Increasing numbers

Please post all questions and answers in here. This way people can easily see if someone else has the same problem.

Moderators: administrator, BeligerAnt, petec

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

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by Shakey » Tue Jul 03, 2018 6:49 pm

I prefer option 2, hell would make my AWS's easier. I think paired with an expansion to the clusters walkers for last slot and a move to 2 rollers + 1 Else top actually make it effective and really bring variety. I get that this kinda hits a lot of 3 bit teams hard though.

5) I accept I am biased on this one, I think if this route was explored rather than an outright ban simply a limit to 1 kit/prebuilt. They do have a place in competition and are doing great at bringing people in and giving them confidence to move on to their own bots where they may not have even attempted the hobby before.

Hope I did positive compromise right :P
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!

User avatar
DieGracefullyRobotics
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:39 am

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by DieGracefullyRobotics » Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:30 pm

I'm absolutely not an advocate of 5) personally. I just flagged it up because it was mentioned before as a possible option.
Dave
Die Gracefully Robotics - Barely Even a Proper Team.

Zanbots
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:01 pm

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by Zanbots » Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:14 pm

The idea of bot number 4 being a reserve.
I expect that means 4 is out given large numbers.

So here's a nice half baked suggestion.

Could it be viable to be swapped in later. In the scenario there is a damaged robot on the team?

This is not a perfect suggestion.
It feels a bit unfair in some regards and I'd hate to see people swap because they feel they would loose with bot 1 but not bot 4 so swap them even though 1 is fine.

It would allow us to potentially see all 4 of a team enter and ease frustrations and delays when people are suddenly unready or suddenly withdraw.
Jeremy Hall
Ants; 24601
Oh, Baby!
B-Bot
Valjean

Zanbots
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:01 pm

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by Zanbots » Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:48 pm

I would like to suggest that moving the entry requirements regarding clusters and walkers would slightly reduce numbers and add extra variety.

I suggest a 3 robot team should contain at least 1 walker or cluster.
A 4 robot team should contain at least 1 walker and at least 1 cluster.
Jeremy Hall
Ants; 24601
Oh, Baby!
B-Bot
Valjean

User avatar
DieGracefullyRobotics
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:39 am

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by DieGracefullyRobotics » Wed Jul 04, 2018 8:35 am

Do you mean swapping one robot out for another mid-comp? Then it's not a fair comp. If your robot progresses, you have to deal with any damage it takes along the way as part of the challenge. If you have the option to swap it out for a reserve machine, then it's completely unfair.

I don't personally mind the idea of limiting the 3rd and 4th team slots but it doesn't help with numbers, just variety. People will still just build to the limits. Also, we are talking in the committee meeting about possibly allowing more unusual robot types to qualify for 4th slot allowance, so it may not just be the 2 in future.
Dave
Die Gracefully Robotics - Barely Even a Proper Team.

AntRoboteer
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by AntRoboteer » Wed Jul 04, 2018 3:30 pm

Really good idea starting this thread now before the situation occurs and great to see all of the positive thoughts on how to work things. My thoughts would be as follows:

Option 1 does sound moderately fair (although a little harsh of course to those who see the event later than others) and the event organisers can already choose to do this right now if they wish (such as the concerns for AWS 55 when the number of teams was steadily increasing).

Option 2 does sound the better option out of the bunch if numbers are getting high. A potential way to work it could be people would sign up their possible 4 entries and then on the day a decision on whether to drop down to 3 would be made based on what actually turns up. Then, a drop down to 3 entries maximum would be announced and the teams would say which one they would eliminate during the tech check phase (meaning low overhead as well). The question is whether it would be 3 rollers or 2 rollers + 1 walker/cluster.

For me, option 3 would be the worst option out of the bunch as I think we should do everything possible to keep possible team entries same (3 rollers + 1 walker/cluster) in as many cases as possible to allow for the variety the AWS events bring. One of the things to take into account is that AWS 55 was in a very central location (unusual taking into account history of venues) and therefore many more people than usual were able to make it, hence the high numbers. However, when the next AWS comes up in Bristol area, I reckon sign-ups shall fall back to a usual sort of level as it is naturally less accessible. Hence, option 3 (limiting sign ups to 3 entries in general) does not really seem necessary at the moment and I think it'll take a while to reach that point.

Option 4 gets all the robots processed and in much better time; if the organiser is up for it, it would likely be a consideration. Could be issues raised about the arena the robots are competing in affecting the outcomes of some fights though (due to weapon types being potentially more/less effective in some arenas).

On option 5:
Shakey wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 6:49 pm
5) I accept I am biased on this one, I think if this route was explored rather than an outright ban simply a limit to 1 kit/prebuilt. They do have a place in competition and are doing great at bringing people in and giving them confidence to move on to their own bots where they may not have even attempted the hobby before.
I think this is actually very clever and should be investigated as it is very much in the spirit of what the standard antweights are all about (getting beginners into the hobby). I agree that an outright ban seems a little unfair.

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3699
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by peterwaller » Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:12 pm

I agree that banning kit robots would not only be bad but virtually unworkable.
There are many instances of people building a robot for other people often parents for children which you could argue was effectively like someone getting a kit built one. Unless you insist on proof that a robot was made by the driver you could hardly enforce it.
I think a kit is often a good way for someone to get into the hobby if they have no robot or even construction skills.

User avatar
DieGracefullyRobotics
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 7:39 am

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by DieGracefullyRobotics » Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:22 am

I agree with all that and think 5) can be pretty much discarded as an option.
Dave
Die Gracefully Robotics - Barely Even a Proper Team.

User avatar
tomboys
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:17 pm
Location: Milton Keynes

Re: Increasing numbers

Post by tomboys » Thu Aug 02, 2018 8:31 am

How about you can enter 4 robots:
1 - roller
2 - roller
3 - walker/cluster
4 - roller (reserve)
Tom Boys (Team Tomb)
Up the Antie - Flipper
Push Comes to Shove - Shovebot

Post Reply