After reading the RFL rules wanted to say I completely support everything in it.
Should firstly say this is only my interpretation of what I have read.
I think people should read the rules a few times as they don’t mention Holds but rather they mention Pins and lifts in the same paragraph with the same time limit.
What they do mention is the term Held Pinned (Rule 2.8.3.1).
Only reason I mention this is by definition Skeletor is a robot that Holds you Pinned so why bother trying to separate a Pin from a Hold, Its just adding unnessasry complication and its basially the same Rule Number with the same time limits.
If Skeletor, Scoopy, Pinscher or Sproing (or anyone else actually) held you or pinned you, then by the rules they have 15 seconds to do their thing then a ten second count down begins for them to back off.
They could still do their thing for another 5 or so seconds if they like but if they are still doing damage (or whatever) past the 25 second mark then by the new rules they lose for not showing fair play. I actually support that. Bad sportsmanship should be penalised as the opposite of that is bad behaviour wins fights. Just my opinion.
When robots are seperated they have to back right away so people can regroup and have time to try new strategies if they like.
All this is going to do is improve the fighting and the skill levels for everyone.
The new rules to me simply seem a lot like boxing. Its going to make fighting and tactics more a part of it and also make the fights last longer and be more entertaining. Like boxing it sounds like a ref would be very handy to keep the action going. The ref doesn’t score just keep the fight flowing so its not too boring by robots not being allowed to move.
When boxers get pinned on the ropes the ref will separate them eventually and space them apart as it gets boring and skill levels go down hill if he doesnt. People like to watch a good fight and fighters need room to do their thing.
This sport is only getting faster so if 20 odd seconds is not enough time to safely do your thing then maybe up your voltage or change your gear ratio or just practise, but don’t forget that you have enough time to attack again and again, there are 3 minutes for you so don’t despair if u cant win in 30 seconds.
The RFL rules might not even be applied locally but the general idea of encouraging a fair and entertaining fight is good. You can still have lots of damage in there as well as encouraging more tactics.
Anyways that’s just my opinion. _________________ Bots that do not destroy you, only make you stronger.
A ref seperates the fighters and keeps the fight going. That is a good thing.
But to me, especially in a oil-sport (blood sport for machinery), every measure should be taken to remove judges.
Judges s-ck, let the fights decide.
This set of rules should be tacked onto the construction rules.
Just my 2 cents worth.... _________________ There is no such thing as excessive carnage.
Fri Feb 17, 2006 7:54 pm
Rotwang Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic
One of there ideas; 2.8.8 is significantly different from our way of doing things and would be a big incentive to cluster bot builders. Any thoughts?
Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:21 am
Knightrous Site Admin
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW
I think rule 2.8.8.8 is a good rule. Gives people a reason to build a cluster bot and keeps them on a fair playing field IMHO.
I'm not too happy with the rule 2.2/2.3 Double Elimination. I disagree with allowing the winner of the losers tree straight into the finals against the winners tree finalist. You might as well run two trees (East & West) and have the finalists of each tree fight for 1st.
At HOC, we run a double elimination setup, but it's slightly different. The winner of our losers tree is allowed back over into the semis of the winners, not directly into the grand finals. This means the losers tree winner will have had to win at least 1-2 battles in the loosers side to get back to the winners side to face robots that have only had 1 battle.
IIRC, this also happened at the Marayong 2004 Tag Team. Nick and Myself (Basilisk & Annihilation) lost there first match, went into the losers tree, won 2-3 matches, came back to th winners tree into the semi finals and we were defeated by El Bravo & Sorry.
Rule no 2.8.8. states that now a multibot has to be completly disabled to be counted out, so that means one section could be immobile and the other keep fighting... what if one was just a.. say... rolling chassis? _________________ ( •_•)
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3842
Location: Queensland near Brisbane
2.8.8. Special Considerations for Multi-Bots Robots consisting of physically separate, independently controllable segments are referred to as multi-bots. As long as at least one of a multi-bot’s segments is still able to show movement when requested to do so, that combatant is still considered “alive”. To score a knock-out against a multi-bot, [all] of the multi-bot’s segments must be incapacitated or eliminated.
How would a rolling chasis show movement? _________________ So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems
Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:44 pm
dyrodium Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 6476
Location: Sydney
The other robot in the multibot pushs it? _________________ ( •_•)
Joined: 31 May 2004
Posts: 3160
Location: Melbourne, Australia
What dummy wrote that rule ?
I mean I'd like to see more multi-bots too, but "show movement", "incapacitated", "eliminated" ??
So if my otherwise "incapacitated" robot can still twitch a servo (movement), it is still "alive" unless the opponent manages to "Eliminate" it ??
eliminate: (To completely destroy (something) so that it no longer exists.)
I think I'll just have a robot drop a bunch of super-balls and that will count as a moving multibot that will be impossible to eliminate. _________________ Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people
Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:45 pm
Glen Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 9481
Location: Where you least expect
So it was 30 seconds then 15 and a 10 count and now it’s 10 seconds and a un quantified do it now or else.
SPARC Match Rules v1.0
“Pinning/Lifting:
Any robot pinning or lifting their opponent may only continue to pin or lift them for 10
seconds at a time. After 10 seconds has elapsed the robot in control must release the
opposing robot. If the robot in control is not able to release the opposing robot then the
match will be halted and the robots will be separated.
“Release” is defined as complete physical separation such that both robots are able
to freely move away from their current location.
Refusal to comply with the referees request to release the opponent when the robots
are not stuck together will result in forfeit of the match.”
Just wont to clarify that the referee is going to do the timing?
Is the 10 seconds an audible count?
Just controlling the bots hard enough for me without being responsible for accurate time keeping. _________________ Satisfaction is proportional to effort and results.
Sat Sep 12, 2015 7:44 pm
Nick Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 11802
Location: Sydney, NSW
The ref is meant to do the timing - if they forget, you get a free pass until the bots separate naturally or someone remembers to count . _________________ Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum