Active Weapon Proposal

[muchalucha]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

As for that 4kg FW, I don't think it would have much luck in a full combat event to be honest fast and maneuverable it might be, but it happens to weigh less than a number of robots' spinning blades!

youd be suprized , i do add weight above the wheels depending on my opponents to get more traction.

[daliad100]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

What about:
FW with active weapons: 13,6 kg max
FW without active weapons: 10 kg max.
This rules out the heavily armered box. And it gives every beginner without active weapon 3,6 kg to build one.

i think this is a really good idea (the best so far) , but i think 10 kg is almost too much (6-7 kg maybe ?), because thants , my only FW at the moment only weighs in at 4 kg , but it uses 2 drill motors , its weapon/tactic is going really fast and being very light, being very menouvorable and running circles round the flippers lol.

But still , i dont think this rule should be implemented as is at all , but if it is modified with mariens suggestions , if a really clear need arises than that would be ok . And braps for being brave enough to post this .

Surely that low mass of robot (7kg, let alone 4) is dangerous with flippers in the arena Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVK-TRMsxy0
A similar reason why there's a lower limit to a heavyweight's mass.

You would have to turn flipper pressures down which could be a disadvantage to the flipper in a 3 or more way melle where another robot has an active weapon.

[RogueTwoRobots]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

Thanks to those who have contributed, either again or for the first time. Its good to get an idea of how we all feel about it.

I seem to have unintentionally grouped all rambots into the 'boring cheap box pusher' category, which some of you mention is maybe a bit unfair on those rambots that are fast-paced, or are more expensive and intricate than a pair of drills on wheels. Sorry about that, I do appreciate the cost and effort you guys have put into your machines.

I think one thing that's maybe slipping under the radar a bit is that this proposal would not be a blanket ban on passive robots, only for official competition events. If I apply this proposal to the fighting calendar for 2009, it would currently mean only one competition (UK champs) where passive robots would be restricted, and even then, they would still be allowed to run in whiteboards. Rebel Robots could maybe be affected by the proposal (imagining it in the 2009 calendar again) but that is where the issue of event organiser discretion vs FRA implementation would come up.

Tony, using the above example of the fighting calendar, Baramot could still easily have plenty of run-outs a year at Robots Live, Roaming Robots etc while your spinning robots could have their time at the full combat. You also had Baramot at the UK champs this year where it was running in the whiteboards. That is essentially an exact model of how this proposal would affect a robot team.

I don't want to propose a complete ban on passive robots, as I understand how much building a robot is made easier for new blood by not having to worry about a weapon, especially for first robots. I shall re-iterate that the intention is for it only to apply to official championships. Part of the decision-making process would also be whether to allow passive robots into the competition if it is the builder's first robot (something that could be open for debate)

Joacim, all areas of a combat robot are subject to breakdown and failure at various points. Personally, I wouldn't want to see a robot disqualified just because it suffers weapon failure, but others may think differently. Also technically, there's nothing stopping someone from entering a robot with an active weapon and not using it for the entire event. Lots of issues that would require to be resolved.
But it is generating some good discussion on the forum, nice and healthy

[muchalucha]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

do thwack bots count , as there hammers are sort of active weapons and next to flippers and spinners they are very entertaining to watch and if in the hands of a good driver quite destructive

[RogueTwoRobots]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

Ahh thwackbots - that's something I meant to mention in the first post but it slipped my mind :P

Its one of those debatable issues. If the proposal was to allow for thwackbots, some people may argue that its not really an active weapon. If not, others would argue that it is an active weapon. My personal feeling would be to allow them because, as you've said, they can be really entertaining to watch and quite destructive. Stinger never caused huge amounts of damage but it could steadily beat the other robot up. Looking at now, we've got Saint Hammer, which is also extremely entertaining to watch bouncing around the arena.

So in my mind, yes, I would allow them but if this proposal gets submitted it would be based on the general concensus.

[majinb]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

I didnt wanna give the impression I was offended, I just wanted to create a clear difference between cheap and simple to make boxes and rammers such as Pillow Torque and Storm II for the sake of the discussion.

It's a tough discussion, the bottomline seems to be that robots that are not entertaining at all and also lack a certain effort should be discouraged. Between 7 Series of Robot Wars on tv however I have seen many spinners, axes, flippers, crushers and lifters that failed to entertain me and didnt seem to be put together very well, but also a bunch of robots without active weaponry that were very entertaining.

Thwackbots indeed can be entertaining to watch but seeing Storm II ram Steel Avenger OOTA, tbf that was one of my RW highlights (yeah, he had a lifter but he didnt exactly have to use it to perform that action). Thwackbots can also be destructive but I dont think that factor really does it, I mean flippers arent very destructive and lifters arent destructive at all, I daresay a rammer such as Storm II can deal alot more damage to a robot than a lifter can.

Im reading interesting things here, such as, like I said, encouraging entertaining robots by adding more importance to the Style catogery in Judges' Decisions, or indeed altering the arena to encourage certain types of robots.

The charm of RW always was to me that no matter how fancy those machines on the telly looked, every avarage Joe was able to set himself a budget, head to the shed and build himself one of those fighting machines. This is partly why I disliked the inactive weapon ban in Series 7 (and this was several years before I got to appreciate the rammer subtype like I do today). After giving it a good thought I think all in all Im against banning simple and cheap boxes, it may make the game (or at least certain competitions) elitist and discourage new builders. Its a good point that you may wanna make your first bot a simple box, and then try something more fancy for your second one, but telling to newcomers that they have to build not 1 but 2 robots before they can enter a certain competition is discouraging, as is telling newcomers that their first robot has to be top notch if they wish to enter with their first robot.

[muchalucha]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

this is just a suggestion before someone flames me lol . But maybe we could do what the antweight crowd have done , put a blanket rule on metal thickness(and maybe oher materials), over on the rw 101 forum this rule is being debated as it is seen by many as uneccesary due to the 150 g weight limit (and for other reasons). but in FW's , weight limits are never too much of a problem so maybe there should be a limit like :

steel : 2mm
aluminium :3 mm
hardox : 2mm
plastics other than hdpe polycarb and uhwmpe: 5mm
hdpe : 4mm
polycarb : 4mm
uhwmpe : 3mm

this applies just for armour only and is just a suggestion

[joey_picus]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

The fatal flaw there being you can't get Hardox thinner than 3.25mm, as the Hardox police will inform you :P

[typhoon_driver]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

I would tear through everyone of those min thicknesses and they would all be useless in my machines as the internal forces are so large that I need to have 10mm thick bulkheads etc to support weaponry.

[muchalucha]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

I would tear through everyone of those min thicknesses and they would all be useless in my machines as the internal forces are so large that I need to have 10mm thick bulkheads etc to support weaponry.

lol as stated in my post above these suggestions are just for the armour , supporting metal parts can be any thickness you like.

[ady]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

i think the problem is:-
Wedges can be entertaining, the good thing with them is they can take a full spinner hit, which cause lots of sparks and bangs,but keep going, but like flippers if their are too many they are dull.
also their trusty rambot that never lets them down, its cheap to maintain and gets them further in competitions.

i wouldnt be bothered either way, if the rule became compulsory and you wasnt too impressed with having to have a active weapon, its easy to add one to any robot if you think about it (doesnt mean it has to be effective)

Perphaps people should be incouraged in sum way to have a active weapon?

[craig_colliass]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

Hi
I own 2 FW robots one Tron (Formerly JABOW [meaning Just O Box On Wheels]) and The Mighty Seraphim this is a mini Saint.
My view of Tron is that it was boring! I have changed the speed controller the batteries the motors the wheels but it is still a little boring it is getting better though!
The Mighty Seraphim is only a two motor machine with no active weapon like the HW Saint, I would not like to say if that is boring or not. :shock: :shock: :shock:
I agree with the sentiment expressed about active weapons on this thread, but I feel in practice there will be little that can be done in the FRA rulebook about this subject. But I do like the 10 kg idea.
I think if the EO€™s decided to give the active weapon machines extra slots in their program more people would want to have that type of machine. EO€™s deciding that only active weapon machines can be in any competition would be their choice.

At the end of the day we must have people buying tickets and wanting to come back for more. The EO€™s are best placed to decide how to achieve this.
If the rules are changed I know the whole community would help individuals to make their robots comply.

Craig

[dragonmaster_1]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

Hi Ady
Like to see you put a Active weapon on Baramot well you said
(its easy to add one to any robot if you think about it )
It has got lots of holes drilled in the top and bottom to get it in weight as it is.

As soom have said they are boring. Soom maybe soom not. At the UK champs Baramot it won its white board battle on the audience vote so it could not have been that boring.

[dragonmaster_1]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

Craig you said
(If the rules are changed I know the whole community would help individuals to make their robots comply.)
well i suppose i could take out the EV Warriors and put in some drill motors but what would be the point might just as well build another robot which i dont have the funds to do as baramot was not cheap to develop its tacken 3 years to get it to where im happy with it.

[Mouldy]

Re: Active Weapon Proposal

I'll be bold.. Please ban box's they bore the hell out of me..

Maybe the people who own box's think there awsome.. fair enough for beginers etc.. but has anyone ever seen the audience's face's when theres a hardox drill box slaping into another one thats identicle but.. maybe a different colour? possibly bigger wheels if there feeling flashy.

Box for beginners.. everyone else, weapons please in the competitions.

box's suck.

My opinion.