Welcome back Jake! I knew you would revive this discusion!
My advice to you would be, take off the padded gloves and don`t hold back! Your potential for inflicting extreme damage should eliminate close decisions.

I thought, many months ago you did object to the idea of making this a spectator sport, entertaning the audience for the profit of the coorporation!
We may as well bring in House robots to excite the spectators.

For us the goal is to destroy/ dissable the apponent, however we can. to win! Making it spectacular for the viewers, although this is a good thing, is not one of my priorities. My new bot is designed for fatal attacks aimed at the vitals. It won`t send shrapnel and sparks flying across the arena but the aim is to KILL!!! The only thing I would try to avoid would be wrecking IBCs, anything else is a target.
What I`m saying is badly destroying someones devoted work is what we entered this for and expecting it upon ourselves.

Be sadistic and evil! so we can all be happy and friends!

Good idea Brett, we`ll have to encourage that!

awww but pushing around dead opponents is what makes me such a big man LOL

i feel immobilisation is the aim, whether you flip them on the wall, crush their reciever or tear their wheels off. its all good in any case.
_________________
www.demon50s.com - Minimoto parts
http://www.youtube.com/user/HyzerGlen - Videoooozzz

good points made by all a great topic ........so the conclusion i see is this

its design vs design and what people deem as entertaining and not entertaining ........some people go to a boxing match to see a great fight ,or a one sisde affair with a 1st 30 sec KO.....but be aware everybody the judging criteria is present in both cases so this is what the topic is about .........not what we deem as entertaining or fancy but the reality of who won it ..and thats what needs to be decided ......do we all build carnage bots and screw the flippers and wedges ,or do we learn to understand the concept of a true battle and look beyond the asthetic value and spectical ..........and get down to the nitty gritty of it
_________________
Photos - http://community.webshots.com/album/154092733uokpXC
Photos- http://community.webshots.com/album/166819552PDWWqP

stuff the spectators i'm in it for myself.
i want to see robots getting busted immobalised etc.
if you have a wedge or pushy bot that is hardcore (ie singularity say) then by all means.
but we want to encourage destruction.

currently damaged is outweighed by other stuff 3:1
dads idea for judging
2 categories
damage and tactics.

damage rated on how much and how serious the damage is,
tactics is pretty self explanitory
_________________
Mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets

I like damage as much as the next guy.. its part of the game.. something to do with pushing your toys to destruction..

But I dont want to see people building barely-mobile ultra-powerful weapon bots that crawl around the arena and are nearly classed as an arena hazard either. thats why the aggression and control points are there..

Anyone can build a hand-grenade robot that dishes out king hits, you just spin something big and heavy really fast. The challenge then comes in making it hold together for an entire competition and being able to deliver your weapon to your opponent effectively.

I think that over-emphasising damage would unbalance the equation, discourage flippers, clamps, scoops, wedges and other "control" bots, and just turn it into a spinner-fest.

I think some of the american competitions had/have what they call the "DC" judging.. damage and control (or tactics if you prefer). I dont recall the conclusions on whether the competitors liked these categories in the end or not though..

You could have a look at the BattleBots/RFL Delphi Forums and search for "DC Judging" if you're interested.
_________________
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people

quote:

---

Originally posted by Valen:
dads idea for judging
2 categories
damage and tactics.

---

this is off topic from the main stream convo at the moment.. but i think that any type of judging to discourage weaponless bots just wont work

some of us sad types will always build them .
_________________
www.demon50s.com - Minimoto parts
http://www.youtube.com/user/HyzerGlen - Videoooozzz

quote:

---

we cooled off on plan-C because a) valves are spensive, and b) its "damage" isnt spectacular, and is far too likley to bust up valuablle bits inside the oponents bot, we dont want to go punching holes in speed controllers and batteries, it isnt entertaining, and thats what this is about.
the coloseum would have sucked if the combatants had pistols.

---

I dont think Reboot did anything wrong. Am sure most would rather keep fighting if they can when damaged.
Losing one side is going to keep happening so it comes down to how you overcome it or hide it, if u can.

Reboot was making a good comeback before this happened so it was at a critical time to happen with 30 seconds left as Reboot owned the previous 45 seconds no problemo and had stopped Plan Bs weapon.
With 30 seconds left and having Plan B in the wall it could have changed the result but it broke its own belt and Plan B got out of there and stayed cautious till the end with only one impact between them after the belt broke.

In the end I thought they made a good decision for a good fight.
_________________
Bots that do not destroy you, only make you stronger.

[Ok Aaron its 10’30pm I have just got home and I check the forum to find this

quote="teamvertex"] Don't want to be heavy on Reboot here, but if I had lost one side of my drive and couldn't attack, I wouldn't even think about debating that I should have won, even if I tore a lot of parts off the opponent.

[/quote

Just where are you going with this? If you are daring to suggest that anyone on the Rotwang team said or did anything to the judges concerning this fight you are way out of line!!
Once the belt went Rob knew he was in trouble but that doesn’t mean he has to tap out.
Reboot is a tough customer to attack when it can spin with the drum still working.
The ridiculous placement of the time clock where the competitors and judges couldn’t see it possibly didn’t help in a situation like this.

I don’t know who judged the fight, Originally Brett had given me to understand that Lindsay aka Damage would be judging both days but as probably everyone that was there knows it is possible that 3 random people were dobbed in to judge with no one in particular given the authority or obligation to count out a disabled bot.

To my knowledge no one has raised even the merest possibility of questioning the outcome of that match.
Plan b won! Ok no argument.
The fact that the judges took a few seconds longer to collect their thoughts than someone was happy with is not the fault of anyone on the Rotwang team!

good call on the clock placement, maybe 2 clocks next time
_________________
www.demon50s.com - Minimoto parts
http://www.youtube.com/user/HyzerGlen - Videoooozzz

quote:

---

Just where are you going with this? If you are daring to suggest that anyone on the Rotwang team said or did anything to the judges concerning this fight you are way out of line!!
Once the belt went Rob knew he was in trouble but that doesn’t mean he has to tap out.
Reboot is a tough customer to attack when it can spin with the drum still working.
The ridiculous placement of the time clock where the competitors and judges couldn’t see it possibly didn’t help in a situation like this.

---

Actually Aaron as I remember it bearing in mind I was in my normal sleep deprived robot tournament grumpy state, the argument between some combination of drivers and judges was at the end of the first Plan B vs. IG Mk2 fight.
I kept well clear but I do recall Brett insisting that Plan B had lost drive and the fight was a knock out.
I somehow thought that someone was claming that Plan B could still move only very slowly.
Perhaps as Brett has the judging sheets it might be possible to find out if this fight ended in a knock out or a judge’s decision .
I hope no one takes offence to anything in this post, It’s just that I am disappointed that some builders might as Aaron apparently did think the Rotwang team might have done something as un sporting as contest a black and white decision as the Reboot Plan B fight.
Naturally we were bitterly disappointed when the belt broke and my tactical advice to Rob to try and wedge Plan B into the wall at the start of the match was a bad call.
He should have just gone him with the drum from the start like he did when he beat Plan B with MiniMower.
All this of course means we will almost certainly have to trek up to Geoff’s shed for some pay back.

quote:

---

Actually Aaron as I remember it bearing in mind I was in my normal sleep deprived robot tournament grumpy state, the argument between some combination of drivers and judges was at the end of the first Plan B vs. IG Mk2 fight.
I kept well clear but I do recall Brett insisting that Plan B had lost drive and the fight was a knock out.
I somehow thought that someone was claming that Plan B could still move only very slowly.

---