|
|
|
|
|
|
Glen
Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 9481
Location: Where you least expect
|
5 minutes was how we all started off, it was just too long and the matches started to get tedious anyway.
quote:
If you really dont like the present system and want to change things, then the next best solution I've heard is simply to have X number of judges who simply say "I thought Bot A won" without having to justify their decision based on any criteria
thats what weve been doing at marayong from day 1, it seems to work well enough.
well as ive said if anyone ever bothered to look up the battlebots system of judging a swear blind its as good as you could possibly have it, ive never really seen a wrong call in all the battlebots matches ive seen and heres the criteria of it taken from "battlebots the official guide"
JUDGING AND VERDICT
if the bout goes the entire three minutes without either bot being incapacitated, the outcome is decided by a panel of three judges seated at arena ringside. judges score each match in three categories: aggression, damage and strategy.
AGGRESSION: is a measure of how often you attack your oppenent, how boldy and how severly.
DAMAGE: is just what it sounds like: how much damage you inflicted on your oppenent, either directly or indirectly with the arena hazards. a weaponless robot that successfully and consistently pushes its opponents under the pulverizors can outscore a robot with a ferocious weapon.
[b]STRATEGY: measures how successfully you carry out a game plan that exploits your robots strenghts against your opponents weaknesses, while protecting your robots weaknesses against your robots strengths. (note: running away does not count as strategy).
the first two are judged completely equally so the spinner peeps and pushy peeps are happy, and the last one is just a generic form of judging that favours no particular type but covers aspects like plan b smashing scoopys arm so it couldnt saw its thin lid, and me jamming myself under ballistics flipper so he couldnt flip us, strategy is impartial to what type of weapon you have, it just cares about how you use it.
now where is the problem with that.
_________________
www.demon50s.com - Minimoto parts
http://www.youtube.com/user/HyzerGlen - Videoooozzz
|
Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:44 pm |
|
|
Spockie-Tech
Site Admin
Joined: 31 May 2004
Posts: 3160
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nick:
The way this discussion is headed, Jolt, Plan-B, Orbit, and reboot should either retire or go "totally offensive" as the only real way to win.
Not at all.. I think you misunderstood what I meant Nick..
I wasnt implying that a spinner has to knockout its opponent to win, just that
if it doesnt want to be judged on its driving and agressiveness, but more on its damage, then it needs to do enough damage to KO its opponent
. If it cant do that, then it will also have to do well in the "driving" categories to have a chance..
quote:
By that logic a wedge or ram that scores by control or imobilisation isn't doing enough if they can't permanently imobilise their opponent by propping them up or tossing them out of the arena.
If they dont want to be judged by the DCSA categories, then that is correct, they need to KO someone. But I have no problem with someone winning through a combination of SCA even if the damage points are low. My responses were meant to say that if you want the judging to be more about damage than the other areas, then do more damage.. 
quote:
They shouldn't be penalised but the attacker should be rewarded for inflicting that damage.
As they are.. thats what the damage points are for. I'm arguing that damage should not be
over
-emphasized against the other categories, unless it is sufficient to result in a KO.
quote:
Should Singularity have won just because it was still moving?
Not at all.. Just being alive at the end doesnt mean you won, but it does mean that the other bot
didn't
inflict enough damage for a KO, so there is no reason for the damage that was caused to outweigh the other categories.
quote:
We need something that evens out the field so that no one style of bot has an unfair advantage.
I like the current judging standards.. If someone can come up with something better I'm open to change, but I havent heard anything I like the sound of yet..
_________________
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people
|
|
Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:51 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RoboWars Australia Forum Index
-> State Specific Information
. A good dent (damage category) is equal to a good wedge (control category) and driving is largely independent of the bot. Hurrah - its all settled! 
