Rule 12.2.1 (Entanglement)

[gravity]

Hes got a point, cause In his case, 100% of your opponent is immobilised, and only 33% of your own robot...

[babeth]

No, because if you do it on purpose then the entangler can be counted as an untethered projectile, thus forbidden.

Peter, the rules may not be entirely clear on all the aspects concerning cluster robots but the following points are important:
- no entangling devices - your part of the cluster that entangles the opponent can be seen as an entangling device
- no untethered projectiles - your part of the cluster that entangles the opponent can be seen as an untethered projectile
- no grappling - after a certain time (60 seconds ?) you must let your opponent go, failure in doing so will result in you losing the fight by default

The point is that all the parts of your cluster must be on the offensive, with the intent to attack, not with the intent to just hang on. By the way:hanging on does not generate more points for attack... it is a single action and the jury might consider the hanging part of the cluster immobilised. Do you really wish to imperil a third of your chances like that ???
Also, the aim is to immobilise your opponent by actively damaging it or scoring points by hitting it. What you intend to do is -in my humble opinion- bordering on the unsportive.

[fluppet]

As a slight aside (sorry, Kane) I guess the same could be argued for caltrops (robotic or otherwise). Ive pondered about having very small and simple robots drive under a robot with low ground clearance (as most are these days) and spring up into a caltrop configuration, lifting the opposition off the ground. Actually being able to drive with it there is another matter.

Its not strictly entanglement (the robot is lifted, not entangled). It would probably contravene the holding rule, though.

I just like the idea of defeating Typhoon with lots and lots of antweights. :-)

--
Fluppet

[leorcc]

I really fail to see why Peter would want to use nets or whatever entanglment weapon anyway. I believe you and your team are building a 3 cluster walker, meaning 3 66kg(!) robots. You dont need to resort to these kind of tactics.

--
Leo

[peter]

Babeth: I am sorry if you think what we want to do is unsportive. We dont try to do that, just get the rules clear. If Arthure says :no ropes we dont use ropes. Easy.
But your reasoning is not correct.
You say: - no entangling devices. That is not correct. The rules say: No Weapons or defenses, which tend to stop combat completely. For a cluster bot that is something different.

You say: - no untethered projectiles. I dont think may people see a robot (part of a cluster bot) as a projectile (but I could be wrong).

You say: - no grappling, but that is not in the rules. I know, if you hold an other robot for more than 30 seconds, you lose, but this not what we want to do.

You say:The point is that all the parts of your cluster must be on the offensive. I say why. If you have 3 bots, why not use one for defence? You are using shields on your bot for defence dont you?

Leo: We dont want to entangle other robots. What I try to make is a defence agains those spinners. They are so powerfull.
We dont want to use nets, but things like a few meters of rope to jam the spinning flywheels. This should be our secret wapon so dont tell them Problem is, is it allowed?

Peter

[babeth]

Peter, I was only pointing out to you what possible judges would make of it. I would, so that means others can too. Your reasoning about the rules is faulty.
See: If you look at the rules you know that 12.2.1 nicely covers everything... even a rope, cable or net. Also take a look at 12.6, any cable you would want to use will be too short to be effective anyway and you will need that robot to be able to dis-entangle itself from the other without cutting the cable (because that would make it an untethered projectile) !!!
The no grappling is implied in the rules about entanglement devices, but it is also a long-standing tradition (and it was a rule enforced by Mentorn !) that you should not hold your opponent pinned down for longer than a minute.
So, with this point of view, the fact that you would sacrifice one of your 3 robots in the cluster to actively entangle the opponent seems rather odd. The nice thing about clusters is that one might be able to hold the opponent for a short time long enough for the other to make a solid attack, but would also force the opponent to choose a target and become one at the same time.
Your reasoning that a cluster robot can immobilise itself on the opponent without being counted out simply isnt going to work.

[typhoon_driver]

i really wouldnt want to try and stop typhoon 2 with a piece of rope or such device. Have u considered that even if u were allowed to have this device, ur robot would get sucked in and take a few direct hits straight from the cutters (it takes quite a few large hits to stop us). Remember that a cluster would be 33kg, or 66kg max and i really wouldnt want to put a middleweight or lightweight type robot against our disc at full tilt.

I have used our own robot as an example but dont think i am dismissing the other spinners out there, some are equally as damaging but ours came to mind first (wonder why )

[arfamortis]

Peter

Read my post,

This robot would also have to forfiet the fight as it would also constitute pinning for more than 30 seconds:

Unless you can remove the entanglement device before the 30 seconds are up you are pinning illegally.

[terryc]

I had a long chat with Mentorn judges about this. I wanted to use chains threaded with piano wire on my wheels to act as a defense. The idea being that if hit by a spinner then they end up wrapped round the bearings and jam the motors. This seems valid to me as you are not and have no intention of immobalising another robot just stopping the weapon.
However if this got caught up in the wheels then you were imobalising the robot.
To many risks of getting disqualified for us.
It would be nice if we could air the idea again as us flippers really do need some form of allowable defense apart from ever thicker amour (boring).
If your going to have rules about entanglement then to balance the equation you need rules limiting kinetic energy imparted by spinners.

[peter]

I was thinking along the same lines with one difference. The cable/robe/chain whould break at my end. This way I am not pinning the other robot (because I am still moving). I am not throwing/shooting it (the other robot pulls it in) so no projectile.

Is this allowed or is it pinning again?