Rule wish list

A discussion forum for proposed changes to the AWS rules

Moderators: administrator, BeligerAnt, petec

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:03 pm

When I have done tech checking, I admit it has just been weight and size. However, I'd be happy to add the name tag and to check whether to see if they have a switch or removeable link/way of unplugging (though I don't know the last time there was an ant that couldn't do this, maybe it goes without saying?)

We seem to have done ok without failsafes up until now. It is my understanding that most 2.4ghz TXs and RXs failsafe now anyway? When was the last time (if ever) that an ant caused an issue due to losing radio contact and not being able to failsafe?
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
Simon Windisch
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Simon Windisch » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:35 pm

Ok, so we've got one person saying that we shouldn't tech check failsafes because most robots failsafe and another person saying that we shouldn't tech check failsafes because some robots don't failsafe.

Is anyone saying that that we shouldn't tech check failsafes because robots are safe without them?

razerdave
Posts: 1534
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:40 pm
Location: Carterton, Oxfordshire
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by razerdave » Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:52 pm

Only issue I ever had with failsafing was Baby Hell and Stewie on 40MHz, Got stabbed and Stewie Nom'ed my finger.

Pete: Didn't realise your cluster had the cluster name too, I will bear in mind to have mine on in future, but this last AWS was not my usual entry :P.

Dave: I'd like to change my original thoughts on the cluster rule. You should have to take out all the parts, I agree. I think what a lot of people are finding hard to accept that because that little car was buzzing around, your cluster won even though the much larger part had been taken out, and that it could have been an ant in its own right. The americans do it with the HW's/SHW's, have one massive part and 1 or 2 smaller parts that won't scratch a damn thing.

But, TBH, thats the rules. I'm not a huge fan of the 'Antweight and little car' types of cluster, but thats irrelevent.

Simon: Its hard to determin. Robots of any size can be danergous under no control (accidently nom'ed fingers, blades, etc). I'd rather robots be failsafe checked just so we know which ones need to be kept turned on when taken out.

User avatar
Shakey
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Shakey » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:28 pm

I think at the very least spinners should have the failsafe tested to see if the blade stops when signal is lost.
Nuts And Bots - For all your components and ready built antweights!

Alex Shakespeare - Team Shakey / Nuts And Bots / Team Nuts:
AWS 44, 45, 49, 51 & 55 Winner - Far too many robots!

Bodge Job
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Bodge Job » Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:13 pm

I think, for a clusterbot to be eliminated, all of the botlets have to be out, or they loss there advantage, and even if they do put a nearly ant weight and a mini rc car, it would be no harder to fight than a normal ant weight, as you have a slight advantage over the nearly any weight, so you could defet it more easily, and how hard is it to push a little rc car out?

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:03 pm

Exactly. I agree. Though a fair few people proved pushing a small car out to be strangely difficult on Saturday! Maybe they should just practice driving :wink:
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
Simon Windisch
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Simon Windisch » Tue Nov 15, 2011 12:14 am

And don't forget, once you have put the big robot out you have basically won, even if you only victory spin until the end of three minutes.

Andrew_Hibberd
Posts: 1295
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2004 12:00 am
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Andrew_Hibberd » Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:32 pm

Just read Dave's augments on the previous page. Its a much better argument than 50% 66% etc to have to eliminate all the cluster parts. So I guess I am converted to say all parts must be eliminated rather than a given weight. The only other thing is we need to be faster at counting down botlets when immobile.

This brings me to another interesting point me and Pete W were talking about. We don't see many people trying walkers. I think I counted 2 at the last AWS which is too low IMO. The rules allowing a cluster over a walker are getting more clusters/fleas but I think we should encourage more walkers.

What about:

3 rollers or walkers
& 1 cluster or walker

or
2 rollers
1 roller or walker
& 1 cluster or walker

Any thoughts on this?
TEAM GEEK!

User avatar
joey_picus
Posts: 1137
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:51 pm
Location: Lancaster, Lancashire
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by joey_picus » Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:36 pm

I have to admit I was unaware you were only allowed one walker in your team before; have I understood that right?
Joey McConnell-Farber - Team Picus Telerobotics - http://picus.org.uk/ - @joey_picus
"These dreams go on when I close my eyes...every second of the night, I live another life"

Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule wish list

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave » Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:27 pm

There was nothing in the previous ruling to stop anyone entering 4 walkers, if that's what they wanted to do. It was only the 4th member that HAD to be either a walker or a clusterbot. The other three could be roller, walker, cluster, or whatever.

Since introducing the cluster rule, the number of people attempting to build walkers (or shufflers) has decreased, but the amount of people building fleaweights has increased a lot.

I would love to see more people attempting walkers, however I don't really get what you're suggesting Andy. I don't see how your new version differs from the current model?
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

Locked