arena building

american roboteer · Post by **american roboteer** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 9:26 pm

Winning most certainly is everything but you dont have to take it seriously to have fun.
Otherwise what is the point of "Combat Robots" just dont fight if you dont want to win. How much fun would that be?

As for the inclosed arenas the wedge would still be utilized always has been always will. RW had a pit so wedges where used but BB didnt still wedges used though. Making no drops would make faster and more powerful wedges to do internal shock damage rather than push.

Through all the rambling winning is everthing and you cant fight Cityhall (aka wedges)

Post by **BeligerAnt** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:36 pm

Remember a pusher is much much simpler (and cheaper) to build than anything with an active weapon. The 50% drop-off allows a pusher to be a viable robot and keeps the "minimum technology level" fairly low.

Otherwise, the minimum level increases year on year to the extent that newcomers are effectively excluded - it seemed to me this was what happened with RW, there were more and more complex robots and less and less new teams each year. This is not necessarily a good or sustainable thing.

There has been much debate about including a pit in an antweight arena, but the arena isn't really big enough to take a pit. Making the arena bigger goes against the whole idea of being able to stick it in the back of a car and set up an event with little prior planning.

A while ago PeteC and I thought about drop-down arena walls like on BattleBots(?), but it relies on having the time and money...

I don't believe that it is practical to build an antweight "Ram-bot" that can cause significant damage just by ramming an opponent. Whilst it is practical at heavyweight, it just does not scale, even to featherweight.

Rhys · Post by **Rhys** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:07 pm

I don't think cost would really be the issue, it would be more to do with the design. You can pick up pretty decent micro servos for under a tenner, which would be fine for a flipper. And as for difficulty, surely one of the best things about ants is the improvements and new designs that you can make. Who can honestly say that they haven't vastly improved their robots since they started? Take josh as an example. His ants have improved considerably since he started, and he's only 11 (correct me if I'm wrong Josh

). So I'm sure others could do the same.

As for the pusher not being an option with an enclosd arena, I think a pusher could easily put another ant over a 0.5" wall. They'd just have to be better designed. And I don't think thats a bad thing. Also, who's to say a good pusher wouldn't win a judges descison? That would not only encourage better design, but encourage better driving skills. I just think the idea of someone turning up with a simple, low pusher, and having an immediate advantage over a well engineered robots is wrong. Surely it shouldn't all be about pushing power?

...it just does not scale, even to featherweight

Clearly never saw KatRip taking my feather apart then

Remote-Controlled Dave · Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:06 am

I'm not against a fully enclosed arena, I'm for it. As its not really practical though, an enclosed arena with small enough walls or less of a drop-off zone than 50% could be talked about. How about a quarter drop-off zone or something?
However, why not "be creative" and build something thats better than a "low wedge" with our current rules, or something that's ment to directly combat them. No design is completely flawless to 100% of its competitors, it seems the people who have a problem with low wedges are the people who have an ant that can be best combated by them, same reason I like to avoid fighting DBA if I can, cos its bound to beat me, but I don't think a rule change is in order. Every single robot can be beaten by another one out there, its more about the luck of the draw than whether theres a drop-off zone or not. People take chances with spinners knowing there will be a drop-off zone. If you're worried about ricocheting out, then build something that wont.
And no, winning is not everything. If it was I certainly wouldn't bother

Marco Roberts · Post by **Marco Roberts** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:16 am

I really like the idea of a fully enlclosed arena, which opens up into a 50% drop off arena after a period of time. This is because sure pushers do have a considerable advantage but on the other hand maybe not. Spinners oftern nock bots out of the arena, also the most won champion pete waller specialises in spinners so that says as much.
A constant fully enclosed arena would eliminate many many roboteers, due to just getting trashed by spinners, since the robot is now useless. Not a good idea considering ant weights need as many contestants as possible.

If the arena was fully enclosed for around 30 seconds that would mean decent combat. Also showing all bots having to survive against a spinner (including other spinners).

But to be honest, I think we shouldnt go too over board. We should build the robots around the rules, not the rules around the robot.

quote from earlier

just making the walls .5" but fully enclosed would mean the weaponless wedges should get creative instead of... well.... staying weaponless.

This just sounds like the perfect dba arena. No pesky getting pushed off, and from seen videos, when you hit things they are usually frown 5" above the ground

Cavecrusher · Post by **Cavecrusher** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:13 am

damn, he's smart

anyway, the MarineAntWars arena idea, the one with the droppable sides sounds like a good.

Craig_Anto3 · Post by **Craig_Anto3** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:32 am

Gary mate get to a few Roaming robots events feather ram bots are leathal, 25-40mph robots leave u with more than a scratch off ur paint.
Anto XP1HP put holes in PeteW arena walls when i first built it jus ram an slam (new motto

) but this is off topic.
Everyone thinks I'm gonna say no to a fully enclosed arena right???

WRONG I'd love to fight in a battlebox so long as i have a pit i'm happy.

Remote-Controlled Dave · Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:51 pm

Marco summed up everything I was tryna say really well, and I agree with what Craig is saying.
Is anyone up to the challenge of making a Marin Ant Wars - type arena then? Just to try things out with. The shutter for the pit could even be manual, just pull a door away from an enclosed area.

PS, Craig, cant wait for this new anto to compete. Not been so excited about seeing an ant in action before

Marco Roberts · Post by **Marco Roberts** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:17 pm

im up for building an arena
I had an idea for using decent webcams to shoot a ant eye view

Andrew_Hibberd · Post by **Andrew_Hibberd** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:10 am

Intersting conversation, just got back from uni.

I have been thinking that i am going to make my own arena. My original plan was to buy the AWBots arena, however i think i can make something better. The idea is an octigol arena - 4 sides are against the side of the octagon, this means 50% enclosure to the arena. The corners then have 2 walls (about 2" high) from each side making a sort of football goal in each corner. So 25% wall and 25% drop off. This means that all robots: spinners, flippers and wedges would have to have more control to achieve victory. Spinners would have to 'aim' robots towards a corner. Pushers would have to aim to get the other ant through the 30cm wide gaps in each corner. Flippers will be able to flip other robots over the 2" high wall if they can.

I believe that this will make fights a little longer and increase the skill required to win the fights. As well as almost complying by the arena rules. The size of the walls could be reduced to give a 50% drop off zone.

What do people think?

Pictures to follow, in a week or so.