|
|
|
|
|
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic
|
There are no secrets about the Judging, Damage is very carefully quantified, an invertible bot that is flipped but suffers no physical damage or loss of mobility apart from being airborne for a fraction of a second rates as trivial damage. Both Bane and IG2 were invertible, with Bane it made no difference which way up he was, he was specifically built to fight Stealth. Soft thin-skinned air armoured bots like Stealth and Ballistic are the ones that get a raw deal from the Judging as dents and punctures that do nothing to effect the bot count as minor damage. Partial loss of weapon function as in Marauder loosing its bungie, bent pivot bolt bent arm or whatever happened in the Bane Marauder fight rates as significant and that is what lost him the fight in a close split judge’s decision. Danny told me later he voted for Marauder. As far as fighting a horizontal thwack if he is spinning just wait for him to stop, yes you stand to get an aggression point if you charge but chances are that you will suffer more damage than its worth. Once Marauder stoped it was Bane hitting him so who deserves the aggression points then?
Heres an example of some modified judging-guidelines document that ours will be based on from Steel Conflict in the USA.
STEEL CONFLICT - TOURNAMENT JUDGING GUIDELINES
1. Tournament Judges
A panel of judges will determine the winner of matches in which time expires before one
combatant is defeated as defined in the Tournament Rules and Procedures. The number
of judges on the panel shall be an odd number to eliminate the possibility of ties.
Judges' decisions are final.
1.1. Qualifications
Judges must be completely familiar with the Official Rules governing the tournament.
Judges must be familiar with the scoring system and Judging Guidelines as defined here.
Judges must be reasonably conversant with combat robot design and construction.
1.1.1. Responsibilities
Each judge shall officiate in a given robotic combat Tournament with complete impartiality
and fairness, respecting and abiding by the rules that govern that tournament, in the true
spirit of sportsmanship.
Each judge is responsible for keeping track of the Combatants during the course of the
match. Many Combatants look similar, it is the responsibility of each judge to keep them
straight and award points correctly.
Each judge is expected to take careful note of existing damage when Combatants enter
the arena. Existing damage must not be counted against a Combatant in the event of a
judges' decision.
Judges must watch the entire match and award points accordingly. Judges are allowed
(and encouraged) to take notes during a match to assist in scoring.
1.1.2. Judge Foreman
One member of the judges panel will be designated the Judge Foreman. The Judge
Foreman will ensure that all other judges are conforming to the guidelines as set forth
herein. The Judge Foreman may or may not participate in scoring judges decisions,
depending on the number of judges available.
The Judge Foreman will ensure that all Combatants conform to the tournament rules.
Warnings and instructions from the Judge Foreman will be issued to the Combatants
verbally during the matches. Should a Combatant fail to comply, the Judge Foreman will
stop the match and the violating Combatant shall be deemed the loser.
The Judge Foreman will determine the point at which a knockout countdown is to begin
based on the strict interpretation of the rules. When a 10 second countdown is warranted
by the Judge Foreman, the non-responsive Combatant will be notified and the countdown
will begin. The arena announcer will start the countdown at 10 and count down to 0.
If the non-responsive robot has not displayed sufficient translational movement as described in
the rules, the Combatant will be declared the loser.
1.1.3. Conduct
Judges will clearly identify themselves as such.
Judges will not consult with each other or the audience while watching or scoring a
match.
2. Judges' Decisions: Scoring
When a match does not end in the elimination of one of the Combatants as defined by the
Tournament Rules and Procedures the winner shall be determined by a Judges'
Decision. In a Judges' Decision the points awarded to the Combatants by the panel of
judges are totaled and the winner with the majority of points is declared the winner.
2.1. Point Scoring System
Points are awarded in 4 categories:
· Damage
· Aggression
· Control
· Style
All points must be awarded - each judge will determine how many points to award each
Combatant in each category, according to the Judging Guidelines (see below).
2.2. Judging Guidelines
2.2.1. Scoring Aggression
Aggression scoring will be based on the relative amount of time each robot spends
attacking the other.
Attacks do not have to be successful to count for aggression points, but a distinction will
be made between chasing a fleeing opponent and randomly crashing around the arena.
Points will not be awarded for aggression if a robot is completely uncontrollable or unable
to do more than turn in place, even if it is trying to attack.
Sitting still and waiting for your opponent to drive into your weapon does not count for
aggression points, even if it is an amazingly destructive weapon.
Awarding Aggression Points
o A Combatant who attacks a full-body spinner (e.g. intentionally drives
within the perimeter of the spinning weapon) is automatically considered
the aggressor and awarded a 3-2 score in the case where both robots
consistently attack, or both robots consistently avoid each other.
Note: a Combatant is considered a "full body spinner" if the robot cannot be attacked
without moving within the perimeter of the spinning weapon.
2.2.2. Scoring Damage
Judges should be knowledgeable about how different materials are damaged. Some
materials such as Titanium will send off bright sparks when hit but are still very strong and
may be largely undamaged. Other materials such as Aluminum will not send off bright
sparks when hit. Judges should not be influenced by things like sparks, but rather how
deep or incapacitating a "wound" is.
Judges should be knowledgeable about the different materials used in Bot construction
and how damage to these materials can reduce a Bots functionality. Judges should not to
be unduly influenced by highly visual damage that doesnt affect a Combatant's
functionality effectiveness or defensibility. For example, a gash in a Combatants armor
may be very visible but only minimally reduce the armor's functionality.
Judges should look for damage that may not be visually striking but affects the
functionality of a Combatant. For example:
· a small bend in a lifting arm or spinner weapon may dramatically affect its
functionality by preventing it from having its full range of motion
· bent armor or skirts can prevent the Combatant from resting squarely on the floor,
reducing the effectiveness of the drive train
· A wobbly wheel indicates that it is bent and will not get as much traction.
· Cuts or holes through armor may mean there is more damage inside.
Damage suffered to robots can be grouped into the following classifications:
Trivial
· Flip over (or being propelled onto bumper, ramp, or other obstacle) causing no
loss of mobility or loss of weapon functionality.
· Direct impacts which do not leave a visible dent or scratch.
· Sparks resulting from strike of opponent's weapon
· Being lifted in the air with no damage and no lasting loss of traction.
Cosmetic
· Visible scratches to armor.
· Non-penetrating cut or dent or slight bending of armor or exposed frame.
· Removal of non-structural, non-functional cosmetic pieces (dolls, foliage, foam, or
"ablative" armor).
· Damage to wheel, spinning blade, or other exposed moving part not resulting in
loss of functionality or mobility.
Minor
Flip over (or being propelled onto bumper or other obstacle) causing some loss of mobility
or control or making it impossible to use a weapon.
· Intermittent smoke not associated with noticeable power drop.
· Penetrating dent or small hole.
· Removal of most or all of a wheel, or saw blade, spike, tooth, or other weapon
component, which does not result in a loss of functionality or mobility.
· Slightly warped frame not resulting in loss of mobility or weapon function.
Significant:
· Continuous smoke, or smoke associated with partial loss of power of drive or
weapons.
· Torn, ripped, or badly warped armor or large hole punched in armor.
· Damage or removal of wheels resulting in impaired mobility
· damage to rotary weapon resulting in loss of weapon speed or severe vibration
· damage to arm, hammer, or other moving part resulting in partial loss of weapon
functionality.
· Visibly bent or warped frame.
· Major: Smoke and visible fire.
· Armor section completely removed exposing interior components.
· Removal of wheels, spinning blade, saw, hammer, or lifting arm, or other
major
component resulting in total loss of weapon functionality or mobility.
· Frame warping causing partial loss of mobility or complete loss of functionality of
weapon system.
· Internal components (batteries, speed controller, radio, motor) broken free from
mounts and resting or dragging on the arena floor.
· Significant leak of hydraulic fluid.
· Obvious leaks of pneumatic gases.
Massive
· Armor shell completely torn off frame.
· Major subassemblies torn free from frame.
· Loss of structural integrity - major frame or armor sections dragging or resting on
floor.
· Total loss of power.
Post-Match Inspection
Judges may request the combatants to demonstrate operability of their robots drive train
and/or weapon following the end of the match, before the arena doors are opened.
Judges may inspect the Combatants robot after a match to determine how best to award
damage points. The judges will not handle the Combatants robot. The driver or a
designated team member will handle the Combatants robot. A member of the opponent's
team may be present during any such inspection.
Damage self-inflicted by a robot's own systems and not directly or indirectly caused by
contact with the other robot or an active arena hazard will not be counted for scoring
purposes.
---- END OF Steel Conflict Guidelines ----
Add to these our additional categories of
** Control ***
---------------
Control
Each robot is awarded a point in the Control category based on its demonstration of control of itself, its opponent, and the match. Length of time during which control is demonstrated, and the degree to which control is demonstrated, shall both be taken into account in the final determination of which robot showed superior control and is to be awarded the control point.
The degrees of possible control examples are...
Helpless. The robot is unable to demonstrate control, is barely mobile, or moves randomly or intermittently.
Occasional control. The robot may achieve a few shoves or wedge lifts on the opponent, or brings its weapon to bear a few times. It may dodge or escape a few of its opponent’s attacks. It shows some control of its position relative to its opponent. It often has to correct its aim while driving.
Adequate control. The robot achieves several attempted attacks, and some effective attacks. It avoids some of the opponent’s attacks. it only occasionally has to correct its driving aim
Good control. The robot executes many attempted attacks or several effective attacks. It dodges or escapes regularly. It generally drives to its target without correcting its aim. It can often compensate for its opponent’s motion.
Excellent control. The robot executes many quality attacks. It rarely misses its target. It dodges or escapes regularly and recovers quickly. It is rarely out of position relative to its opponent.
Transcendent control. The robot attacks at will and can stay on its opponent. It dodges most blows or escapes almost all attempts to lift, pin, or grapple. It rarely misses and does not need to stop to take aim or correct aim.
and the ever-controversial
*** Style ***
-------------
This is the curly one. Style can mean totally different things to different people, and in this circumstance, this is exactly as it should be. What we would like this category of points to indicate is how "cool" the judge (and hopefuly the audience) thought the robot was in its battling.
Style can incorporate an effective strategy, where an obviously outpowered bot reliably executes a manever designed to lessen the impacts of the other bot. It can incorporate using a tactic that is particular effective against that particular style of opponenet (high-siding a wedge for example, or keeping a spinner rammed into the wall to prevent it from spinning up)
In most cases style could be as simple as a team having a bot that "looks cool", whether through innovative mechanical engineering, or a novel themed paint job. More typically, style points would be given to the bot that shows the greater level of creativity, engineering, uniqueness, articulation, or motion. a raw-steel box on wheels would not be likely to win many style points.
the style category can be summed up in one word.. Mechadon. an unquestionably stylish, cool robot, that nonetheless didnot do very well in its fights. everyone remembers and loves it simply because it looks and moves so damn cool.
This is what style is supposed to encourage. If someoe chooses to front an arena full of wedges, lifters, bar-spinners, flippers and other "conventional" desgns, with a bot that defies description, then they will quite likely get the style points. Think WarHead,
Quite often, "Stylish" robots sacrifice some "effectiveness" in order to look cool. Cosmetic additions use weight, and experimental designs are hard to stick with with when going up against a well-proven wedge or rammer. By awarding a point for style, we hope to encourage people to work around these limitations and build something that will cause spectators to keep coming back for more..
---
One of the best recent examples of "Style" that I can recall, was Pinscher's jaws grabbing onto Arachnophobia in mid-spin with magnificent timing. You can hear the crowd roar its approval in the video's, which highlights what the "Style" point is all about to me. something indefineable that nevertheless is "cool".
Remember style is a *tiebreaker* point - so looking cool and having a snazzy paintjob will not win you a match if you perform poorly in the other areas, but it may help to swing a close match one way or another.
OK, thats enough for a mega-post to start the brow-beating. If anyone has any suggestions, improvments, or criticisms.. go for it.
This is the old Mentorn system
In the arena the robots face each other in a timed fight to the death. If within the allotted time one of the robots becomes immobilised, the other robot will be declared the winner. If neither of the robots have been immobilised our panel of expert judges will declare the winner on a points system using four judging criteria as follows:
1. DAMAGE. (Weight of 4) 1-5 points x 4 = Score for Damage.
2. AGGRESSION. (Weight of 3) 1-5 points x 3 = Score for Aggression.
3. CONTROL. (Weight of 2) 1-5 points x 2 = Score for Control.
4. STYLE. (Weight of 1) 1-5 points x 1 = Score for Style.
The winner will be the robot who has scored the highest number of points if there has been no clear winners. This scoring system gives a fair and unbiased chance for every robot- irrespective of size, weight or power- to win!
|
Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:35 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knightrous
Site Admin
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW
|
I didn't accuse anyone of being biased, I just explained that with a judge from each state, that no one could made comments about bias judging, which would offend people.
Take a chill pill Gary, I wasn't saying there has been or will be any bias, it was just to eliminate the "possibility" of such an occurance. Kinda like putting a seat belt on when you get into a car, you might not crash, but it's a precaution.
Brett, can you wave a magic wand and shift all these judging posts into the judging thread please, I think we've cluttered the Devastator thread enough _________________ https://www.halfdonethings.com/
|
Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:33 pm |
|
|
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic
|
quote:
Originally posted by TDT:
I didn't accuse anyone of being biased, I just explained that with a judge from each state, that no one could made comments about bias judging, which would offend people.
Take a chill pill Gary, I wasn't saying there has been or will be any bias, it was just to eliminate the "possibility" of such an occurance. Kinda like putting a seat belt on when you get into a car, you might not crash, but it's a precaution.
Brett, can you wave a magic wand and shift all these judging posts into the judging thread please, I think we've cluttered the Devastator thread enough
A random scramble to find judges through the day, having to go from a fight to trying to judge a fight with the adrenalin still pumping, getting distracted from prepping your bot or thinking about your next fight to judge a fight, being in a normal sleep deprived caffeine overdosed big event state and having to put up with an argumentative competitor who thinks he should of won. Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me. Personally I would prefer the same 3 judges all event ones that aren’t involved with competing bots.
|
Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:38 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|