How Could I Improve...

True but even the best robot lose. Think about it. for example Chaos 2 in series 4 strength stated: Undefeated and the weaknesses said co2 flipper or some sort of hydraluic promblems. And beside he a very good robot but that doesnt mean he cant have a weak spot already all he did win 2 series in the series 3 and 4. I not saying its unfair I just saying it makes a much better sense to reveal the strength and weakness. And what Im really trying to say that is a bit fealful not showing the strength and weakness.

(Message edited by Bartmanhomer on March 06, 2008)

Also it stops tournament writers knocking you out on a technicality they found when looking for strengths and weaknesses.

True. But that how the way it works. Its not like their being biased about it.

Vapourbots don€™t have rules, so Nitrogen and heated canisters are legal unless the tournament writer specifies its use / says to follow the FRA rules. As we are using the FRA Forum, we should be using the FRA Rules€¦ but each to their own.

Sakura: Other than batteries, it looks fine to me. Weird, but fine. :proud:

Nitro-Gene 4.0: Loose two of the LEM130€™s. Battery details probably needed. Do not state weakness. Which brings me swiftly on too€¦

I do not recall a tournament where everyone has been forced to give every one of their vapourbots a strength and weakness. If so, then it was stupid. You find strengths and weaknesses by reading the stats, it doesn€™t take long. Paul, why does it annoy you that I do not hand out weaknesses for me to be screwed over with in tournaments? Is it because you cannot find any weaknesses to exploit yourself? If so then that€™s just good for me, because it means I have designed a vapourbot to do what it is meant to. WIN!

If a writer cannot find a strength or weakness to be able to write a battle, then they shouldn€™t be allowed to write them. Psyclonised does not have a speed because I have never been asked to give one. One a day a tournament writer will check the stats before putting up the draw. That is a mistake on my part, so I apologise and will add a speed in due course. But Salamander III won The Crash & Burn Tournament with an un-powered disc. Paul, your vapourbots do not have any batteries to drive them. So does it really matter? :proud:

Mentorn may have asked competitors to put weaknesses down. But there is a reason why Robot Wars has not had a series for several years - Mentorn suck. Also, do you think roboteers made it their mission to parade around the pits telling their fellow competitors that their robot was made of wood, or did not have a self-righting mechanism? No? So why should vapourbots be any different?

I could not agree more with Aaron. When did you last see Osama Bin Laden with a neon sign welded to his head saying, €œcome and get me€? When did you last buy some glue that says €œmay not stick€? When did you last buy an umbrella that says, €œmay not be waterproof€? It just does not happen.

A key sentence came up in this discussion - €œI also dont design robots to have weaknesses€. Which is exactly right, if you know your robot has a weakness, would you not try to hide this? Or, even more logically, would you not try to ensure your robot does not have any weaknesses? Why have a weakness saying €œtoo slow€ when you could just make the robot faster? It just makes me cringe. If your robot has weaknesses, you hide them, prevent them, or scrap the design.

I€™m not here to make up the numbers; I€™m here to win. So why would I intentionally make a design with weaknesses? I don€™t want a perfectly good vapourbot to be screwed out of a tournament because it got pitted for having €œlittle traction€ or flipped OOTA because it had €œhigh ground clearance€. Surely if you have any intention of winning, the last thing you would do is tell your opponent how to beat you. I can see no sense in that what so ever.

I€™m not saying my vapourbots don€™t have weaknesses. I€™m just saying it defeats the object of researching and designing if all you are going to do is say how to beat it. Although feel free to point out any weaknesses with my vapourbots. I would be glad to know them. :) If you can€™t figure out how to beat something, that is not my problem.

Wooo€¦ I feel much better now. :rofl:

Its not really much of a problem, its just the best reason I could think of for putting down strengths and weaknesses...Im more here to have fun though, because if everyone was here to win wed all be designing hardox bricks and uber-spinners with vacuum systems.

And for the record, I think wood is very unfairly underrated as armour...

So what the big deal then? My robot have a strength and weakness and I really dont care how the outcome goes. You win the match, you win the match, you lose the match, you lose the match. I just here to have fun and enjoy myself.

AJ, if your robot have a strength and weakness why not just post it? Im not against you nor that Im not even obessessed of beating you but I really think its fair that every robot show their strength and weakness.

Why? As I said, because I think it defeats the object of what we are doing here. Telling your opponent how to beat you takes away all the credability and work you have put into a design. If I truely beleive my vapourbots had any weaknesses, I would have fixed them. So there is no purpose of me trying to nitpick for weaknesses. That is everyone elses job.

I will be looking forward to your opinions on my upcoming virtully indestructable vapourbot. :proud:

I dont think its wouldnt ruin your whole creditibily. But hey dont take my word for it.

I think the issue is not that robots arent supposed to not have weaknesses its that a good design should have other things mean the weakness doesnt matter.

To take an extreme example - Aarons gyrate robot had card armour I believe but it wasnt as big an issue in that design because it would kill thigns before they got a chance to attack the armour.

At the opposite end of the scale, I designed Achilles progressivly improving with my losses to account for whatever took it out each time where practical. The result? If you include hypotheticals its had six places in the top 3 of tournaments, and ten heat wins. Yet after all that, just as in its very first fight it is going to suck on producing a damage score in a judges decision purely because it doesnt have the means to do it.

When I design a vapour, I design it to make it cool by my view. As a stat writer, your job is essentially to demonstrate and try to persuade the writer that its as cool and awesome as you think it is.

Perhaps its easier to think of them as limitations rather than weaknesses.