Thread for silly questions about rules!

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

That's a brave statement! I disagree entirely. If I had a bot at, say, 88g and my second bot had to be at least 30% the weight of the first, I'd get into a right flap trying to work it out. I guess it could have a chart similar to the one Peter made for the walker/roller cluster thing.

[EpicentrE]

As Pete said in the other thread, we should really be aiming to make any rule changes as simple as possible, not introducing formulas and percentages which - whether easy or not - people will need to calculate.

One simple way to discourage entries consisting of one large robot and one small would be to revert back to judging a clusterbot to have lost if 50% or more of it's botlets (by number, not weight) were eliminated. I honestly can't remember why we changed this in the first place, and although I'm sure there was a good reason, it's still worth considering.

Failing that, we need to work out exactly which situations we want to be allowed and which we don't, and then find the simplest way possible of expressing rules that will make that the case.

My personal opinion is that having one large bot and one small is not an issue. Many people seem to be forgetting that if your robot weighs less than 150g it is at a disadvantage. More weight means more traction, it makes you harder to push, to lift, it will make you fly less far when hit by a spinner, etc. I am of the opinion that if I was to build a 125g robot, I'd rather add 25g of ballast (or bigger batteries, thicker armour, etc.) than have a nano in the arena with me.

The only thing I dislike is entries which are just two people's fleas that were built entirely separately stuffed together and given a silly name. But that's just a personal preference and causes no issues in a competition most of the time so I wouldn't suggest any changes that would disallow this, beyond what we've discussed before to make sure people aren't abusing the system to gain far more entries than they should.

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

The reason the 50% rule was dropped is because Robot Wars dropped it. Robot Wars was the source for that rule and then they dropped it because it didn't make a lot of sense ie. what's the point of building a clusterbot with 2 lighter machines if you lose anyway if only one of them dies? May as well just build one machine. Which is pretty much what you said anyway Scott. But yes, Robot Wars dropped it from extreme series 2 onwards, so it was also dropped from antweights.

I think I've made up my mind on this point. I agree with what Scott says, in so much as I don't think rules should be made just to stop a trend. Clusterbots have enough disadvantages in them to warrant adding more obstacles just because.

[Hogi]

the way I see it, the botlets of a clusterbot make up one complete robot as they enter as one entry and the competition is between robots so reinstating the 50% of cluster eliminated=total elimination rule seems to me to be unfair as you are effectively only really eliminating half a robot. I agree that the lesser weight of clusterbots already puts them at a disadvantage to a single robot. I am still going to build my fifty gram botlet as I want my cluster to be more than just a 125 gram robot and a nano but if others would rather still use nanoweights as cluster partners or indeed even enter six nanos as a clusterbot then I think that's just as fair a thing to do in my mind.

[peterwaller]

I know I am biased having an uneven cluster but I really think trying to come up with new rules to outlaw existing robots without a very good reason is the sort of thing that we would criticise other weight division for doing.
I am just as bad I voted to outlaw toys but now I am thinking it seems to have started a witchhunt of things some people don't like.
What happend to the freindly and helpful bunch that we all claim to be, but on the off chance we do go down this road I want to ban Gaffertape.

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

I think you're right Peter, except for the fact that I didn't suggest it originally because I didn't like it. I use the rule myself and am happy too. I suggested it as I thought it might improve the sport, but as originally stated I was in two minds about it.

[Rapidrory]

As I said before, I don't think uneven clusters are enough of an issue yet to justify a rule about them. Hopefully roboteers take this discussion as an incentive to try something more creative (like dan is doing). I'm considering it, though since I'm just finishing up 4 rollers it will depend on whether my latest grabber thing is underweight enough to cluster something with... Next AWS I'll try be more original

Toys were banned partly because AWSs are already getting to the point where there are too many entries to run a tournament in a day; considering the last Reading AWS had almost 100 robots entered, and I've sold around 80 ESCs since then, this year's AWS could be a little tight.. little things keep getting suggested to try and fit it all in, but at the current rate of growth something more drastic is going to need to happen soon... bit of a tangent I know, but just another thing that could do with discussing in advance..

[limpet]

Some sort of qualifying rounds going on concurrently then on to the main event with the qualified ones.
You could even do it with the current set up by running two or three arenas with specific groups in each, then go to one arena afterwards for the group winners.

[EpicentrE]

We've discussed that before, and it raises a couple of issues;

> Venues will need to be bigger to accommodate the extra arenas
> You'll need more arenas (and with the average arena size increasing the costs and complications of constructing and transporting them are higher than they've been before)
> You'll need more judges, organisers, and people calling fights to keep things running smoothly
> Unless the arenas are identical, people will feel unfairly treated if they end up fighting in an arena which more plays to their opponents strengths (for example, I'd rather not fight Anticide in an arena with lots of drop off and low walls, and I'd rather not fight a spinner in an arena with very few pits or drop-offs)

Three things that would definitely speed up events are;

> Dropping the warm-up competition. This is a shame, but I think it's probably becoming necessary. However, losing the warm-up competition may well leave more time at the end for extra events, so I think overall we won't see a decrease in amount of fights people can have
> Doing the sign-ups faster. This has a few facets; firstly, roboteers need to sign up accurately and on time. Hopefully the new sign-up system will help any issues relating to this. Secondly, EOs should be looking to get people signed-in and tech checked as soon as possible after they arrive, rather than waiting until most people have arrived to start trawling through the entries. You can assign an extra person to this if the EO is still busy with other aspects of the event. Thirdly, we need to set a strict cut-off time. It's OK if you're a bit late; we know traffic and roadworks are a pain. But if there's no sign or contact from someone by a pre-decided time it should be assumed that they are not attending. A phone number of an EO or someone who's involved of the running of the event should be given on the forums so that, in the event that a competitor is running late, they can call ahead and let the EO know to include their entries in the draw.
> Doing the draw faster. As much as I love Dave Lawrie, doing the draw and creating the brackets manually takes far too long. EOs should definitely be using Antlog or some similar tool for this.

I failed on basically all of the above on my last event which is why it overran so much. I know the above sounds demanding, but I think it's necessary to start being more strict and organised at the beginnings of events as the number of entries increases. I know all of the above are certainly things I'll be doing if and when I run another event in the future.

Also people need to be realistic if they're not ready when called for a fight. If you're called to fight, and you need anything more than 10 seconds before you're ready, tell them to call the next fight. If fights are being called well, those people are probably already waiting at the arena ready to go. It wastes everyone's time if we're standing around waiting while you go "almost ready, just a little longer, I'm almost done" etc. rather than just allowing us to run the next fight.

[Remote-Controlled Dave]

I think the speeding up of events thing is being blown slightly out of proportion. We have overrun twice, once was the Reading one with the two rooms where the final stages had to be rushed, and the other where Scott had to withdraw and leave early (though the rest of the event ran fine and even Scott admits his double booking was a bit ambitious). There is a whole list of stuff we can do to speed these up.

1) setting a sign in deadline and an event start deadline and making it strict. "If you're not there and ready by so and so time, you'll miss the draw". Slightly harsh maybe, but some people don't half dawdle! If you get delayed or stuck there is no reason you can't phone ahead and say "I'm still coming, please include my robots in the draw" then we can put the fights back as much as possible.

2) Automated draws. Not quite ready to be available to all people yet, I still can't work it, but getting there, and saves a LOT of time.

3) Smaller arenas. Not a popular solution maybe, but a solution nonetheless. Smaller arenas equal shorter fights. Of course there are other factors here too (no one wants 90% of fights ending cos of driver error) but I would say Peter's arena with the new extra walls is a perfectly acceptable fighting surface whilst considerably shortening fights.

4) No warm up. Simply no time for it anymore.

5) Moving fleas and nanos to the end of the day. As much as we need to be running them, these competitions should take secondary place. If left til nearer the end of the AWS they can be ran whenever the majority of their combatants has nothing left to do, freeing up a lot of time. Last time the fleas alone took an hour and a half, this can be time moved to run parallel with the later stages of the AWS, or after if there is only one arena.
If you plan to enter multiple events with the same robot, that's your choice, but if you get mangled in the AWS then you can withdraw from the other comp before the draw is done, thus only affecting yourself.

6) Event organisers acting more authoritative. This one is a bit...controversial maybe, but if you're going to run an event, you need to do more than simply mumble the next three fights into a microphone no one can hear. It is not people's job to stop all they are doing and listen to you, it is your job to make sure they hear you. Now you all know I'm able to project my voice across a room (AWSs are the only time in life I am known as loud) but that's what you need to be doing, three/four fights in advance! The last event was slowed whenever we were waiting for someone who wasn't even aware they were supposed to be going in, despite the fight being called several times. Shouting is essential! If you'd like me to do it, just ask, but you need that degree of urgency and authority in place from fight one.

7) Dual arenas. Not always a practical or doable solution but a solution nonetheless.

8) If you need more time to get your robot ready, ask for it! I agree totally with Scott here, too many people go "just a minute!" without being specific.

9) Have the fight order available to see on a secondary source. Again not always possible but a solution.

10) Does anyone really NEED a "lunch break" anymore? This used to be so the committee could meet but that's no longer as possible so why not play it by ear? If you find time is going well after the first few rounds, announce a short break. If time is getting tight, you always get time to shove a sandwich in your face between your own fights, so make your own time to. And don't go off to the pub like Krissy did!

There are 10 easy ways to improve speed at these events, all of them reasonable. By implementing just a few of them we can save a good hour or so, leaving more than enough time to get everything done. The sport is swelling nicely in terms of numbers but we are in no way at dangerous levels yet. We just need to be more conscious of it.