Fra agm 2016

[craig_colliass]

Not wanting this to be some sort of impolite question or to jump the gun on the discussions, but what should I be thinking about prior to these discussions?

The note I have is this:-

Current Agenda:
Heavyweight weight limit
Immobilisation rule
Annual Awards Discussion
Constitution

I was wondering what is the background is to these points being brought forward.
The weight and the annual awards is quite straight forward, but I have no idea about the other two.
Thanks

[Shakey]

I don't know where we'd actually suggest points to talk about but I'd like to suggest the cluster ruling (On when they are immobilised) is bought up.

[Flag Captured]

Would like to echo the above

As for specifics, I think a 75% rule would be fair or just some kind of common sense ruling - just so that someone can't hide an antweight in the arena to avoid being counted out.

Also would like to have the walker/shufflers mentioned - robot wars weight limits on those would be great globally, maybe a slight increase on either just to make them more viable - something like a 15% and 30% increase for shufflers/walkers respectively? Nothing too huge but enough to make them a reasonable trade-off for the lesser mobility and higher difficulty...

[Eventorizon]

Matt, True walkers already get a 100% bonus -

2.2 Legged Robots
Legged Robots or “Walkers” can weigh up to twice the specified weight in all classes. A walker must employ
moveable legs to support its weight. Each leg must have at least 2 degrees of freedom. Robots with rolling
or sliding mechanisms will not be classified as walkers.

I'd like to see the cluster rules moved to 67%, meaning Triple clusters could be a thing as well as double clusters.

Immobilisation still needs looking at, as well as the pit. Hopefully some of this can transfer into Robot Wars.

[Garfie489]

Not wanting this to be some sort of impolite question or to jump the gun on the discussions, but what should I be thinking about prior to these discussions?


Immobilisation rule


I was wondering what is the background is to these points being brought forward.

So one example i can put forward that needs to be rectified is that currently immobilised robots are only considered immobile at the end of their 10 second count. Whereas really it should be deemed at the start of the count, with 10 seconds being given to prove mobility.

This has quite negative results thats actually appeared several times in melees, and arguably on the TV show aswell.

For example, Conker vs Beauty 8 vs Shard.

A robot which is clearly immobile and cannot move currently has 10 seconds before being deemed to be out. This means that even though they made be destroyed into a million pieces, if another robot they are fighting against goes out of the arena within 10 seconds - they are considered to have beaten that robot.

This happened to Conker, who after destroying B8 with Shard then seconds later clashed blades and went out of the arena. Beauty 8 was awarded 2nd place - even though it was completely dead when Conker went out.

Thus for this case the immobilisation rule should be changed such that if you are counted out, your deemed to have been immobile from the point the count starts - not ends.

[Flag Captured]

Matt, True walkers already get a 100% bonus -

2.2 Legged Robots
Legged Robots or “Walkers” can weigh up to twice the specified weight in all classes. A walker must employ
moveable legs to support its weight. Each leg must have at least 2 degrees of freedom. Robots with rolling
or sliding mechanisms will not be classified as walkers.

I'd like to see the cluster rules moved to 67%, meaning Triple clusters could be a thing as well as double clusters.

Immobilisation still needs looking at, as well as the pit. Hopefully some of this can transfer into Robot Wars.

Yes, I do realise but I think 100% extra may be a bit too much and could be a bit exploitable, hence the suggestion I made.

[Eventorizon]

Yes, I do realise but I think 100% extra may be a bit too much and could be a bit exploitable, hence the suggestion I made.

Its been around for years, and only a few teams entered a walker, and most never used the full 100% extra. Anarchy was 165kg I think. But yes, it could be exploited.

[grant_ploughbot]

I agree with Gareth on the immobilisation rule. The robot that died first should be out in my opinion.
The walker/shuffled weight bonuses for Robot Wars were set for safety reasons. Mainly so that someone can't turn up with a lightweight walking mechanism and a 100kg spinning disc that the arena can't hold. This is something that might be worth looking into for the FRA, however as its a safety concern rather than a standard rule or regulation change it wouldn't go to an AGM.

With regards to clusterbots, we put a 55% or 60% split on the immobilisation for RW so that if one was killed, the other could carry on. I think anywhere between 55-70% is sensible. I'm not a huge fan of 50-50 though.

[Flag Captured]

Fair point with regard walkers and spinners... Would be hard to regulate against that with a higher weight limit without requiring approval for builds I suppose.

About clusters too, I reckon there could do with being a slight change in judging criteria for them - if you lose a half of the cluster that's clearly damage but if you then manage to hold on with the other half and still put up a reasonable fight I'd say that classes as good control - maybe enough to cancel out the loss of points for damage if driven well enough especially considering it'll be fighting a robot twice the weight. Would be difficult to win still and rightly so, but it means it's not a given that you're going to lose the decision just because you've lost half the robot.

I mean, if you've got a 4 motor drive robot and you lose 2 of those motors but still carry on fighting, that's just the same thing in my eyes!

[leorcc]

As long as we don't go the drone in the air route I'm fine with whatever proposal for clusters.