I think the central issue here is that we don't want a battle's outcome to be decided by a post match counting of scars, and not by which bot put up the best fight.

A bot can take damage while attacking, which is still damage, but the rules shouldn't turn an attack into a potential loss of points - otherwise we'll end up with two bots sitting there waiting for the other one to do something.

The "gut feel" system seems to work pretty well, and doesn't require the judges to be familiar with the rules word for word.
_________________
The Engine Whisperer - fixer of things

So Dumheds proposal is to select 3 (or more ?) random members of the audience at the end of a fight and ask them who won. majority opinion rules ?

What about audience-bias/stuffing ?

If you can arrange to have 50 of your friends standing around at the time you are fighting, you would stand a better chance of winning that a lone bot builder who might have less of a fan club present.
_________________
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people

Lets be honest here Brett, we are all nerdy robot builders. None of us have 50 friends (joke)

Not random audience members, random builders.

In NSW we have had plenty of close fights but no issues with the builders choice for winner.

At the end of the day who cares who the audience thinks wins, we are the ones who truly appreciate the sport

I would definetly prefer my fellow builders to do the judging over even experienced but non builder judges.

also we use more than 3 judges.

I don't think there's been any contention since we started that?
_________________
The Engine Whisperer - fixer of things

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rotwang:

The thing is after a short time we will have a full field of fast powerful aggressive bots.
No variety = BORING.
If that is what Daniel wants and he thinks by jazzing it up with pyro effects to sell it to the crowd he is the EO its his decision .

---

I would say that the majority of fights are able to be determined without needing to reference the rules. The rules currently reflect the majority of what people think, it just makes it quantifiable in case of a dispute as to who won.

I would say that dumping a relatively complete rule set would be a bad idea. I would start by making small amendments to see if the changes are working the way that you wanted.
_________________
They say that he crossed the fine line, from insanity to genius.

Vodka anyone?
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

I think we should have some rules to define how fights over rules are judged

I wouldnt say the present rules are biased in favour of spinners myself (even although I have a spinner).

Sure, there is a damage point, but emember, Robowars also has a "Style point" (dons asbestos suit) that is designed purely to encourage robots doing undefined "cool" things that offsets it.

If You cant make holes in someone (or scratch them), then do something else cool (Sproing for example, grab lift, carry them around, and stack them against the wall) and you will likely win a style point and offset your lack of ability to damage someone.
_________________
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people

I can't think of anyone who would say no to fireworks and video screens etc - that's all stuff we would kill for at other venues.

If you want to make it more exciting for audience and builders, I suggest the scheduling system we have started in Sydney. I wouldn't say its perfect, but having ten matches back to back feels more exciting than single matches with a ten to 20 minute break.

You could also say the scoring system and round robin event format we use in Sydney is fairer if viewed over the whole event. Since we have more matches and the match points average out. a good bot can have a bad match and still win the event. I can't recall which sports do it, but some judging systems discard the lowest score for each competitor to help eliminate judging bias and 'off' performances.

I'm not saying our new system is better than others, but if it is too contentious to remove the perceived spinner bias at the match level, then reduce it by averaging at the event level. I definitely notice that Jolt has a harder time winning an event since we made the format change. Jake's excellent software has made score keeping a snap, so our system is now at least as easy to manage as double elimination.
_________________
Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion

Couple of points I would like to make.

1

The IG vs. Fragmentor fights. The draw is easier to understand if you take it in context.
The only bots there were the 2 NMO bots and the Rotwang Robotics bots and we have fought each other so many times there wasn’t a lot of point going through the motions, then Brett turns up stylishly late as always and just for something to do to entertain some of Daniels guests Frag and IG end up in the arena.
It was a fun fight and we got a lot of spontaneous applause, we had already pretty much decided not to post any results on such a casually organized day.
Not surprising then that our judges didn’t wont to make either bot the looser.

As far as I was concerned that was fine, I had a fair bit of input into both bots anyhow and both were running on Brett’s IBC controllers so he couldn’t loose either.

Anyhow I am sure if it was a Sidetracked event instead of by the bay after pigging out on Daniels excellent spit roast a result would have been forthcoming.

2
I really don’t think spinners have an advantage under the current rules apart from when their weapons stop working during a fight and they wriggle out of having this scored against them as damage.

As far as I am concerned if it stops for any reason its counted and that goes for any active weapon.
If you swap the wrong gas bottle into your bot and only get 2 flips too bad that’s damage against you.

This is the point I was trying to make at Jam Jerrup.


3
If you really care about FAIR how can you even propose a change that will mean that certain type of bots only hope of a win is a TKO or a system that you are already talking of banning certain types of bots as your way of maintaining game balance.


If you wont simple and fair just flip a coin, it’s easier and likely to be more accurate than the proposed system
_________________
Satisfaction is proportional to effort and results.

About point 2 - I thought that having your spinner weapon (or any other active weapon) break was already counted heavily against you. I know that if Jolt's weapon fails for any reason, I have zero chance of winning a match unless the opponent is already a rolling TKO. I'm completely with you on point 3.
_________________
Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion

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.


This is at the end of rule 2.2.2

Then arguments like my axe cut your bungee no my bungee always does that. That doesn’t count etc.

Once again, to put it in context this just started as a chat round the camp fire after dark and the arena packed away and all the gear back in the car’s etc.
Suggestions for making it easier for the judges, my recollection of some things that made it more difficult than necessary and perhaps even some of the builders were a bit vague on.

I mean really how can even an experienced judge decide what is or isn’t self-inflicted and why shouldn’t it count even if it is.

I vote we remove this clause.
_________________
Satisfaction is proportional to effort and results.

I am pretty sure we never used that particular clause up in Sydney, builders have always expected that active weapon would be counted against them and it has always been seen as "fair". Cutting out that rule would be a great idea.
_________________
Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion

Brain wave!
Danny if you wont a simple comp as George and Moth wont just split it off like the Soccer comp and call it what it is: Sumo.

Only difference is the pit is in the center instead of round the outside.

No time limit and away you go. Bit like the final of Robotica.
_________________
Satisfaction is proportional to effort and results.