What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

[AIBB]

Hi, I started this thread to gauge support and opinions for a project to bring back robot wars with a redeveloped format. Constructors will be using more computer and programmed functionality, and their progress would be documented and tracked during the series. The aim is to gain government support and improve the technical and computing teaching in schools.

I will be following this thread with interest and am looking for like minded individuals to partner with.

Thanks,

AIBB

[PJ-27]

Re: What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

One of things I noticed only just the other day was the huge LACK of robots in the later series of Robot Wars.
Even I got bored and stopped watching around Season 5 and I realised this was because in Season 1 the show was only 30mins, but you got to see 6 robots competing in a variety of formats every week.
I watched an episode of Extreme the other day, 1 hour and I saw 4 robots, soooo much talking too!
With the first 3 seasons lots of shots of the pits, people working on robots, close ups on the inners etc...
It also had much more rustic charm, the later ones just seemed too fake.

Just my 2 pennies.

[RogueTwoRobots]

Re: What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

Sums my feelings on it up in a nutshell, cheers PJ

The other thing that got to me about the show later on was just how much stuff they were willing to stick the RW logo on. Replica toys and such I can understand, but I feel the just tried to squeeze too much money out of the brand through merchandise. Brands such as Star Wars, that stretch back decades, can get away with it (they're still churning out Phantom Menace stuff in some of the latest store catalogues) but RW couldn't, in my opinion anyway.

That description of the earlier shows feeling rustic, exactly! It was only when I re-watched Series 1 and 2 recently on Youtube that I realised how much that feel was lacking from the later series'. Things like the Trial games, Craig's introductory speeches and little quips here and there just completed it nicely.

So yeah, if it was to come back in some way, shape or form, I'd like to see a return to games and assault courses, in addition to battles of course. Promotes the importance of good driving and things such as ramps and 'cattle grids' could help deter a ground-scraping wedge culture. Also, less WWE style trash-talk, more technical coverage of the robots. If it can educate while entertaining, it's much more beneficial.

[RogueTwoRobots]

Re: What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

Just to add to that, I don't see such a program coming back as Robot Wars. It is a format that is known for what it was and has had its time on screen.

A new programme would have to have a new name, new approach and fresh feel in order to stand a chance of succeeding. And while I'm quietly pessimistic about a show of that scale ever actually making it back on to television, anything that promotes the sport in a positive way and encourages new people to get involved is to be supported.

[AIBB]

Re: What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

Thank you all for the contributions to this discussion thread.
As a seasoned graduate in A.I. ! I imagine a new format involving more autonomous BattleDroids, battling in gladiatorial style, using the latest software and sensory devices.
The emphasis would be on the A.I.Robot builds and hobbyists. A more technical and grass roots hobbyist slant, and far less WWE style false reality show input from hosts and competitors.
I am currently in contact with junior parliament members investigating how the show can also be used in conjunction with an education program to promote technical and computing skills.
I would ask that members of the RFL and hobbyists get involved, and please contribute to this thread to keep the dream alive for current and future Robot builders and viewers alike.
Many thanks.

[Ellis]

Re: What next for Robot Wars & bringing it back

I voted yes, with a new format, by which I mean returning to the core of the sports that you got to see glimpses of in the earlier series' of RW. The later shows were brilliant too but they were more that than anything, a show.

I can't say autonomous machines strikes me as an obvious direction to take the sport, as very few roboteers have ever gone there. I can name just one fully autonomous machine, and it's in the US and still being developed. I believe one of the main attractions for most of us is actually being at the controls of the robots, and by moving partially or entirely to AI, the TV companies might take more of an interest but the hobbyists themselves might be put off. Plus, I can't imagine the robots would be as impressive as piloted machines, which with today's tech would be even more extreme than in series 7.

Just slightly playing devils advocate^, but as far as I'm concerned do please keep looking into the TV possibilities. Whatever the format, there is an absolute mountain of learning material in this hobby, I think there is no question that education would benefit greatly from joining in.

[Bacon Wizard]

Howdy

Newbie here. Never built a robot, maybe never will (but I plan to try, starting with asking some questions on this forum)

But as a fan for many, many years, the TV show is sorely missed.

I'm quite sure it WOULD need a new lease of life to make it back onto prime-time. But I think a major part of the problem in terms of viewing figures was the lack of innovation.

Safety regs are of course necessary, and so is fairness. But seeing 20 wedges flip each other for hours-on-end does not inspire new generations of students, families, kids, designers, teams..

What is wanted is the mayhem and violence that is promised, as a vehicle for the genuine education and exploration of ideas that lies behind it all. And THAT requires teams to be very free to come up with mad, nasty, metal-munching, devious tactics and weapons etc. Which in turn would require some very, very serious money put into a completely safe arena and protected audience. It isn't gonna happen that way.

But lets not also forget that TV is probably going to have to re-think itself in the next 5 years anyway. If sponsorship and advertising could garner enough money to make a success out of a purely online approach, then what's stopping it?

[Garwulf]

I'm quite sure it WOULD need a new lease of life to make it back onto prime-time. But I think a major part of the problem in terms of viewing figures was the lack of innovation.

Safety regs are of course necessary, and so is fairness. But seeing 20 wedges flip each other for hours-on-end does not inspire new generations of students, families, kids, designers, teams..

Well, if James Cameron's show gets off the ground properly, this sort of robot combat will be back on the air in a pretty big way, but I think I really must disagree with you when it comes to innovation.

The big problem in the UK right now is that spinners aren't allowed at the heavyweight level due to the arena ceilings not being able to handle them. The sort of money that a television show would bring in would probably fix that (especially considering that one of the reasons the current UK arenas can't handle the spinners is due to the need for portability), and you'd start seeing a full range of robots again.

Also, I think it is worth pointing out that what drives innovation in this sort of contest is the arms race created when somebody comes up with an otherwise off-the-wall idea. If you asked me the two most important robots in the UK robot wars, I'd say Chaos 2 and Hypnodisc, no contest. Both of them were obsolete by the end of the television series, but it was thanks to them that a lot of the armour and robot weapons developed as they did. So, that sort of innovation is not something you can really impose from the outside - you need another Hypnodisc or Chaos 2 to force roboteers to react. And that requires the enthusiastic participants.

(Oh yes - and welcome to the forum, fellow fan!)

[Bacon Wizard]

Cheers Garwulf.

We agree that innovation is the driving force for success. But are you sure there is room for such innovation under current regs? (and again, this isn't a whinge; I recognise the need for such regs) Most of the innovation we see now is under the bonnet since we ended-up with 3 main bot types (brick, wedge, spinner) with the exception of tin-openers such as Razor who also deserves a place in the pantheon of game-changing ideas.

It's great coming-up with new, spinner-proof armour for example, but it doesn't change the nature of the bot. For the onlooker, it's just the same bot as ever before.

It's about creating a spectacle.

I agree about the arena making a difference, certainly. But I doubt we'll see this on tv again until we having something brand-new for audiences. Even Dr Who's come-back came with some major format changes.

Could we have aquatic and aerial divisions? (Yeah, I can see how tough that would be too, but brainstorming here) and I personally would like to see more walkers now materials have moved-on a bit (That's what I plan to work-on!)#

[craig_colliass]

Interesting point about walkers, I have two, (links below) the rules for walkers have been recently tightened up to such a level they are not illegal but now not practical, under the two degrees of movement clause both the robots on the videos would be technically shufflers, and would not be allowed any weight allowances. Perhaps in the future we may get something to work on say walker against walker fights but until then we can only talk of what might have been.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf8Ft...lAbBMw&index=8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Tfid...lAbBMw&index=3

[Bacon Wizard]

I have seen your Theo Jansen before! Not the spider though: is that based on klaan?

These would disqualify on the basis of powered by rotary motion/cam anyhow in my understanding.

I reckon I may have cracked it, but its all just on paper for now. Start prototyping next payday

if we have larger terrain, more outdoors-y it woukd be interesting to see bots coping with grass, gravel, uphill, puddles, climbing "trees" etc and roboteers using an on-board cam.

[Eventorizon]

The technique developed by Mike Franklin for Scuttle in Technogames and Anarchy in Robotwars counts as two axis. Its the only system I know of that you could use at the moment. I am planning to build a wooden machine to test the principal. However actually making a machine that was combat ready would be insanely expensive. Around £1000 with no weapon is what I clocked one of my simpler designs at.

[Bacon Wizard]

I thought that might be the case, but wasn't sure. Was hoping so. Anarchy was the first and as far as I can tell, ONLY walker that one's opponent wouldn't simply laugh-at.

I feel as though my various designs all solve the issue (need to find out how well they perform) but I haven't dared to look at the cost yet because like with you, it's clear that it'll be VERY expensive.

Might it be possible to see some of the rules relaxed for very specific occasions? I mean... say the winning team get a budget to build a house-robot sized and suitably weaponized bot (so flamethrowers etc allowed) to compete with the ACTUAL house robots? (And last year's effort added to the house robots stable, too)

Lets see the house bots evolve, get hurt, change, die, form vendettas etc too.

[Garwulf]

We agree that innovation is the driving force for success. But are you sure there is room for such innovation under current regs? (and again, this isn't a whinge; I recognise the need for such regs) Most of the innovation we see now is under the bonnet since we ended-up with 3 main bot types (brick, wedge, spinner) with the exception of tin-openers such as Razor who also deserves a place in the pantheon of game-changing ideas.

Well, I'm afraid I can't really speak with any intelligence about the regulations, as I haven't given them a proper read, or have the engineering background to understand the full share of their limitations or implications. That said, though, I think the important thing is the people - you get something like Razer or Hypnodisc when some gifted amateur comes up with some out-of-left-field idea (hopefully the baseball metaphor works here) that nobody ever thought of before. That can be encouraged, but not directly.

As I wrote in a Livejournal post a couple of months ago, the Robot Wars show had a very important underlying message - "You can do this too - come join us!" So, people got to see something insanely fun, followed by encouragement to build a robot of their own. And, that worked. So, I think, regardless of the format, any new show would need to have that underlying message to bring in the new blood.

As far as the current variety goes, I think it is important to remember that the most thrilling and exciting fights depended on the robot driver more than the technology. One of the most exciting fights on the television show, as I recall, was between Chaos 2 and Wild Thing, both of which were flipper bots. But, they both had first-class drivers, and that made for a truly exciting fight. And, although they are storytelling tropes, people do love to get behind the underdog, particularly when it is fighting one of the more powerful spinners.

When it comes to how I would prefer the format, there are a few ways that I would do it:

- A firm focus on the people. This is part of the "you can do this too" message - it really is a powerful thing to see this stuff on television and realize in the interview that the roboteers are ordinary people just like you.

- Bring back some, but not all, of the side events. I think series three had it right when they got rid of the qualifiers. But, it is fun to spice up the action with special events such as combat robot hockey or an obstacle course.

- No visible corporate sponsorship. I know this would take money away from the teams, but it would also reinforce the "you can do this too" message. As soon as you have corporate logos plastered on the side of robots, it becomes a lot more intimidating for new blood to try to get into the sport. Instead, if there must be corporate sponsorship, it should be going to the organizing body and divided out to the teams based on financial need - that way, there would be a level playing field, and a more exciting sport.

- Keep the game show format. Seriously, it works. Compare the Robot Wars viewing figures with Battlebots, and it's no contest - Robot Wars was a smashing international success, and Battlebots was a niche show. The fact is that the game show format told the story of a robot tournament on television better than a robot tournament did (strange, but true).

- Oh yes, and PAY THE ROBOTEERS! Seriously, I couldn't believe it when I read in Gearheads that the UK Roboteers for all intents and purposes never received a penny for their hard work, even as they and their robots became international stars. Shame on Mentorn for that, really. Please tell me that between now and then Mentorn actually paid them...

[Bacon Wizard]

Constructors will be using more computer and programmed functionality
AIBB

Hmm. I do think the personalities of the teams matter hugely and frankly, fully autonomous bots just won't cut the mustard in terms of good viewing. However, I think some inclusion of this may well help with funding, and it would be fun to see each bot have SOME autonomy. A "special-move" type of idea might work, self righting would be easy enough etc. and perhaps the more automated a bot is, the more concessions towards weight or something could be awarded. A certain amount of fly-by-wire is probably a natural progression anyhow (eg, selecting where in the arena you want the bot to go, rather than actually steering) But recognising an opponent vs house bots for example? Hmmm.

I think there's some potential here, but nobody wants to watch bots dithering about, missing the opponent completely and bashing against the arena lamely. Its a gladiatorial contest and we want blood! Glory!