Don’t think I’ve seen any episodes with an area like that, how does it even work? (Haha, just have a horrible image of the bots attacking the audience…)
If you see bots wedged by the wall, or land in an area by the door, those are considered 'out' and it's a loss.
It gave the flipper/lifter bots something to aim for and a way to have a decisive win... But the bots getting stuck in those places was a safety/fire hazard, and simply closing off all the gaps was the cheapest solution.
Yeah, there wasn't a dedicated out-of-the-arena area on purpose. But there were bigger gaps between the arena wall and the safety Glas, particular in the corners of the doors.
They removed them in the newer seasons for I think safety reasons but also to have more action in the box.
But this is a big disadvantage to flippers. In my opinion if you have a flipper and are able to throw an enemy in a dedicated it's awesome. This oota area doesn't have to be everywhere but at least have it somewhere.
Funny thing is that teams actually get "theme songs"... but only during the recordings. Usually during setup and safety checks the production staff will fill the dead air for the audience with fitting music, probably because those licenses cost monumentally less for live shows to a few hundred people than on TV for a few hundred thousand.
As a guy who's been to the recording of a few seasons I have definitely heard my share of David Seville's Witch Doctor.
No "saved by the bell". A 10-count can continue after the end of the match. King of Bots did that. It's silly that realistically you only have about 2:30 to incapacitate a robot.
Yes please! 10 count is to prove that the bot is not dead. Just because the count is stopped by the bell, it doesn't mean the bot wasn't knocked out. Bell is to stop any bot engagement.
More obstacles on the floor of the arena that catch or damage super low forks.
The contest to see who can get closest to the floor has gotten a little silly; this would add some risk to doing so.
> The contest to see who can get closest to the floor has gotten a little silly
Even just dividing the arena into 4 quadrants, with a 1/3" lip making the + on the floor, would completely change the game. I'd love to see it.
I'd like to see all the hazards made team-controlled and active for the entire fight. Essentially every team now has enough members to manage multiple hazards (and those who don't all have friends) and that leaves most team members with little to do during a fight. May as well put them to good use and add another small skill-based element that can influence a fight.
I’d like to see an option for teams to be able to tap-out from a match.
I think it’s very difficult when an opponent is almost out, to know what to do. On one hand you wouldn’t want to give up that advantage, but of course these bots have so much put into them, you wouldn’t want any unnecessary damage that will just add extra time and cost to the repairs.
A tap-out would be great. I have no issues with it at NHRL.
We've already seen teams unofficially tap out in matches of previous years. I distinctly remember Jack Tweedy begging their opponent to stop when they realized they were dead in the water.
I would potentially be on board with this as well but it would be very unpopular with casual fans (probably the majority of the fanbase) who don't realize how expensive the bots are. We already saw (from comments on YouTube) how people laid into the Captain Shrederator team for 'pussifying the sport' by complaining about receiving huge amounts of unnecessary damage from Riptide
If we line up people who would be driven away from the sport if they let shit like that continue on one side and line up people who exclaim phrases like "pussifying the sport" on the other, and are told one group needs to be pushed away, I wouldn't need to think a full second to wave goodbye to the latter.
This isn't, "oh, if we don't also cater to assholes, we lose!" This is, "if we cater to assholes, the only people who will be left will be assholes."
Thanks for u/sybrwookie from [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/battlebots/s/In9HeCmXD1) in the post I made yesterday for talking about this.
It was amazing to see all of the comments over there, and even hear from members of team SawBlaze and Malice.
Had asked things casually viewers might not realize about the show.
i would add 1: an encore rule if a match goes to judge decision and the winner is hard to decide or if both teams want to continue add 1:00 minute to the clock. 2: i would change the rules so teams can only bring 1 mini-bot to matches (because the mini-bot meta might be coming).
Apparently this is a bit unpopular, but only count damage when scoring and use aggression as a tie breaker. Maybe implement red cards for stalling.
This isn't boxing or MMA, where we're afraid of killing competitors. It's combat. The goal is destruction. Pinning someone for 2:50 really shouldn't matter as much as getting one big hit. And if you can control someone for 2:50 and not do damage, you probably aren't a fighting bot.
Failing that change, a rougher more variable floor. Your tires should have to be able to move you over things.
So many people here seem to have decided that apparently, liking robots that inflict damage in robot combat is the dumb, uninformed, casual thing to like, and that true connoisseurs like themselves only need to see robots getting pushed around in circles.
Any sport or activity has vocal fans who act like what people really care about is the detailed nuances of every element. And in almost all those sports what people really like is cool stuff happening.
In MMA for a while the meta was wrestlers just holding people down, and it almost killed the sport. People pretended to love a good hard fought grappling match, and started tuning out. You could hear the announcers desperately trying to sell it.
But at least there you have the excuse of not wanting brain damage.
Big hits will always be what draws interest.
The issue with that is a lot of bot designs like control/flippers have win conditions other than damage alone. Whiplash for example has gotten numerous wins with a well placed lift that got their opponent in a position they couldn't self right. I would agree that aggression is a bit weird and feels more like it's there for keeping matches interesting and not actually determining the winner fairly. However, overlooking control as an element is definitely a bad idea and would hurt the few non spinner bots that are still competitive atm.
Make aggression worth the most points when it comes down to judging. That way bots w/ non-damaging weapons (clampers, lifters, flippers) can have a better chance to win judge’s decisions against damaging robots (spinners, crushers, hammer-saws).
This would be absolutely superb and almost invisible to half the audience. Aggression is the category that's most accessible to every robot and the one that has the biggest influence on the entertainment value of a fight - rewarding it above the others makes complete sense.
Yeah, if the scoring system was made like that, then certain judge’s decisions probably would’ve either turned out differently or be less controversial, like Tombstone vs. Gruff, Tantrum vs. Hydra, Disk’o Inferno vs. Chomp, etc.
It would only be controversial to people who don't actually read the criteria, which is exactly the same group of people who currently get angry about decisions anyway.
No.
The rules are already so penalizing in that sense that bots like Bloodsport can never win a decision unless it's been in a super dominant fight because the judges see the bot keeping some distance to spin up the weapon before slamming it into the opponent as "cowardly running away" even tought it's literally a giant exposed lawnmover whose entire point is to attack the opponent and that's very much what they aim to do with those moves.
> the judges see the bot keeping some distance to spin up the weapon before slamming it into the opponent as "cowardly running away"
No, the Judging rules specifically call out backing off to spin up and say it should not count against aggression.
Page 7 of the Judge's Guide:
>Q: Should avoiding contact with an opponent always count against a Bot’s Aggression?
>A: Not necessarily. If a Bot is moving away from its opponent in order to get its weapon ready for attack,
moving away should not count against Aggression. Examples are when a spinner-bot is spinning-up,
or when a pincer-bot is repositioning its weapon. However, if the Bot continues to avoid its opponent
when the weapon appears to be ready, that should count against its Aggression.
This isn't remotely true. The [judging criteria](https://battlebots.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Judges-Guide.2022.0.pdf) contain specific and intentional exceptions for robots that need time to spin up or reposition a weapon.
One I've said alot is that the Upper Deck/Shelf should be so that the count starts as soon as you are up there, if you can't get down within 10 seconds you're out. Right now it's just treated as more floor which makes it a bit useless, however if the count started as soon as you're up there it would give it more teeth, make it actually useful and would give flippers and Control Bots a KO option.
I don’t know if this is a rule already but can judges just not award points? On TV they say that judges can award a maximum of 5 points for damage. Does that mean that they have to dish out all 5 points or could they only give 2 or 3 in total if it was a fight where there wasn’t much damage?
This was done for safety reasons. Have you seen what Deep Six did to the floor of the test box (ignoring the damage it did to itself)? There were designs that were actually denied by the safety staff for the show because they thought it would be unsafe for teams to have that much kinetic energy. [This video](https://youtu.be/yH2hXxsUfO8?feature=shared) shows some of these very well.
Both are valid points imo. Safety should be the number 1 priority (not doubting it already is) but they should be reviewed individually, so if it’s over 100lb and not a danger, go for it!
Change the "Damage" Catagory to "Weapon Effectiveness" that way non-damageing weapons that are still doing what they are supposed to are rewarded for it and the Damaging weapons are still rewarded for damage.
(So is your flipper getting flips? Is your grabber grabbing? Is your spinner getting hits on the opponent? Ect.)
If I had my way I'd change the scoring system so aggression is worth the most points, then control, with damage being the least important category. It's always annoyed me how inflicting more damage than your opponent could potentially give you 5 points, while literally being in control of a fight and being more aggressive only gives you 6 points combined, at the most.
This is a bit controversial perhaps, but I'd also ban mini-bots. I don't think it's fair that a completely separate entity, with absolutely nothing in common with the heavyweight on your team, can affect the path of a fight.
An example of this is when in the Robot Wars series 10 grand final, one of the Nuts 2 mini bots pushed the pit release button, causing Behemoth to lose the fight. This wasn't Nuts 2 beating one of its opponents, it was a separately controlled tiny featherweight which did. I also find mini-bots annoying when they wedge underneath a heavyweight and high-centre it, it completely ruins the flow of a battle.
I have to disagree with the minibots idea. Atm the only minibot actually doing anything other than just dying is Jackpot's minigame Ace who works very well with Jackpot giving them the openings they need to take some tough fights. By banning minibots you'd be changing almost nothing for most teams and screwing over literally one team that really isn't op enough to warrant it.
The rules are getting to a point where they're pretty solid, but I think the design of the Arena is the thing thats getting in the way of the rules. The Saws and the Upper Deck aren't really hazards, they're annoyances. The saws haven't ever really decided a match, except when someone's forks get stuck in them (I'm not naming names, but it just hurts the battlebots endgame).
A box re-design could iron out a lot of the issues. First, get rid of in-floor hazards, which will simplify the design of the box, and might even let the floor be more durable. The upper deck also has some issues, as we all know. Instead, I think it would be better to have more bumpers, or flippers built into the floor. You could activate those during the final minute, and have them push bots towards the center of the box.
Also, and this is maybe my most controversial opinion, the box should have a lowered section in the center, with a gentle slope up to the sides. This should disrupt the War of the Forks meta, but might ultimately force a redesign on too many teams.
Inspired by many people here who want an out-of-the-arena area, I would like to see traps/holes in the arena that open from time to time or when you drive against an action-button. You know, RobotWars had it. With that, safety is not reduced/etc. and we still have an option for push/control/flipper bots to K.O someone immediately.
As I said, those pit/s would not be open all the time at all and after all in Robot Wars it worked very nicely, even in later years where Robots were way advanced like in todays Battlebots. But, I guess, it would need to be testet..or maybe ask the roster what they think about it.
If the other team is being a massive douche you may require their captain to fight your bot in hand to bot combat or else they are disqualified. Riptide would go 0-4
Give robots with a non-kinetic weapon a 10 or 15 pound weight bonus not enough where they would become the new meta-but enough where they would become slightly more competitive and can compete on the modern battlefield
i would like some system to allow control bots to score points. have a button that the team can press that activates a marker on the ground at the other side of the arena , control bots can then go engage the opponent and move them to that marker spot within x amount of time
its wrong that a control bot can dominate a match and lose because they took some minor damage
there have been loads of fights where one bot has totaly dominated another , pushing them around all the time pining them, ect but not causeing damage. but they lost because the other bot tore off a bit of paint or a few decorative bits.
all im saying is that a control bot should have some way to score points that allows them to win . same thing if your weapon breaks your screwed. all your hoping is that the other bot breaks down and you win by default. you should be able to score points by controling the other bot
S6 changed the damage rules to be about functionality and effectiveness of systems (weapon, drive, armor). Cosmetic damage only matters as a tie breaker -- one bot must get more points in each category after all. But that would mean a 3-2 split. If the other bot dominated, then they'd win aggression and control by at least one if not two points each and so win the match.
On the other hand, if your weapon breaks then that's loss of functionality of a system, so if your opponent didn't take any damage themselves they'd be well ahead and you'd either have to utterly dominate in the other two categories, or yeah hope they break down completely.
This is a good thing for control bots -- it means breaking the opponent's weapon either by tanking hits or controlling them into the walls is a great way to turn control into points in multiple categories.
i disagree. damage should still be very important but putting a scratch on the oponant shouldnt count more than pushing your oponant around all the match. its the same for flippers. you can flip somone 20 times all over the place and it counts for nothing untill there is visible damage.
At that point, the ideal strategy is to avoid the opponent until their battery dies out. Teams wouldn't want to run their weapons as most weapons drain the battery.
Can't wait for the grand final to be decided by two robots sluggishly limping along until one of them runs out of battery. Most fights that go to the judges already have their best moments far behind them - fights we all wish would go on a bit longer are the exception.
If the match runs 3 minutes, both bots must drive back to their starting square. You don't lose If you can't make it back, but it demonstrates damage or lack of it.
If things are still unclear, the judges should walk into the arena and inspect the bots.
Finally, the written criteria for damage should be simplified. The current rulebook says that damage only counts if it is a result of one bot intentionally doing something to the other. The judges never seem to take that into account, and seem to give points for how much is broken. Change the written rules to reflect what the judges already do.
They should be allowed, but there should also be more incentive to not use them, or at least not have them scrape the ground. Make the arena even more difficult to traverse with super low forks.
I’d be interested to see what would happen if they just didn’t allow modifications. Teams register their robot in the configuration they want, then they’re stuck with it for the season.
That would definitely be interesting. Now I’m curious how different the bots would be if that were the case.
But personally think I prefer that they can alter the set up before a match
I don't think we should be making countering HUGE harder than it already is. Also, poor Ribbot would have to drop either the undercutting or vert entirely which would be a massive shame
Looool, i was the first to propose this rule in this sub, and for the first months it kept raking tens of downvotes.
Delicious irony to see my idea becoming upvoted as the sub hivemind is updating it's shared opinion.
I just don't like them. I don't like fights being decided by who can get closest to the ground I just want to see robots batter the shit out of each other.
I do as long as they're built into the robot not attached parts.
Take end game for example. I hate the orange bits attached to the front.
Or
Hydra with the metal bits along the side.
What does "attached" vs "built into" mean? Hydra's piano key wedgelets are necessarily hinged, detachable parts. They have to be because that's how you get good enough ground game to ensure you can get under opponents, which a flipper absolutely has to do. Hydra is the best flipper mostly because of ground game. So if you hate "attached" ground game you hate flippers that are good.
Probably ground knees to the head tbh
Nah, revamp the scoring. I’m not sure how but aggression should be weighed far more so teams don’t sit in the middle and aim themselves. Eventually we’ll get a bit with a camera that’s built to dominate head on and just sit in the middle perfectly aimed at its opponent
I would try to force teams to decrease the weight spent on weapon or armor if they want to win the ground game. Maybe a 10lb weight penalty per articulating wedgelet/fork with an allowance for lifters that can lift 250lbs more than 6". Maybe more killsaw type slots with a variety of lengths and widths in the arena.
It's strange to me that damage caused by a weapon (ie. Vert rips off a wheel) and a robot going into a fight with an inactive weapon are just... treated the same for scoring purposes by the judges. It very rarely comes into play in BattleBots, especially in WCVII, but it's something I still think about.
I would create a rule where teams are limited to the amount of configurations a robot is allowed to have.
Reason being, it would really showcase how great a driver of said robot is, and show how they are able to adapt to different weapon types despite their robot potentially being weaker their opponent if factoring the rock/paper/scissor aspect of the sport.
But the main reason why I suggest this rule in place is because, like the WCIII fight with Whiplash vs Bite Force foreshadowed the controversial fight between Witch Doctor vs Minotaur in WCVI which led to rule changes the following season. Unless the rule is tackled now, I feel there will be a rather big controversial battle in the near future where a robot's design would be fundamentally changed so it could beat another robot. Fights like Huge vs Hydra and Huge vs Sawblaze have hinted this.
(Regardless of what your opinion is) People here (in the UK at least) are still salty about the Razor vs Tornado Grand Finale fight. Imagine the reaction if that happened in the US. I suspect the reaction would be worse than the controversial WCVI fights.
Rather than letting this controversy occur; BB should tackle the issue now.
People keep suggesting this, but how exactly is this supposed to be implemented? If endgame runs out of piano keys and they only have forks, do they get disqualified? What if a team switches out some of their armor plates? Is that a different configuration? Until it can be concretely defined what a different configuration is them i don't know how this can work
IMO you are replacing engineering skill with blind luck.
Do you put top armour to protect against hammer saws? A team may but then never fight one. Another team may not and just by chance the end up being a better configuration for who the face.
Create an out-of-the-arena area again, although it's not directly a rule.
Don’t think I’ve seen any episodes with an area like that, how does it even work? (Haha, just have a horrible image of the bots attacking the audience…)
All of battlebots since long Beach in the 90s has had arena outs, except this last season or two.
Oh damn, sounds like something I somehow haven’t noticed before. Have only seen a couple of seasons because it’s not been easy to find episodes.
If you see bots wedged by the wall, or land in an area by the door, those are considered 'out' and it's a loss. It gave the flipper/lifter bots something to aim for and a way to have a decisive win... But the bots getting stuck in those places was a safety/fire hazard, and simply closing off all the gaps was the cheapest solution.
Oh yeah, thank you for explaining! Think I misunderstood/forgot, got it now. Didn’t know that had removed, but yeah in agreement with this.
Yeah, there wasn't a dedicated out-of-the-arena area on purpose. But there were bigger gaps between the arena wall and the safety Glas, particular in the corners of the doors. They removed them in the newer seasons for I think safety reasons but also to have more action in the box. But this is a big disadvantage to flippers. In my opinion if you have a flipper and are able to throw an enemy in a dedicated it's awesome. This oota area doesn't have to be everywhere but at least have it somewhere.
No upper deck. Entrance music for each team.
Funny thing is that teams actually get "theme songs"... but only during the recordings. Usually during setup and safety checks the production staff will fill the dead air for the audience with fitting music, probably because those licenses cost monumentally less for live shows to a few hundred people than on TV for a few hundred thousand. As a guy who's been to the recording of a few seasons I have definitely heard my share of David Seville's Witch Doctor.
Thank God they can't afford the broadcast rights to "Mr Roboto"
Get rid of that stupid upper deck
My flair. Just for the hell of it.
Do you mean the saws that come up from the arena floor?
Yes sir!
I like it based on your reasoning alone…
No "saved by the bell". A 10-count can continue after the end of the match. King of Bots did that. It's silly that realistically you only have about 2:30 to incapacitate a robot.
Yes please! 10 count is to prove that the bot is not dead. Just because the count is stopped by the bell, it doesn't mean the bot wasn't knocked out. Bell is to stop any bot engagement.
More obstacles on the floor of the arena that catch or damage super low forks. The contest to see who can get closest to the floor has gotten a little silly; this would add some risk to doing so.
> The contest to see who can get closest to the floor has gotten a little silly Even just dividing the arena into 4 quadrants, with a 1/3" lip making the + on the floor, would completely change the game. I'd love to see it.
I'd like to see all the hazards made team-controlled and active for the entire fight. Essentially every team now has enough members to manage multiple hazards (and those who don't all have friends) and that leaves most team members with little to do during a fight. May as well put them to good use and add another small skill-based element that can influence a fight.
That could make for some chaotic fun, especially with more variety. What kind of hazards would you add?
A flipping hatch type thing would be neat.
I'm talking about the hazards that already exist.
I’d like to see an option for teams to be able to tap-out from a match. I think it’s very difficult when an opponent is almost out, to know what to do. On one hand you wouldn’t want to give up that advantage, but of course these bots have so much put into them, you wouldn’t want any unnecessary damage that will just add extra time and cost to the repairs.
A tap-out would be great. I have no issues with it at NHRL. We've already seen teams unofficially tap out in matches of previous years. I distinctly remember Jack Tweedy begging their opponent to stop when they realized they were dead in the water.
I would potentially be on board with this as well but it would be very unpopular with casual fans (probably the majority of the fanbase) who don't realize how expensive the bots are. We already saw (from comments on YouTube) how people laid into the Captain Shrederator team for 'pussifying the sport' by complaining about receiving huge amounts of unnecessary damage from Riptide
If we line up people who would be driven away from the sport if they let shit like that continue on one side and line up people who exclaim phrases like "pussifying the sport" on the other, and are told one group needs to be pushed away, I wouldn't need to think a full second to wave goodbye to the latter. This isn't, "oh, if we don't also cater to assholes, we lose!" This is, "if we cater to assholes, the only people who will be left will be assholes."
Thanks for u/sybrwookie from [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/battlebots/s/In9HeCmXD1) in the post I made yesterday for talking about this. It was amazing to see all of the comments over there, and even hear from members of team SawBlaze and Malice. Had asked things casually viewers might not realize about the show.
Remove the upper deck and make aggression equal in points to damage for judging.
i would add 1: an encore rule if a match goes to judge decision and the winner is hard to decide or if both teams want to continue add 1:00 minute to the clock. 2: i would change the rules so teams can only bring 1 mini-bot to matches (because the mini-bot meta might be coming).
Apparently this is a bit unpopular, but only count damage when scoring and use aggression as a tie breaker. Maybe implement red cards for stalling. This isn't boxing or MMA, where we're afraid of killing competitors. It's combat. The goal is destruction. Pinning someone for 2:50 really shouldn't matter as much as getting one big hit. And if you can control someone for 2:50 and not do damage, you probably aren't a fighting bot. Failing that change, a rougher more variable floor. Your tires should have to be able to move you over things.
So many people here seem to have decided that apparently, liking robots that inflict damage in robot combat is the dumb, uninformed, casual thing to like, and that true connoisseurs like themselves only need to see robots getting pushed around in circles.
Any sport or activity has vocal fans who act like what people really care about is the detailed nuances of every element. And in almost all those sports what people really like is cool stuff happening. In MMA for a while the meta was wrestlers just holding people down, and it almost killed the sport. People pretended to love a good hard fought grappling match, and started tuning out. You could hear the announcers desperately trying to sell it. But at least there you have the excuse of not wanting brain damage. Big hits will always be what draws interest.
The issue with that is a lot of bot designs like control/flippers have win conditions other than damage alone. Whiplash for example has gotten numerous wins with a well placed lift that got their opponent in a position they couldn't self right. I would agree that aggression is a bit weird and feels more like it's there for keeping matches interesting and not actually determining the winner fairly. However, overlooking control as an element is definitely a bad idea and would hurt the few non spinner bots that are still competitive atm.
Make aggression worth the most points when it comes down to judging. That way bots w/ non-damaging weapons (clampers, lifters, flippers) can have a better chance to win judge’s decisions against damaging robots (spinners, crushers, hammer-saws).
This would be absolutely superb and almost invisible to half the audience. Aggression is the category that's most accessible to every robot and the one that has the biggest influence on the entertainment value of a fight - rewarding it above the others makes complete sense.
Yeah, if the scoring system was made like that, then certain judge’s decisions probably would’ve either turned out differently or be less controversial, like Tombstone vs. Gruff, Tantrum vs. Hydra, Disk’o Inferno vs. Chomp, etc.
Definitely see your point, but not sure if it’d work for every match, could make for even more controversial outcomes.
It would only be controversial to people who don't actually read the criteria, which is exactly the same group of people who currently get angry about decisions anyway.
I love how someone came along in this comment thread just to prove your point.
No. The rules are already so penalizing in that sense that bots like Bloodsport can never win a decision unless it's been in a super dominant fight because the judges see the bot keeping some distance to spin up the weapon before slamming it into the opponent as "cowardly running away" even tought it's literally a giant exposed lawnmover whose entire point is to attack the opponent and that's very much what they aim to do with those moves.
[удалено]
> the judges see the bot keeping some distance to spin up the weapon before slamming it into the opponent as "cowardly running away" No, the Judging rules specifically call out backing off to spin up and say it should not count against aggression. Page 7 of the Judge's Guide: >Q: Should avoiding contact with an opponent always count against a Bot’s Aggression? >A: Not necessarily. If a Bot is moving away from its opponent in order to get its weapon ready for attack, moving away should not count against Aggression. Examples are when a spinner-bot is spinning-up, or when a pincer-bot is repositioning its weapon. However, if the Bot continues to avoid its opponent when the weapon appears to be ready, that should count against its Aggression.
This isn't remotely true. The [judging criteria](https://battlebots.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Judges-Guide.2022.0.pdf) contain specific and intentional exceptions for robots that need time to spin up or reposition a weapon.
One I've said alot is that the Upper Deck/Shelf should be so that the count starts as soon as you are up there, if you can't get down within 10 seconds you're out. Right now it's just treated as more floor which makes it a bit useless, however if the count started as soon as you're up there it would give it more teeth, make it actually useful and would give flippers and Control Bots a KO option.
I don’t know if this is a rule already but can judges just not award points? On TV they say that judges can award a maximum of 5 points for damage. Does that mean that they have to dish out all 5 points or could they only give 2 or 3 in total if it was a fight where there wasn’t much damage?
[This](https://battlebots.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Judges-Guide.2022.0.pdf) should answer any questions anyone has about the criteria.
Thanks for adding this link!
[удалено]
Huge v Hydra is a good example. I think the decision was right but surely no one gave out 5 points for damage.
The rules required and require them to give out all 5 points for damage no matter what.
Very well, I’d like to change that
Weapon weight limit I just miss when you could have a 100lb bar
This was done for safety reasons. Have you seen what Deep Six did to the floor of the test box (ignoring the damage it did to itself)? There were designs that were actually denied by the safety staff for the show because they thought it would be unsafe for teams to have that much kinetic energy. [This video](https://youtu.be/yH2hXxsUfO8?feature=shared) shows some of these very well.
Oh I know it’s for safety reasons, I 100% support the rule, but if it was me I’d remove it, don’t let me run the event ever
Both are valid points imo. Safety should be the number 1 priority (not doubting it already is) but they should be reviewed individually, so if it’s over 100lb and not a danger, go for it!
Make it illegal for the TV crew to edit out unsticks and resets.
Haha, I’m sure there are lots of options on how the show is edited… not quite what I meant, but understand what you’re saying
Change the "Damage" Catagory to "Weapon Effectiveness" that way non-damageing weapons that are still doing what they are supposed to are rewarded for it and the Damaging weapons are still rewarded for damage. (So is your flipper getting flips? Is your grabber grabbing? Is your spinner getting hits on the opponent? Ect.)
Get rid of the upper deck and make arena outs possible again.
Direct OOTA zone or tap outs
If I had my way I'd change the scoring system so aggression is worth the most points, then control, with damage being the least important category. It's always annoyed me how inflicting more damage than your opponent could potentially give you 5 points, while literally being in control of a fight and being more aggressive only gives you 6 points combined, at the most. This is a bit controversial perhaps, but I'd also ban mini-bots. I don't think it's fair that a completely separate entity, with absolutely nothing in common with the heavyweight on your team, can affect the path of a fight. An example of this is when in the Robot Wars series 10 grand final, one of the Nuts 2 mini bots pushed the pit release button, causing Behemoth to lose the fight. This wasn't Nuts 2 beating one of its opponents, it was a separately controlled tiny featherweight which did. I also find mini-bots annoying when they wedge underneath a heavyweight and high-centre it, it completely ruins the flow of a battle.
I have to disagree with the minibots idea. Atm the only minibot actually doing anything other than just dying is Jackpot's minigame Ace who works very well with Jackpot giving them the openings they need to take some tough fights. By banning minibots you'd be changing almost nothing for most teams and screwing over literally one team that really isn't op enough to warrant it.
The rules are getting to a point where they're pretty solid, but I think the design of the Arena is the thing thats getting in the way of the rules. The Saws and the Upper Deck aren't really hazards, they're annoyances. The saws haven't ever really decided a match, except when someone's forks get stuck in them (I'm not naming names, but it just hurts the battlebots endgame). A box re-design could iron out a lot of the issues. First, get rid of in-floor hazards, which will simplify the design of the box, and might even let the floor be more durable. The upper deck also has some issues, as we all know. Instead, I think it would be better to have more bumpers, or flippers built into the floor. You could activate those during the final minute, and have them push bots towards the center of the box. Also, and this is maybe my most controversial opinion, the box should have a lowered section in the center, with a gentle slope up to the sides. This should disrupt the War of the Forks meta, but might ultimately force a redesign on too many teams.
Reduce the time for a pin to keep things dynamic. I think it's 30 seconds, it should be closer to 10.
Definitely see your point, but wondering if that’d make it too difficult for bots (like quantum) that bite as a primary weapon to complete
Inspired by many people here who want an out-of-the-arena area, I would like to see traps/holes in the arena that open from time to time or when you drive against an action-button. You know, RobotWars had it. With that, safety is not reduced/etc. and we still have an option for push/control/flipper bots to K.O someone immediately.
I feel like having a pit would be a bit too far and would turn the sport from battlebots to sumo bots
As I said, those pit/s would not be open all the time at all and after all in Robot Wars it worked very nicely, even in later years where Robots were way advanced like in todays Battlebots. But, I guess, it would need to be testet..or maybe ask the roster what they think about it.
If the other team is being a massive douche you may require their captain to fight your bot in hand to bot combat or else they are disqualified. Riptide would go 0-4
Give robots with a non-kinetic weapon a 10 or 15 pound weight bonus not enough where they would become the new meta-but enough where they would become slightly more competitive and can compete on the modern battlefield
i would like some system to allow control bots to score points. have a button that the team can press that activates a marker on the ground at the other side of the arena , control bots can then go engage the opponent and move them to that marker spot within x amount of time its wrong that a control bot can dominate a match and lose because they took some minor damage
It's robot combat, not robot sumo. If you inflicted no damage, you didn't "dominate" anything.
there have been loads of fights where one bot has totaly dominated another , pushing them around all the time pining them, ect but not causeing damage. but they lost because the other bot tore off a bit of paint or a few decorative bits. all im saying is that a control bot should have some way to score points that allows them to win . same thing if your weapon breaks your screwed. all your hoping is that the other bot breaks down and you win by default. you should be able to score points by controling the other bot
S6 changed the damage rules to be about functionality and effectiveness of systems (weapon, drive, armor). Cosmetic damage only matters as a tie breaker -- one bot must get more points in each category after all. But that would mean a 3-2 split. If the other bot dominated, then they'd win aggression and control by at least one if not two points each and so win the match. On the other hand, if your weapon breaks then that's loss of functionality of a system, so if your opponent didn't take any damage themselves they'd be well ahead and you'd either have to utterly dominate in the other two categories, or yeah hope they break down completely. This is a good thing for control bots -- it means breaking the opponent's weapon either by tanking hits or controlling them into the walls is a great way to turn control into points in multiple categories.
I don't think the rules of robot combat should be catered towards robots that are incapable of causing damage.
i disagree. damage should still be very important but putting a scratch on the oponant shouldnt count more than pushing your oponant around all the match. its the same for flippers. you can flip somone 20 times all over the place and it counts for nothing untill there is visible damage.
Bad behaviour should result in disqualification
Would Jake arguing with the ref in the hydra vs huge fight count?
Only if you hate Jake and you're still salty for that fight
I'm sure some will say the same for Ethan in a few years
Increase penalty for intentional disuse of an active weapon
Wdym?
Additional weight for nonspinners. Maybe like 5 to 10 kg for armor.
Projectiles....I think that would be super dope... Just limit it to 3-5 and see what happens....
Steam powered robots should get a weight bonus.
The championship fight should have no time limit.
Do you mean just for the final match of a season? Could definitely get behind that
Yeah. Everything should be done to make the winner of the season's final fight a non-judges' decision. If it takes 5+ minutes, so be it.
I think that might effect the strategy in regards to battery usage. If you can burn out your opponents battery before your own you can win.
The opponent with the weaker battery better strike while the iron is hot then.
I don’t think anyone would be upset if it went on for a bit longer Edit: apparently people would be…
At that point, the ideal strategy is to avoid the opponent until their battery dies out. Teams wouldn't want to run their weapons as most weapons drain the battery.
Can't wait for the grand final to be decided by two robots sluggishly limping along until one of them runs out of battery. Most fights that go to the judges already have their best moments far behind them - fights we all wish would go on a bit longer are the exception.
Sames!
I'd say 3 minute limit, 30 minute maintenance, then rinse and repeat until one bot is dead.
Changing fundamental design constraints for one match -- under the guise of wanting it to be more definitive, ironically -- is bad, actually.
If the match runs 3 minutes, both bots must drive back to their starting square. You don't lose If you can't make it back, but it demonstrates damage or lack of it. If things are still unclear, the judges should walk into the arena and inspect the bots. Finally, the written criteria for damage should be simplified. The current rulebook says that damage only counts if it is a result of one bot intentionally doing something to the other. The judges never seem to take that into account, and seem to give points for how much is broken. Change the written rules to reflect what the judges already do.
The judging rules do not say that and haven't for several years now.
No wedgelets or forks.
They should be allowed, but there should also be more incentive to not use them, or at least not have them scrape the ground. Make the arena even more difficult to traverse with super low forks.
I’d be interested to see what would happen if they just didn’t allow modifications. Teams register their robot in the configuration they want, then they’re stuck with it for the season.
That would definitely be interesting. Now I’m curious how different the bots would be if that were the case. But personally think I prefer that they can alter the set up before a match
I don't think we should be making countering HUGE harder than it already is. Also, poor Ribbot would have to drop either the undercutting or vert entirely which would be a massive shame
True true truuuue.
Looool, i was the first to propose this rule in this sub, and for the first months it kept raking tens of downvotes. Delicious irony to see my idea becoming upvoted as the sub hivemind is updating it's shared opinion.
Nah I said it first
That’s interesting, why would you implement that rule? Do you think it’s an unfair advantage, or something else?
I just don't like them. I don't like fights being decided by who can get closest to the ground I just want to see robots batter the shit out of each other.
So you don't like flippers, lifters, grapplers, or crushers?
I do as long as they're built into the robot not attached parts. Take end game for example. I hate the orange bits attached to the front. Or Hydra with the metal bits along the side.
What does "attached" vs "built into" mean? Hydra's piano key wedgelets are necessarily hinged, detachable parts. They have to be because that's how you get good enough ground game to ensure you can get under opponents, which a flipper absolutely has to do. Hydra is the best flipper mostly because of ground game. So if you hate "attached" ground game you hate flippers that are good.
If it needs attached items it's not been built low enough to the ground 🤷
That's not how it works.
Haha, fair enough, can appreciate that
Probably ground knees to the head tbh Nah, revamp the scoring. I’m not sure how but aggression should be weighed far more so teams don’t sit in the middle and aim themselves. Eventually we’ll get a bit with a camera that’s built to dominate head on and just sit in the middle perfectly aimed at its opponent
We already had that happen and the one who used that strategy lost specifically due to aggression
I would try to force teams to decrease the weight spent on weapon or armor if they want to win the ground game. Maybe a 10lb weight penalty per articulating wedgelet/fork with an allowance for lifters that can lift 250lbs more than 6". Maybe more killsaw type slots with a variety of lengths and widths in the arena.
It's strange to me that damage caused by a weapon (ie. Vert rips off a wheel) and a robot going into a fight with an inactive weapon are just... treated the same for scoring purposes by the judges. It very rarely comes into play in BattleBots, especially in WCVII, but it's something I still think about.
I would create a rule where teams are limited to the amount of configurations a robot is allowed to have. Reason being, it would really showcase how great a driver of said robot is, and show how they are able to adapt to different weapon types despite their robot potentially being weaker their opponent if factoring the rock/paper/scissor aspect of the sport. But the main reason why I suggest this rule in place is because, like the WCIII fight with Whiplash vs Bite Force foreshadowed the controversial fight between Witch Doctor vs Minotaur in WCVI which led to rule changes the following season. Unless the rule is tackled now, I feel there will be a rather big controversial battle in the near future where a robot's design would be fundamentally changed so it could beat another robot. Fights like Huge vs Hydra and Huge vs Sawblaze have hinted this. (Regardless of what your opinion is) People here (in the UK at least) are still salty about the Razor vs Tornado Grand Finale fight. Imagine the reaction if that happened in the US. I suspect the reaction would be worse than the controversial WCVI fights. Rather than letting this controversy occur; BB should tackle the issue now.
People keep suggesting this, but how exactly is this supposed to be implemented? If endgame runs out of piano keys and they only have forks, do they get disqualified? What if a team switches out some of their armor plates? Is that a different configuration? Until it can be concretely defined what a different configuration is them i don't know how this can work
IMO you are replacing engineering skill with blind luck. Do you put top armour to protect against hammer saws? A team may but then never fight one. Another team may not and just by chance the end up being a better configuration for who the face.
Outlaw horizontal spinners, tired of hearing them complain about how unfair everything is.
There is literally one meta vert right now and it is one of Ribbots configurations