just so we don€™t see our money and time pushed into the pit by a cordless drill, would it be good for the sport? I don€™t think so.
Let€™s remember that its is Robot WARS. Robotic COMBAT. You don€™t send a tank into a warzone to wipe out the enemy, without a cannon. Marc Thorpe didn€™t present his radio controlled vacuum cleaner to people to get his idea for Robot Wars across, he presented his radio controlled vacuum cleaner fitted with a chainsaw (and possibly other lethal implements). So let€™s bring the war back, bring the combat back, instead of playing bumper cars.
And just to summarise; this is not a concrete proposal to be presented to the FRA. This is put to everyone to gauge their opinion on the matter. The main proposal is in regard to competition fights and events, not whiteboards.
If there is an obvious dislike for it, fair enough. If there is support in favour of it, I will consider putting it forward for discussion at a meeting based on the views. And the proposal is open to alteration. I have worded it the way I see it, but every section of it is free to be debated and reworked
Thanks for taking time to read this. Please post your comments, feedback etc so that its possible to gain a picture of how people feel about this.
Many thanks
Still, it is generally more fun to watch robots with active weapons. My opinion is that almost everything should be allowed but that we should make arenas and limitations that favors entertaining robots.
Comment