Active Weapon Proposal

I know this caused some unrest amongst competitors when Mentorn implemented such a rule but don€™t bring out the torches and pitchforks yet :)

I€™m posting the following suggestion after discussions with some people have highlighted the need to discover how the general robot community feels and whether there is argument enough to put forward a proposal to the FRA for voting.

Basically€¦

The idea is to introduce an active weapon rule in featherweights. The rest of this post will be in regard to the featherweights as that is the class in which I compete and have the most understanding in. If anyone wishes to propose such a rule for other weight classes, feel free.

The proposal would not govern every event, and as such I guess it may be more up to the event organisers and what they want in their shows than the FRA. But essentially, for UK featherweight events that are flagship events, featherweights wishing to compete must have an active weapon fitted. I know this will lead to such questions as €˜Well what constitutes an active weapon?€™ as you could simply throw on an aluminum-arm wielding drill motor or something but that is an area that could be considered if this proposal was to be favoured or advanced at any stage.
I mention flagship events; the best definition I can give of that right now is events such as the UK FW championships or UK FW tag-team championships (although there is no official requirement for that to be held every year, with it more being for our fun). Now at the moment these are both held by Robo Challenge so I guess you could also say that for full-combat events, all robots competing must have an active weapon. But if that was to change for next year, say if Roaming Robots held a league table championship for featherweights as well as heavies, the idea would be that the ruling would still stand (with the obvious exception that no spinners could run)

Using a typical Robo Challenge UK champs event as an example, any robot wishing to enter the main competition would have to have an active weapon installed. It is, after all, the nationwide championship for the FW weight class. There would be no such rule for people wishing to compete in whiteboard events, as there is no prize money or trophy up for grabs, and also since whiteboards provide a good test platform for new weapons, drive systems or armour upgrades etc.

There is also the understanding that someone building their first robot is going to find it challenging enough to get a robot fully working without having the added challenge of a weapon. But I€™d like to encourage those who move on to their second robot to take the plunge and go for a weapon.

I decided after the 2007 Eurochamps that I wouldn€™t enter my robots into an event again without weapons. This was for two reasons; one, because I got fed up of having nothing to do in a battle other than push and, two, because I kept putting off fitting a weapon because I sometimes couldn€™t be bothered with the added complexity. But making a firm decision to go for active weapons has been great. It provides more of a challenge for me when building, leads to more problem-solving going on in my brain (and that can only be a good thing :lol:) and makes it more fun and interesting to control in the arena. Admittedly the forks that Kaizer had at the UK champs were slow and not very effective, but it meant I stuck to my pledge nonetheless to have an active weapon in my robots.

For those concerned about extra cost, yes, complex weapons such as spinning discs or pneumatic flippers cost a lot to get running effectively. But take a windscreen wiper motor, attach it to the threaded rod from a car scissor jack, wire it up to some micro-switches and you€™ve got yourself a setup that can be used for either a lifter or crusher/grabber (or whatever your innovative mind can create) for a relatively low cost. Combined with bits of scrap, simple pieces of box section metal or low-cost plastics for mechanisms/linkages its quite straightforward to get a simple weapon working, and this is another reason for creating this proposal - so that builders will have to explore and expand their skills if they want to challenge in a competition, but at the same time, being of benefit to them by developing their talents.

From an entertainment point-of-view watching box vs box, especially in the featherweights can get a bit dull (although I€™m sure some people will argue the effectiveness of a high-speed, high-torque rambot). Having two active-weapon robots could increase levels of excitement/anticipation/enjoyment for the audience, providing them with a more memorable experience.

And finally (phew!) without wanting to sound bitter, there are several of us who spend a lot of money on robots with weapons with our aim being to be competitive but also fun to watch, and it can be a bit irritating when a cheap-as-peanuts box on wheels that€™s armoured like a tank and could be built in a weekend comes in and wins by just pushing. Good tactics? Good driver? Perhaps, but if we were all to get fed up and build a similar machine for a fraction of our weaponed robot€™s cost just so we don€™t see our money and time pushed into the pit by a cordless drill, would it be good for the sport? I don€™t think so.

Let€™s remember that its is Robot WARS. Robotic COMBAT. You don€™t send a tank into a warzone to wipe out the enemy, without a cannon. Marc Thorpe didn€™t present his radio controlled vacuum cleaner to people to get his idea for Robot Wars across, he presented his radio controlled vacuum cleaner fitted with a chainsaw (and possibly other lethal implements). So let€™s bring the war back, bring the combat back, instead of playing bumper cars.

And just to summarise; this is not a concrete proposal to be presented to the FRA. This is put to everyone to gauge their opinion on the matter. The main proposal is in regard to competition fights and events, not whiteboards.
If there is an obvious dislike for it, fair enough. If there is support in favour of it, I will consider putting it forward for discussion at a meeting based on the views. And the proposal is open to alteration. I have worded it the way I see it, but every section of it is free to be debated and reworked

Thanks for taking time to read this. Please post your comments, feedback etc so that its possible to gain a picture of how people feel about this.

Many thanks

*gets in early before tidal barrage of scorn and vitriol*

Firstly I have to commend you for being brave enough to post this, it shows that there is some willingness within the community to try and change the dynamics (?) of the sport around to make things more interesting. Also some democratic discourse on the future of the sport is always a good idea, although it can be a bit depressing to read as well :proud:

Personally I've come around to the idea that a robot with a weapon is far more interesting to build and to drive than a robot without a weapon, be that because of the engineering challenge, ambition, or a desire to do something with the other two channels on a 6 channel controller. I can however very much understand the view of those who have built robots which would be affected by this (largely due to Andy and his box) and to be completely honest if the active weapon requirement were introduced across all competition fights at all events I can see the number of featherweights dropping quite a bit and maybe one or two people being discouraged from building - I know builders who have spent three or four years slowly getting a robot together only to find that their almost finished pride and joy might not be able to compete because it's been designed as a passive machine.

Ultimately I think this should be left to the event organisers' discretion - it is their hard work that supports the sport after all and if Jonno or the Youngs or James and Grant feel that having more active weapons would encourage more spectators to attend and increase revenue, then they should be allowed to make it so. Outright instructing all organisers to ban active weapons in competition fights may alienate a few people and would probably not help the FRA's image much, so maybe if such a rule is to be implemented it should be as a strong recommendation rather than a compulsory rule?

Although please don't let this lead to everyone doing yet more rear hinged flippers, we've got enough on the go as it is. </joke>

There's my two pence anyway, let's see where this discussion goes...it'll at least be more beneficial to the sport than banning 40mhz would at least :P

I am all in favour of making this a solid proposal for the flagship events you mentioned.

but if we were all to get fed up and build a similar machine for a fraction of our weaponed robot€™s cost just so we don€™t see our money and time pushed into the pit by a cordless drill

I came so close to doing this after losing a few hundred quid in 10 seconds in a single battle one event but I didn't. I could easily throw hornet in the arena for one battle and not bother repairing it when it gets damaged but those that know me and have seen me in the pits know that this is far from the truth. I spend hours and hours on all my machines and am thoroughly of the opinion that robots should have active weapons.

What about:
FW with active weapons: 13,6 kg max
FW without active weapons: 10 kg max.
This rules out the heavily armered box. And it gives every beginner without active weapon 3,6 kg to build one.

I do not like rules because it limits the creativity. Rules such as the purposed can also be circumvented with ineffective low weight weapons. It is a lot better to alter the circumstances to make the undesired technology ineffective. Rules should be the last resort when everything else has been done.

I do not know how the arenas look that you are using today, but I guess that quite a few got a pit. Without the pit, pushing is a lot less useful.

I am definitely in favor of active weapons.

Have Fun
STB

I do like Marien's proposal. I myself have the very embodiment of a cheap box robot, but it is well under 10kg. I do think, however that here are some robots without active weapons that are frankly more exciting than a robot with a very basic active weapon, for example Pillow Torque. I would, as an onlooker, much rather see Pillow Torque careering round the arena hitting things and making a loud noise than watching a robot slowly lifting its opponent and dumping it in the pit without all the excitement of high speed collisions. Unfortunately, I am guilty of building a lifter. This type of weapon is good for the owner of the robot, but frankly not so interesting from the audience's point of view.
Just some ideas,

Quote:

---

Rules such as the purposed can also be circumvented with ineffective low weight weapons.

---

This is one of the main reasons why why this proposal failed a couple of years ago. The Pillow Torque example was another reason with the Orwellian argument that some robots are more equal than others.

It is strange though that this proposal only seems to crop up in the featherweight class - I have seen quite a few heavyweight fights that are (quite frankly) dull and in either weight divisions this will happen irrespective of any weapons.

I forgot to add the fundamental reason for it not going any further - the 1st aim of the FRA is:

Quote:

---

Promotion and education of all things to do with robots, of all weights, shapes and sizes

---

Quote:

---

What about:
FW with active weapons: 13,6 kg max
FW without active weapons: 10 kg max.
This rules out the heavily armered box. And it gives every beginner without active weapon 3,6 kg to build one.

---

i think this is a really good idea (the best so far) , but i think 10 kg is almost too much (6-7 kg maybe ?), because thants , my only FW at the moment only weighs in at 4 kg , but it uses 2 drill motors , its weapon/tactic is going really fast and being very light, being very menouvorable and running circles round the flippers lol.

But still , i dont think this rule should be implemented as is at all , but if it is modified with mariens suggestions , if a really clear need arises than that would be ok . And braps for being brave enough to post this :lol: .

Best idea I'd say is to leave it up to the style element of the judging: if the boring box robot manages to get its opponent down the pit, fine - but if it's been dull throughout the fight and it goes to the judges, it should certainly be marked down heavily.

Guys, brilliant so far. Its great to hear how everyone feels about this, or believes is a good option or viable alternative. Keep it coming!

I'm making a note in Word of some of the main points raised, just to have a condensed copy of the fundamental issues arising from these posts should the proposal be presented to the governing body.