Great analysis. I for one am definitely happy that Beta got the JD, as it ran a near-perfect control game and got up in RotatoR's face to the point where it couldn't really do anything--the damage it sustained to its hammer was also incidental and didn't cripple Beta. John Reid obviously knew that if Beta fired the hammer into RotatoR's spinner, the outcome would have been the same or worse. Victor's strategy was very smart in that regard, but he failed to capitalize on it and instead Beta shoved his bot all over the ring for 3 minutes. The damage RotatoR did inflict was basically a lucky shot. Too many control bots are placed at a serious disadvantage right out the gate under the current criteria, which favors destructive spinners because they make for better TV. I love control bots and spinners, and believe they deserve an equal chance in competition as they have in many smaller events. However, I believe your reading of the rules is accurate and that RotatoR could have just as easily been granted the decision for all the reasons you cite. For that reason the rules could stand to be revised, even if they are less appealing to folks who just want to see shrapnel fly.
I think it's also important to note that Beta IS a very destructive bot. It is very tough and well put together, and never seems to stop, but it's basically the only hammer in battlebots with knockout power. They did not go into this fight with the plan of throwing rotator all over the box for 3 minutes and winning a decision on control, they were doing what most non spinners do against spinners; trying to jam up the weapon, and be ready to attack after the dangerous but potentially self destructive weapon is not, or less, dangerous. I saw rotator continuing to attempt to avoid contact with beta's skirt while beta continued to seek contact with rotator's weapon, and throw the weapon into the arena walls to damage it. I saw 2 bots that were working very hard to protect their weapons during the fight, but one of them was consistently the aggressor. If the "aggression" category really should go to rotator after a fight like this, in my opinion, that category should be renamed.
The key phrase in your comment is 'near-perfect'. The mistake that arose from Beta's 'near-perfect' performance was very debilitating as well; Crippling if you will. Being shoved all over the map doesn't show that you are being beaten, or that the opponent is more aggressive. It can occur for various reasons the main if your opponent is simply lower than you. Look at rotators choice of weapon. They chose the higher weapon, which means they weren't concerned of being knocked up and shoved around. Actually, IMO that was one of their choices for trying to get at the hammer head. The only down-side to that is that it appears as if your getting man-handled, when in truth you're being aggressive and trying to climb them to knock off the hammer. Beta may be a better bot, but they did a terrible job this fight and were awarded a win, for a loss, they shouldn't have received.
I figure under last season's rules Rotator would've won, this season's rules were tweaked so bots like Duck have a path to victory. I get that Battlebots wants a show with robots destroying each other, and I'll agree because generally a push fight makes for boring TV. That said, besides the hit to Beta's hammer Rotator did no damage, and spent the whole fight being bullied by Beta. Had Beta hit Rotator with the hammer at least once before losing it, there would be little controversy with the judge's decision. Beta was aggressive and dominated Rotator the whole fight, and while I would give Rotator damage points for the hit to the hammer I thought Beta overall was more deserving of the win. Bottom line, if you want a win, knock out your opponent and don't leave it to the judges to decide.
Should there be revisions on judging? Yes. Do I think Battlebots is biased towards spinners? Yes. Should Battlebots make revisions so non spinners have a better chance? Yes.
The entire system needs to change. They should go towards a point based system for the overall ranking towards top 16 instead of just using binary win/loss condition. For example, give 3 points for a win by KO. 2 points for win by JD and 1 point for loss. This allows the distinction to be made between KO vs JD win and giving advantage to KO wins (as it should be imo) and it reduces the influence of bad JDs like this from impacting overall ranking like it would with a simple win/loss ranking like they have now.
I don't like this idea. It's possible to get a KO by just driving around while your opponent's batteries die (looking at you Tantrum). Having the committee determine subjectively what counts as a solid fight despite a loss, or what's the difference between a heard earned win and a super close match, does more for the seeding than just KO vs JD. Spinners have a way higher chance of KO wins than other designs also which would out them at a huge advantage.
This is a bit of a issue I have with the judging rules it tends to favour spinners rather then making fair across the board I understand they want to put on a good show but it has lead teams to build spinners even though the builders might not like spinners them selfs just to win judges decision easier. As for the fight I would side with beta because of how i see control and aggression scored due to being used to the UK rules
Beta won the fight. It deserved the win. It had very little ways to victory that didn't involve intentionally destroying its own weapon (and the commitee must have known this going in, it's like they've been wanting a "hammer destroys itself on a spinner" moment all season, this is the fourth match our of four with hammers that is intentionally matching a hammer against a top covering weapon) and they smartly decided to not play into the lure. John Reid drove a masterclass exhibition on how to completely dominate your opponent with driving skill and a well designed robot, completely outclassing Ryan at every turn and hounding him into confusion and retreat all match (and Ryan is a great driver, this was no beating on a rookie), and never took any damage whatsoever against a murderous spinner...until a single bop on the back that wasn't even Rotator's intention to do. Any judging criteria that then says that Rotator should win that match is a flawed ruleset, and that to me is the real problem here. That the ruleset allowed such a clear win to even come to such a close controversial "interpretation of ruleset" alone is a problem, and shows Battlebots is still overly favouring spinners to win. Yes, they have to make a good show, but the selection commitee can outright choose who gets on TV, they can still happily bring in 90% spinners because yes they do make good TV. But altering the ruleset so only spinners can win is not going to help that, it's only going to make the field less diverse.
@@Outland9000 Very thick, very dense, very strong steel, sloped back at a huge angle to make its equivalent thickness far more than a shallower slope. It's the same concept as was used in steel-based tanks. It's likely why he doesn't armour his top or back due to how much space/weight the front wedge occupies. He just relies on his outstanding driving to keep people away from Beta's rear.
Absolutely right, People saying oh we'll be flooded with just control bots but Battlebots picks who even gets in lol so its unlikely however I believe theres room for a few. Dont get me wrong I like watching absolute tear ups but theres something to be said about diversity and different ways to win.
I know this is 3 years ago but I just watched the match on Max. I agree with the sentiment and points but your case seems to rest on the idea that everything should be "fair" to all major bot types and.. no, designing a bot to kill bots is a big part of the game. If you can outskill your opponent all match and fail to do damage while taking some damage yourself, you designed a non-competitive bot and the judges owe you nothing. Imagine any other sport. I can be the best at dribbling a basketball but if I can't help get the ball in the hoop I'm worthless. Is the point of the game to drive your opponent around the arena on your head or is it to reduce them to scrap? If Beta can drive the best game of its life and fail to do that, then it deserves to lose. Now I agree that diversity in the field makes better television. So I would solve this the way they did with walkers. Define your weapon category and have different weight limits for each. Hammer bots need to be heavier to avoid losing force by lifting themselves, this would make them more competitive while increasing destruction across the board.
The way the rules work are so in favour of encouraging new spinners, but hardly any other weapon type. At this rate everyone focuses on the fact bets couldn’t use its hammer more than once because if it did it would had been ripped off anyways. And every / most drivers would not waste their weapon once and break their weapon at the expense of making the judges happy. I think they matched bets against one of the few bots it couldn’t do anything against. Despite John’s clear efforts to turn rotator over so he could use his hammer.
For me at least, the 3 categories get broken down to the following: Damage points should be awarded by how much damage you can inflict onto your opponent by any means, whether with a primary weapon, secondary weapon, or use of the hazards. Pretty simple really. Control points should be awarded by taking away your opponents control e.g. keeping them off the ground or on a wedge and bouncing around, as well as controlled use of the arena and its hazards e.g. holding them over the killsaws, pushing into the screws etc. A flip or a Slammow suplex I would count as control as other examples as it takes away the opponents control. Aggression points should be awarded by staying on top of your opponent, charging at them and not giving them much time to catch a breath. For me weapon usage should be kept to just the damage category, as weapons are meant to cause damage not show aggression. No one says that Minotaur (for example) has an aggressive 'weapon', they say it has an aggressive driving style, so I see aggression as purely driving based. Also a lot of these clauses about having to use an active weapon at least once or so can be exploited, as say in this case Beta fires their hammer while nowhere near Rotator just to check it off a list of requirements for points. That would in my opinion be worse than it never firing at all, as it becomes a gimmick almost. The easiest thing to do would to stop putting as much emphasis on it. It's not like you can get into BattleBots without a weapon in the first place, so it won't turn it into WedgeBots. Bit of a long read, sorry. Just wanted to share my personal view on the rules. I agree that Rotator by the current rules should win, but that the current rules need simplifying and balancing. Please remember these are just my thoughts.
Also regarding the points system itself, I think 5 - 3 - 3 works well, and I don't mind that Damage is awarded more points than Control & Aggression, but if I was to make a change I'd change it to a 7 - 5 - 5 system so it's more possible to win with Control & Aggression than it currently is while still having Damage play a large part. You can also be more precise about giving points out with these slightly larger numbers
looking back at this video part of me wonders how much of this is just the fact that just cuz bot bloodsport is a top spinner so its just them favoring the bot most like their own.
Yeah, this was a tough call, definitely the most important thing is to start getting some better consistency in the points system. I kind of hope Battlebots doesn’t go too far in eliminating all possibility of a win going to a bot that favours control, I mean look at Rotator vs Tombstone last season, if it had gone to a judge’s decision, should Rotator have lost just because they used their wedge instead of their weapon to do the damage? Kinda wish the floor still sucked so we could blame an inanimate object instead of the judges for all the controversies again, lol
I have to agree it seems a little stupid that aggression is almost entirely dependant on weapon use, but then if your weapon is disabled right from the start then it becomes suddenly okay not to use your weapon. It almost seems like it would have been advantageous for beta to lose its hammer immediately, because then rather than seeming like John wasn't being aggressive with his weapon when he should have been, he would have seen that the prudent and only remaining move for him was to push Rotator around. Case and point: Blacksmith vs Rotator. Basically exactly that scenario happened and Blacksmith won the decision. Nobody complained about them not using their hammer when it was clearly disabled at the get go, and hardly anyone seemed pissed about the decision or regarded it as controversial.
Agreed, excellent points, definitely the most disappointing thing about this fight was that the hammer wasn’t fired. Hopefully we get a good hammer fight like Beta vs Shatter later this season, can’t wait for something like that
Might I just argue how biased current rules are for spinning weapons simply for the fact they are ALWAYS active? With a hammer or flipper a decision has to be made in an extremely short amount of time to pull the trigger, a miss can throw your machine off balance which could both allow your opponent to attack, damage yourself or in the judges eyes be accounted as lack of control. Spinning weapons pretty much can ignore this risk entirely with a point and shoot approach the only risk being hitting armoured parts of the opponent and losing control, which rotator did constantly. Now I’m an in no way saying any weapon type should be banned but definitely judging criteria to take into account how much harder it is to confirm a hit with any weapon other than a spinner. The fact that a match can look so one sided is so controversially close all because of one mistake for the hammer to hit the spinner is mind boggling. You’ve layed out the ruleset word for word and the fact the points actually added up in rotators favour can’t be argued but if a machine that can’t risk a shot as often as a spinner has to work THAT hard to squeeze a win it simply feels way too damage oriented. Edit, rewatched it you did cover a lot of what I said in my comment at the end there. I understand the damage for entertainment vibe, but even still I think with this fight as example I think it is too biased personally. One meaningful random hit to a sweet spot almost erased 3 minutes of expert driving and in this isolated case really makes me fearful for this sports future. If the judge cards were in a 5 damage 4 control and 4 aggression basis, you could still have the incentive for high energy weapons that get the job done effectively but also allow matches and judges decisions like this one and not have them feel so close. On paper I agree rotator won but it only leads me think the paperwork is wrong for a healthy sport. This match was beta all the way through and I’m personally glad it won though thank you for this explanation, I see now why there’s so much heated debate. To conclude, scoring system needs tweaking lol Thanks for reading of you did!
To be quite fair, even if Beta used the hammer, I don't expect a different outcome. Rotator was just being bossed around with or without hammer and if the battle was allowed to continue, I think Beta would have dismantled Rotator using its rival's kinetic energy. Rotator was poor on aggression and control and you can see that by looking at how many times Rotator's wheels kept losing contact with the ground. Beta was just fixed solid.
On aggression it should say something about using the weapon being pheasible or else you can just have a spinner be there and stop nonspinners from using their weapon. Because if they use it they might lose their weapon forever which means you have a good chance to lose aggression and damage, so you cant use it, meaning you lose aggression. or someone might not be able to use the weapon because the spinner got sent to the other side of the arena in such a short amount of time that noone can reasonably expect a flipper, lifter, or hammer to be used Is this against spinners? Yes but theyre shown to be rather dominant already and still get an advantage in active weapon aggression because more often than not the spinner is active
I'm just going to say it here like I've said in a few other forums and whatnot - I feel like some consideration, whether in control or aggression, should be given to the fact that one robot was too intimidated by the other robot to use their active weapon. I understand there is some rock/paper/scissors going on. Whoopdie-fucking-do. You have a weapon, but are too scared to use it even when you are in complete advantage? To me, that is a sign you are either a) not in as much control as you thought or b) are not actually aggressive so much as you are scared. I'm also going to say this - Beta had ample opportunity to fire their hammer without fear of immediately gettting it ripped off. Even if it wasn't a good hit, they still should be encouraged to do it and the fact that they didn't, to me, says Rotator still held a dominant element of control because they stopped their opponent from even attempting to use their weapon(s). I don't get why that isn't some kind of clause that states that fear of using your primary weapon amounts to surrendering points in one or two categories. I get that they want Duck to get more points, but the solution is to give more value to "reflected" damage or in osme way say "an opponent that hits you yet does more damage to itself counts all against the attacking bot" is a much better rule. As is a rule or sub rule that states that purposely leading into an active weapond with obviously reinforced armor can count as control points if damage to the attacking robots weapon happens. This still would lead into Beta's hands officially - they say "Hey, hit our reinforced wedge!" and when it doesn't do much but Rotator's disc still spits out a belt or two and they slow down, no one is surprised when Beta wins.
Thanks for doing this. Will disagree on the aggression point though. Rotator didn't actively try and deliver it's weapon into Beta as it was on the back foot the whole match. Beta was actively attacking (albeit with its wedge) the whole match, but some aggression must score more than no aggression. If Rotator scores more it suggests a spinner can win aggression just by turning it's weapon on. The damage scoring is interesting but appears perfectly inline with the rules.
I agree with Beta winning, while it was a lot of pushing there was still a lot of excellent driving by John Reed and control! This might actually be one of my favorite matches!
Bloodsport is definitely not the work of just a single person. Justin Marple did a lot more work on the design than I did. I just helped with some of the manufacturing of parts and keeping it repaired at the event along with the rest of the team. But still, thank you for the kind words!
Oh yes I know. I am a HUGE fan of battlebots. And when I saw you and your team destroy skorpios, I knew that you could pull of some upsets and go to the top 16.
Beta won strategically, in the case of manual weapons (hammer, axe, flipper etc.) you have to wait for an opportunity to strike. Rotator (always active weapon) had 3 full minutes to go for Beta's weapon but it broke towards the match end merely because Beta turned his back right into Rotator's spinner, clearly Rotator team were so disorientated and didn't even aim for Beta's weapon, strategy should matter too.
To be fair to Rotator, they were going for Beta’s hammer for the whole match, climbing up its wedge, trying to disable it like Tombstone did(look it up), but Beta was too well-armored for that tactic to work.
Personally I think that beta should have the aggression points mainly because of the fact that his driving was aggressive and rotator was off balance and running almost the entire time. The hit on the hammer was not a controlled hit and should not be worth any points. And with control obviously going to beta beta is the real winner of this fight.
Eh, the decision kinda highlights how shitty the Damage/Control/Aggression criteria are. If you have no control over the match, it follows that you won't get the same chance to show aggression. There's overlap between the categories that are difficult to remove. However, I disagree with you about aggression. 2-1 to Beta looks right to me. Yes, it didn't use its weapon (which was not a surprise to anyone who has watched John Reid fight a spinner) but it initiated more attacks. Rotator did it's best as you say, and did use its weapon but *and the footage you used highlights this* when Rotator drove towards Beta, it was wedgelets first. That is a demerit towards aggression just as much as Beta shoving it's tank wedge into Rotator's spinner. I think Lisa's score card explains why Beta got a damage point. 'Beta dominated'. She felt that Beta won, so she scored the fight to reflect that, presumably Derek felt similarly (and gee, I wonder which judges built low-damage robots that relied on control and which judge lost a fight they dominated because their primary weapon died). If Battlebots removed the 'thou must use your weapon to score 3 aggression points' she'd have given Beta 3 aggression points rather than 2 and a damage point. Full disclosure I do think Beta was better driven, more aggressive and completely nullified Rotator. I'd have scored it as a Beta win too. I understand why you and others feel differently, but y'know. That's why it's controversial, not 'wrong'.
My point in making this video was in part to highlight the fact that these rules and guidelines *exist*. The fact that Battlebots made these rules and requested that judges follow them is in part an effort to keep the spinner heavy meta alive for the sake of what they determined to make for good TV. I would tend to agree that Lisa felt from watching the fight like Beta won and then scored her card to justify that decision. However the existence of these guidelines is entirely to prevent exactly that from happening. Honestly if I were unaware of the guidelines I would absolutely have thought Beta won as well. But the point remains that there have been and continue to be cases where the judges subvert or ignore the rules in order to vote how they 'feel' is right, and the moving goalposts that this creates makes it impossible for the builders to actually be able to effectively strategize for the fights. For instance, if Victor read the guidelines as closely as I did and interpreted them the way that I did, he would have felt like he absolutely needed to go spinner-first into Beta the entire time, and use his forks offensively very few times. I would argue that is exactly what he did in an attempt to win. And the fact he didn't win as a result may well have been no fault of his own, but rather a difference of opinion between himself and the judges. I think this case is a tricky one because there wasn't any hard and fast rule broken, but rather some studious interpretation needed to decipher what the outcome here should have been based on the existing rules at the time. But there have been fights in the past where the guidelines were not followed, or were interpreted differently, which makes it very difficult as a competitor to actually know what to do to win.
@@JustCuzRobotics Why did rotator need to use its wedgelets when they could have ran a double disk which would have made it harder for Beta to attack either side of the bot?
@@JustCuzRobotics if that is the case we will only see rotator use two disks in fights they are guarenteed to win instead of top tier fights a loss to the fans :(
@@JustCuzRobotics "The fact that Battlebots made these rules and requested that judges follow them is in part an effort to keep the spinner heavy meta alive for the sake of what they determined to make for good TV." The fact that you wrote this makes me respect you, simply because this is an acknowledgement of manipulation by the show producers, quite frankly, in violation of the spirit of the sport. This sort of thing reminds me of the Sixth/Seventh Wars from Robot Wars.
If pushing the opponent around wins you the fight all bots will be wedge bots. Frankly I think the audience always sides with wedge bots in moments like these (Skorpios vs Icewave, Tombstone vs Gruff, Duck on multiple occasions) because watching one machine push the other around feels dominant. Fights between bots like Duck, Gruff, Blacksmith and others with nonfunctional weapons are not only boring, they are impossible to judge meaningfully because both just push eachother until someone votes on the prettiest. "Control" is meaningless and useless unless you translate it into something, preventing the other machine from moving freely at the cost of your own moving freely is not something that should grant you points it is double immobility, anyone can build a fat wedge with wheels and push stuff around. Real control is being able to manipulate the position of the opponents machine while maintaining the mobility of your own, and since the value of control can't be measured meaningfully i'd prefer it if damage was the only category being scored on. If you want to increase the value of control make the hammers do actual damage and add meaningful terrain. If a battlebot lacks the capacity to disable an opposing battlebot it should not be in the competition in the first place.
its becasue a bot who has a weapon thats always active does not mean its hits count for much , and its not like they are not functional the just cant be used against horizontal spinners for clear reasons.
honestly, if the intention is to encourage active weapon use, the rules and judging criteria need to be revised to make that crystal clear. if beta had fired it's weapon, it's nearly certain to have been destroyed. thus, beta did not fire it's weapon. essentially, as long as rotator was spinning it was disabling beta's weapon, and as such should have won full damage points.
Good luck on the fight against Endgame tonight! I know it's already been recorded and stuff but I'm rooting for you! And thanks for more information with this video, my last question asking about your opinion left me a bit confused, but only because I'm kind of slow lol. Good luck!
All competitive sports have rules designed to balance gameplay. It could be team limits or a spend cap, but it's there. Robot combat tends to have a rock/paper/scissors setup between highly destructive weapons, defensive bots and control bots. A wedge can best a spinner, a wedge has little answer against control bots (including flippers), and control bots often struggle against destructive machines. The problem is that the current rules are set to give destructive weapons an edge, now even to the point where an obvious win by Beta gets called into question. Robot Wars had the exact same problem, but weighted towards control bots. They were just starting to come around by series 10 by limiting the pit and removing the round robin stages and BattleBots needs to tweak things too. Balance is important and makes for better television. Watch that fight again, but imagine a different rule set was applied. Beta still wins. And it won in this match too, despite the odds, because even with the damage it was still functional, still aggressive and RotatoR offered nothing in return. But pit Beta against Gruff and Beta would struggle. BattleBots needs better balancing, but Beta beat RotatoR.
Interesting. Until I started visiting forums and RUclips videos after the episode there was no doubt in my mind that Beta won and the judges made the correct decision... There is still no doubt in my mind Beta won.
I think that this raises the greater issue, as this kind of judging promotes spinners to be the only way to compete, as they deal the most damage. I do feel that this is where the UK series offers more possibilities for other bots other than spinners to see success, with things like the pits, and parts of the arena designed for robots tobe flipped out of. It doesn't subtract from the amazing power of the spinners, but adds an alternative to all-out damage, and means that the focus is put on the driver more so, and makes it vital to make a stable and drivable bot, as much as a damaging one. This reason is why I think you see more varied designs see success in the UK wars, over the US scene. Damage is cool to see for sure, but there is so many more ways to take this sport than just out right driving. Maybe Battlebots would benefit from having the addition of something like a pit, it would mean that more tactical driving would have to be performed, and flailing robots with huge power would offer much more of a risk. But this spinner meta is almost getting dull for me
If we accept Team Beta's reasoning - that it didn't want to employ the hammer and have it it the blade on Rotator. There for their strategy going (which they did cite before the match) was to try an flip Rotator and then hammer the unprotected bottom. Thus, their initial approach was on of control in order to get that flip. And almost on que, Rotator's spinner did finally catch the hammer head which it knock off. Now Beta was truly weaponless so it was operating under the alternate rules. But intentions aside, the weapon was not employed, Rotator did the only damage - winner: Rotator.
I was going to get on here and state all my arguments in harsh fashion, but then you completely made my argument for me! As for changes to scoring decisions, maybe creating a category called resiliency. The definition of resiliency is "the capacity to recover quickly from difficulties; toughness." Rotator definitely recovered quickly from the difficulty Beta showed(mainly ramming, but dealing no real damage only cosmetic) but the same can't be said of Beta(as his main weapon got disabled). With this extra category I believe Rotator would have won. Since Beta never fired their weapon and only tried to ram Rotator into the wall, Rotator recovered quite quickly. However, when Rotator knocked off Betas hammer, there is no quick recovery from that. The end result could be different if Beta used their hammer; but they didn't. In the end I do believe the judges judged this battle incorrectly. This change in scoring may help alleviate that pain.
I had thought while watching that Beta won fairly, if narrowly, because of the terms "Control" and "Aggression", since they did appear to drive with more control and were often the aggressor. After your analysis quoting the rules of how each of those terms is defined (especially regarding the play between aggression and weapon use) tho, I'd agree with you in that Rotator should've won. Regardless, both are amazing bots and teams (Beta is one of my favorite bots for the technology put into it) and I hope they each get fair shots in the rest of this season and future ones.
This fight felt very similar to the Robot Wars Series 7 title fight between Typhoon 2 and Storm 2, where Storm 2 did all the hard work with its control and aggression, but was the only bot to take any sort of damage. In my opinion, it would seem wrong for one bot to work so hard on taking control of the whole fight, only to lose it because of a "little bit" of damage. On that basis, and no disrespect to all parties involved, I believe Beta was the rightful winner of the decision, because Rotator couldn't really do much when it was being tossed around like a ragdoll, despite the lucky hit on Beta's hammer. Explanation of the rules aside, my scorecard would say: Damage - 5-0 Rotator Aggression - 3-0 Beta Control - 3-0 Beta Total - 6-5 Beta
Beta smothered Rotator the entire fight, so I totally understand why it won most of the aggression points and ALL of the control points. What I think is a MORE controversial decision was the fight between Tombstone and Gruff, since Gruff smothered Tombstone the exact same way WHILE USING ITS PRIMARY WEAPON and STILL lost the fight. I’d love to see a video on that mess.
What does strong advantage mean? Personally I would give rotator 3 damage points as in the context of battlebots, beta took a low to a average amount of damage. Heck they probably only had to undo and redo some bolts in order to fix a new hammer to their robot.
Many people have been saying that discounting beta on account of not firing would be to punish it for a legit strategy they chose against their opponent (waiting for a good hit). What that does, is discount how good rotator was at not dying/being corralled as per their strategy! Beta controlled the fight yet still couldn't execute on their strategy nor flip rotator nor cause it damage against itself to fail nor even just pin it for a moment. Victor has built a robust and hardy robot and it should be congratulated to work in immaculate condition after that long, not just be dismissed as "they were bullied they should lose"
I don't personally see "not dying" as being a point scoring thing, I have to note. Rotator's an amazing bot, I love it, it's still unique in an increasingly "meta design" era and I adore the black and gold look. I almost always root for them. I hugely congratulate their survival, but I can't justify "not dying" as a thing to hold it up in judging.
@@Retrosicotte it throws a spanner in the argument that beta was completely powerless to do anything but abstain from firing. Rotator "not dying" contributed significantly to the lack of aggression and damage. People argue beta didn't have a choice. But that is why they didn't have a choice
If this was season 2, Rotator would have won unanimously. During that season of battlebots, if your weapon broke, and it went to the judges, you were almost guaranteed to lose.
Hard disagree about the aggression thing - Rotator wasn't displaying anywhere near the aggression Beta was. In fact, Rotator wasn't really attacking at all, its weapon hits were mostly just it turning the weapon towards Beta as Beta charged in which isn't "showing aggression". Ramming counts less towards aggression than using a weapon, but the amount of ramming Beta did in the fight meant overall it should get far more points than Rotator would with its working weapon.
YOU'RE RIGHT, THE PROBLEM IS TH...WHY IS CAPSLOCK ON sorry about that. by any reasonable assessment of those events you're right, the problem is that _the rules they were supposed to be judging by_ were intentionally written explicitly wrong as part of an attempt to force the competition towards more explosions. normally they ignore their rules and call a fight wrong in order to make a controversial decision to stick in there every couple episodes to help generate controversy, kinda funny that this time around the controversy was them ignoring them to call a fight correctly. worst I can think of off the top of my head is copperhead vs mammoth, they called a fight in favor of a bot who rules-as-written should have had a solid 0 in all 3 categories with a possible argument for 1 under damage (literally failed to scratch the paint during the fight but they _did_ make contact with their weapon which makes things fuzzier).
Just from watching that fight, I could tell that Beta was absolutely dominating the whole time, and to me, that's what was the most important. If you set aside the judging rules, Beta would have won that match anyways, probably by a lot more (imo). Sure, their weapon broke. But it's not like he was going to use it anyways lol, it was a hammer against a top spinner, if course it was going to break. When team Rotator was talking trash after the fight, my opinion of them dropped immediately. Like, you were on the receiving end of that, did you not feel that pressure? If I lost like that, I'd be applauding the other team instead.
did you see how they were acting during the fight the driver was cheering his bot being bullied around the box because he thought his active spinner would give him an easy win since he new beta couldn't use his hammer against it.
I understand all you say and agree Rotator should, with the current rule, have won. But when watching the fight i thought beta was doing all and rotator was bullied the whole time. The bottomline for me spectator is that it was a pretty enjoyable match. I however understand the frustration of the builder and the hard work of the judges. Should there be judges or just make it a public decision if no knockout. It's a show let's decide who made the best show.
When Hydra/ Jake won against Huge/ Johnathan. A massive shield on the front of the bot that prevented Jake from even having an active weapon. Team Beta is doing the same thing here. Its ridiculous.
I agree that rotator should've won but beta did not let rotator do its thing except for that big hit that took off the hammer of beta, beta had control and aggression because it wouldn't let rotator move around much but now thinking about it yes rotator shouldve won by damage and main weapon hits
Yep. According to battlebots own rules, Beta should not have won. I'm guessing that the Judges scored the fight the way they did because Beta visibly dominated the fight, and they don't know the rulebook by heart. I personally like Beta more than Rotator but they didn't deserve that decision.
With the guidelines I'd still call this a close fight, if I was judging I'd feel hard-pressed to not award Beta more points on control and aggression even with the guidelines. Rotator did no deliberate damage, it was just a shame that it nicked the hammer after the ram. I'd probably make the argument that the weapon still somewhat functioned at that point just to give the win to Beta in my head. Had the fight gone on, I don't see Rotator coming out on top.
A bit late to the party, But I really think that both Beta and Hyra's wins were fair and totally well earned (Lumped Hydra in aswell cause its a very similar situation). Both robots were incredibly well driven and controlled to be able to successfully control and dictate each fight.. both of their strategies were far from fool proof. I really enjoyed both fights and think that it's a shame that such a technical and strategic fight is so frowned upon.
@@JustCuzRobotics in terms of DMG it would be nice if the judges at least went into the box and looked at the bots for a before and after even if really quick
This makes me wonder if control bots are allowed in the arena, they do not inflict damage with their weapon, just by hitting them in hazards, walls and flipping. Beta was acting as a control bot, they controlled the entire fight.
The difference is for a lifter bot like Gruff, its primary weapon is a lifter. If they get under another bot and drive that bot into the screws with the lifter used to raise that bit off the ground then they are using their primary weapon to do damage. Beta is a hammer bot and wasn't using its weapon in order to push Rotator at all.
Rotator did zero deliberate damage, thus rotator didn’t deserve all of the damage points. I feel like in this instance, aggression and control overlap each other. Rotator was on its side the whole time so he wasn’t delivering his weapon in a controlled manner. At that point the driver for rotator could just turn on his weapon and put the controller down and still get aggression points, it makes no sense. What I’m saying is rotator didn’t do enough deliberate damage to earn full damage points as per the guidelines and wasn’t in control at all, thus showing almost no aggression. I think beta clearly deserved the win but the guidelines being so weird stunted that a little, but even with the guidelines in place i think beta still deserve the win
Late to the party, but I'm still trying to catch up on this season. I tend to look at "spirit of the sport" over "rules as written". The rules are there to help maintain spirit of the sport and Beta was not actively trying to take advantage of that. I look at it this way, if a random person were to turn on their TV and THIS fight was airing. And they watched Beta dominate Rotator, only to have Rotator win they'd be thinking "that doesn't make any sense, Rotator didn't really do anything except accidentally hit his hammer!" And would be an absolute turn off to anyone watching. I know if I watched an MMA fight, and saw this guy pummel this other guy, and accidentally broke his hand in doing so, the judges wouldn't say "since he broke his hand, he automatically loses!" I wouldn't respect the sport if I saw that. While I get the technicalities, I would rather Spirit of the Sport rulings over a rule in place to avoid boring bots from entering the competition with fake main weapons. And I say all of this as a huge rotator fan. The sport grows better when it's more fun to watch. And seeing everyone whine and complain about technicalities of rules is not fun.
You can see it in so many ways... I understand Beta won by JD, but i guess i could also understand if Rotator won.. The fight is more than just some point in only 3 categories, in my eyes beta was dominant. And also, 4/5 in damage point for rotator by destroying the hammer tip is a bit overkill i you think about it... I would personnally score 4/5 in damage it Beta was smoking, not moving well, or with a non functional weapon... But once again, we never knew if Beta's hammer was working in the first place i guess.. The fact is, it was a very close fight, and we don't need to be mad about it.. If Rotator won it would have been the same debate.
So I know this is kinda old at this point but I was just made aware of this controversy so I wanna throw my two cents in. I wanna shoot holes in your "per the guidelines" bit. If we are to go by specific wording of the rules why even have the judges weigh in on aggression at all? There's only three points to give. That also being said it's hard to show aggression when you're the one being pushed around an entire match. I mean you can growl and claw towards my face all you want but if I got you held out of arms reach you're not going to get me. Most of the damage by Rotator seems to be incidental throughout most of the fight. Sure they run at Beta and get that weapon to connect for a moment only for that wedge to go "Yea how about you don't". The argument for Beta not using its weapon imo comes down to strategy as well. I can't remember 100% but I think I heard somewhere that they have only a few good swings in that hammer before it's out of gas. Sure they missed a few moments they could have taken a swing after pushing Rotator into the wall but they know that hammer gets knocked off rather easily and when that blade is spinning it would be incredibly stupid to take a swing. There's still a few moments they should have as I don't think the arc would have put the hammer anywhere near the blade but whatever. If I were the driver my plan would have been to keep them under control attempting to get that blade stopped or even considering flipping them over. The latter would be dangerous but would allow me to strike at them without the fear of the blade blowing my hammer off. And from watching the fight this is definitely what it seemed like was going through their head during the fight. After the fight I have to come to the same conclusion the two judges in favor for Beta did. Sure, the damage Rotator did was more significant but at no point were they in control and because they were never in control and due to the design of their robot they couldn't show any aggression. If they had a hammer to swing or a lifter or really anything but a type of spinner to show some "GET YOUR HANDS OFF ME GRRRR" attitude then sure maybe I could award them a point or two depending on how that went. But with that design they had no control and because they couldn't regain any control they had no aggression. Implied aggression I just can't count because I mean... it's Battlebots... if you aren't trying to eliminate your opponent one way or another why are you here? I can only judge you on what you do during the fight. Sure. I'm just a random dude. I don't judge for any events and I certainly don't have a bot to fight with though that would be awesome. I don't have the experience others do. But i'd like to think i'd have done similar driving Beta, and from my understanding of the rules even after your explanation here I would vote for Beta as these two judges did.
Beta does seem to cause rotator to spit out a weapon belt at the 2:51 mark, which could be seen as somewhat effecting the functionality of rotator. If the judges noticed this then the 4-1 damage score seems more reasonable. Although i feel under the current rules Rotator should have won 4-1, 2-1, 0-3.
In my opinion, beta is still fair because it's still uses a wedge that was already designed, not like hydra who did that, and john reed plays fairly, unlike jake
I agree that Beta won this one, Beta's aggression and control overwhelms that one small "damage" that was done on the hammer. I'm even quite surprised and vexed that Rotator team thinks they won, when they got bullied for the full three minutes.
Thanks for the video. I wonder how it would have been scored.ifnyou replace beta with duck. Beta used their bot to get the job done. I feel you should be penalised for not putting your weapon in danger.
Except there are other rules around scoring that do precisely that. beta actually could have lost Control points for intentionally putting its weapon in the line of fire of Rotator's (and this DID happen to Shatter fighting Malice).
I think that as a spectator looking at the fight you would assume that rotator won but the way that these fights are scored I agree with the judges decision and I think that under the battlebots rules beta won.
Back when it fought tombstone i heard that if it did win it was way to damaged to continue, apparently beta took some massive internal damage when tombstone took the hammer off
@@pauldoe3201 more like the difference was that the hammer was no longer attached pretty much. the chain was gone (it was electric back then, as opposed to the new pneumatic version, and one of the bulkheads what torn apart. The real kicker though is that the damage Beta suffered vs Tombstone was an exact result of what Beta was trying to do to rotator: Turning an opponent over in their charges with the wedge.
@@pauldoe3201 only sensible way for a machine like Beta to take on a spinner like that. Other designs can do things very differently, for example drums and verts can deal damage in return, and might even choose to risk a weapon on weapon hit.
Rules are rules. I am not changing anything by discussing them. Not sure why you're upset, Beta still won the fight and my video changes nothing about the remainder of the show.
@@JustCuzRobotics You might not think you're changing anything, but what you ARE doing is highlighting the showrunner's motives for why the rules are written this way....and THAT might cause change in the long run to make things more fair.
![BATTLEBOTS BITE FORCE Exclusive Interview [Builder Blog Ep. 9]](/img/1.gif)
In most robot combat competitions, Beta would’ve won without any hesitation
Fax
@@thomaspalmer5734 thanks! Sadly battlebots isn’t most competitions
1000000000000% This
Great analysis. I for one am definitely happy that Beta got the JD, as it ran a near-perfect control game and got up in RotatoR's face to the point where it couldn't really do anything--the damage it sustained to its hammer was also incidental and didn't cripple Beta. John Reid obviously knew that if Beta fired the hammer into RotatoR's spinner, the outcome would have been the same or worse. Victor's strategy was very smart in that regard, but he failed to capitalize on it and instead Beta shoved his bot all over the ring for 3 minutes. The damage RotatoR did inflict was basically a lucky shot.
Too many control bots are placed at a serious disadvantage right out the gate under the current criteria, which favors destructive spinners because they make for better TV. I love control bots and spinners, and believe they deserve an equal chance in competition as they have in many smaller events. However, I believe your reading of the rules is accurate and that RotatoR could have just as easily been granted the decision for all the reasons you cite. For that reason the rules could stand to be revised, even if they are less appealing to folks who just want to see shrapnel fly.
This. 100%.
I think it's also important to note that Beta IS a very destructive bot. It is very tough and well put together, and never seems to stop, but it's basically the only hammer in battlebots with knockout power. They did not go into this fight with the plan of throwing rotator all over the box for 3 minutes and winning a decision on control, they were doing what most non spinners do against spinners; trying to jam up the weapon, and be ready to attack after the dangerous but potentially self destructive weapon is not, or less, dangerous.
I saw rotator continuing to attempt to avoid contact with beta's skirt while beta continued to seek contact with rotator's weapon, and throw the weapon into the arena walls to damage it.
I saw 2 bots that were working very hard to protect their weapons during the fight, but one of them was consistently the aggressor. If the "aggression" category really should go to rotator after a fight like this, in my opinion, that category should be renamed.
I don't disagree. Aggression seems to be quite the misnomer! Maybe it should just be called 'boldness with primary weapon' or something.
The key phrase in your comment is 'near-perfect'. The mistake that arose from Beta's 'near-perfect' performance was very debilitating as well; Crippling if you will.
Being shoved all over the map doesn't show that you are being beaten, or that the opponent is more aggressive. It can occur for various reasons the main if your opponent is simply lower than you. Look at rotators choice of weapon. They chose the higher weapon, which means they weren't concerned of being knocked up and shoved around. Actually, IMO that was one of their choices for trying to get at the hammer head. The only down-side to that is that it appears as if your getting man-handled, when in truth you're being aggressive and trying to climb them to knock off the hammer.
Beta may be a better bot, but they did a terrible job this fight and were awarded a win, for a loss, they shouldn't have received.
But still it's not a self inflicting damage
I figure under last season's rules Rotator would've won, this season's rules were tweaked so bots like Duck have a path to victory. I get that Battlebots wants a show with robots destroying each other, and I'll agree because generally a push fight makes for boring TV. That said, besides the hit to Beta's hammer Rotator did no damage, and spent the whole fight being bullied by Beta. Had Beta hit Rotator with the hammer at least once before losing it, there would be little controversy with the judge's decision. Beta was aggressive and dominated Rotator the whole fight, and while I would give Rotator damage points for the hit to the hammer I thought Beta overall was more deserving of the win. Bottom line, if you want a win, knock out your opponent and don't leave it to the judges to decide.
agree
Rotator did some damage to the rear left wheel and substructure of Beta with the same hit that ripped off the hammerhead.
Should there be revisions on judging? Yes.
Do I think Battlebots is biased towards spinners? Yes.
Should Battlebots make revisions so non spinners have a better chance? Yes.
This ^^
The entire system needs to change. They should go towards a point based system for the overall ranking towards top 16 instead of just using binary win/loss condition. For example, give 3 points for a win by KO. 2 points for win by JD and 1 point for loss. This allows the distinction to be made between KO vs JD win and giving advantage to KO wins (as it should be imo) and it reduces the influence of bad JDs like this from impacting overall ranking like it would with a simple win/loss ranking like they have now.
I don't like this idea. It's possible to get a KO by just driving around while your opponent's batteries die (looking at you Tantrum). Having the committee determine subjectively what counts as a solid fight despite a loss, or what's the difference between a heard earned win and a super close match, does more for the seeding than just KO vs JD. Spinners have a way higher chance of KO wins than other designs also which would out them at a huge advantage.
Vs flippers
Battlebots: "There will probably be no OOTA anymore unless we can't find a good solution for the door area". More spinner bias is go!
This is a bit of a issue I have with the judging rules it tends to favour spinners rather then making fair across the board I understand they want to put on a good show but it has lead teams to build spinners even though the builders might not like spinners them selfs just to win judges decision easier. As for the fight I would side with beta because of how i see control and aggression scored due to being used to the UK rules
Beta won the fight. It deserved the win. It had very little ways to victory that didn't involve intentionally destroying its own weapon (and the commitee must have known this going in, it's like they've been wanting a "hammer destroys itself on a spinner" moment all season, this is the fourth match our of four with hammers that is intentionally matching a hammer against a top covering weapon) and they smartly decided to not play into the lure. John Reid drove a masterclass exhibition on how to completely dominate your opponent with driving skill and a well designed robot, completely outclassing Ryan at every turn and hounding him into confusion and retreat all match (and Ryan is a great driver, this was no beating on a rookie), and never took any damage whatsoever against a murderous spinner...until a single bop on the back that wasn't even Rotator's intention to do.
Any judging criteria that then says that Rotator should win that match is a flawed ruleset, and that to me is the real problem here. That the ruleset allowed such a clear win to even come to such a close controversial "interpretation of ruleset" alone is a problem, and shows Battlebots is still overly favouring spinners to win.
Yes, they have to make a good show, but the selection commitee can outright choose who gets on TV, they can still happily bring in 90% spinners because yes they do make good TV. But altering the ruleset so only spinners can win is not going to help that, it's only going to make the field less diverse.
Yeah... I don't know how John builds that frontal steel part of Beta but its stood up to some serious opponents over the years.
@@Outland9000 Very thick, very dense, very strong steel, sloped back at a huge angle to make its equivalent thickness far more than a shallower slope. It's the same concept as was used in steel-based tanks. It's likely why he doesn't armour his top or back due to how much space/weight the front wedge occupies. He just relies on his outstanding driving to keep people away from Beta's rear.
Absolutely right, People saying oh we'll be flooded with just control bots but Battlebots picks who even gets in lol so its unlikely however I believe theres room for a few. Dont get me wrong I like watching absolute tear ups but theres something to be said about diversity and different ways to win.
I know this is 3 years ago but I just watched the match on Max. I agree with the sentiment and points but your case seems to rest on the idea that everything should be "fair" to all major bot types and.. no, designing a bot to kill bots is a big part of the game. If you can outskill your opponent all match and fail to do damage while taking some damage yourself, you designed a non-competitive bot and the judges owe you nothing. Imagine any other sport. I can be the best at dribbling a basketball but if I can't help get the ball in the hoop I'm worthless. Is the point of the game to drive your opponent around the arena on your head or is it to reduce them to scrap? If Beta can drive the best game of its life and fail to do that, then it deserves to lose.
Now I agree that diversity in the field makes better television. So I would solve this the way they did with walkers. Define your weapon category and have different weight limits for each. Hammer bots need to be heavier to avoid losing force by lifting themselves, this would make them more competitive while increasing destruction across the board.
Was anyone else waiting to see what that hammer could do? Waiting for something that never happend. 😂
Watch there past figbts
Look up Beta v Grabbot
The way the rules work are so in favour of encouraging new spinners, but hardly any other weapon type. At this rate everyone focuses on the fact bets couldn’t use its hammer more than once because if it did it would had been ripped off anyways. And every / most drivers would not waste their weapon once and break their weapon at the expense of making the judges happy.
I think they matched bets against one of the few bots it couldn’t do anything against. Despite John’s clear efforts to turn rotator over so he could use his hammer.
I was very impressed at Johns driving, Beta looks so controllable with an armour that seems to be made from unobtanium.
long story short, don't hate the player, hate the game
Dragon breath r960 shotgun, call of duty modern ware fare/warzone. Imma ignore what u just said
For me at least, the 3 categories get broken down to the following:
Damage points should be awarded by how much damage you can inflict onto your opponent by any means, whether with a primary weapon, secondary weapon, or use of the hazards. Pretty simple really.
Control points should be awarded by taking away your opponents control e.g. keeping them off the ground or on a wedge and bouncing around, as well as controlled use of the arena and its hazards e.g. holding them over the killsaws, pushing into the screws etc. A flip or a Slammow suplex I would count as control as other examples as it takes away the opponents control.
Aggression points should be awarded by staying on top of your opponent, charging at them and not giving them much time to catch a breath. For me weapon usage should be kept to just the damage category, as weapons are meant to cause damage not show aggression. No one says that Minotaur (for example) has an aggressive 'weapon', they say it has an aggressive driving style, so I see aggression as purely driving based.
Also a lot of these clauses about having to use an active weapon at least once or so can be exploited, as say in this case Beta fires their hammer while nowhere near Rotator just to check it off a list of requirements for points. That would in my opinion be worse than it never firing at all, as it becomes a gimmick almost. The easiest thing to do would to stop putting as much emphasis on it. It's not like you can get into BattleBots without a weapon in the first place, so it won't turn it into WedgeBots.
Bit of a long read, sorry. Just wanted to share my personal view on the rules. I agree that Rotator by the current rules should win, but that the current rules need simplifying and balancing. Please remember these are just my thoughts.
Also regarding the points system itself, I think 5 - 3 - 3 works well, and I don't mind that Damage is awarded more points than Control & Aggression, but if I was to make a change I'd change it to a 7 - 5 - 5 system so it's more possible to win with Control & Aggression than it currently is while still having Damage play a large part. You can also be more precise about giving points out with these slightly larger numbers
looking back at this video part of me wonders how much of this is just the fact that just cuz bot bloodsport is a top spinner so its just them favoring the bot most like their own.
Yeah, this was a tough call, definitely the most important thing is to start getting some better consistency in the points system. I kind of hope Battlebots doesn’t go too far in eliminating all possibility of a win going to a bot that favours control, I mean look at Rotator vs Tombstone last season, if it had gone to a judge’s decision, should Rotator have lost just because they used their wedge instead of their weapon to do the damage? Kinda wish the floor still sucked so we could blame an inanimate object instead of the judges for all the controversies again, lol
I have to agree it seems a little stupid that aggression is almost entirely dependant on weapon use, but then if your weapon is disabled right from the start then it becomes suddenly okay not to use your weapon. It almost seems like it would have been advantageous for beta to lose its hammer immediately, because then rather than seeming like John wasn't being aggressive with his weapon when he should have been, he would have seen that the prudent and only remaining move for him was to push Rotator around.
Case and point: Blacksmith vs Rotator. Basically exactly that scenario happened and Blacksmith won the decision. Nobody complained about them not using their hammer when it was clearly disabled at the get go, and hardly anyone seemed pissed about the decision or regarded it as controversial.
Agreed, excellent points, definitely the most disappointing thing about this fight was that the hammer wasn’t fired. Hopefully we get a good hammer fight like Beta vs Shatter later this season, can’t wait for something like that
Might I just argue how biased current rules are for spinning weapons simply for the fact they are ALWAYS active? With a hammer or flipper a decision has to be made in an extremely short amount of time to pull the trigger, a miss can throw your machine off balance which could both allow your opponent to attack, damage yourself or in the judges eyes be accounted as lack of control. Spinning weapons pretty much can ignore this risk entirely with a point and shoot approach the only risk being hitting armoured parts of the opponent and losing control, which rotator did constantly. Now I’m an in no way saying any weapon type should be banned but definitely judging criteria to take into account how much harder it is to confirm a hit with any weapon other than a spinner. The fact that a match can look so one sided is so controversially close all because of one mistake for the hammer to hit the spinner is mind boggling. You’ve layed out the ruleset word for word and the fact the points actually added up in rotators favour can’t be argued but if a machine that can’t risk a shot as often as a spinner has to work THAT hard to squeeze a win it simply feels way too damage oriented.
Edit, rewatched it you did cover a lot of what I said in my comment at the end there. I understand the damage for entertainment vibe, but even still I think with this fight as example I think it is too biased personally. One meaningful random hit to a sweet spot almost erased 3 minutes of expert driving and in this isolated case really makes me fearful for this sports future. If the judge cards were in a 5 damage 4 control and 4 aggression basis, you could still have the incentive for high energy weapons that get the job done effectively but also allow matches and judges decisions like this one and not have them feel so close.
On paper I agree rotator won but it only leads me think the paperwork is wrong for a healthy sport. This match was beta all the way through and I’m personally glad it won though thank you for this explanation, I see now why there’s so much heated debate. To conclude, scoring system needs tweaking lol
Thanks for reading of you did!
look at flippers
To be quite fair, even if Beta used the hammer, I don't expect a different outcome. Rotator was just being bossed around with or without hammer and if the battle was allowed to continue, I think Beta would have dismantled Rotator using its rival's kinetic energy. Rotator was poor on aggression and control and you can see that by looking at how many times Rotator's wheels kept losing contact with the ground. Beta was just fixed solid.
On aggression it should say something about using the weapon being pheasible or else you can just have a spinner be there and stop nonspinners from using their weapon. Because if they use it they might lose their weapon forever which means you have a good chance to lose aggression and damage, so you cant use it, meaning you lose aggression.
or someone might not be able to use the weapon because the spinner got sent to the other side of the arena in such a short amount of time that noone can reasonably expect a flipper, lifter, or hammer to be used
Is this against spinners? Yes but theyre shown to be rather dominant already and still get an advantage in active weapon aggression because more often than not the spinner is active
I'm just going to say it here like I've said in a few other forums and whatnot - I feel like some consideration, whether in control or aggression, should be given to the fact that one robot was too intimidated by the other robot to use their active weapon. I understand there is some rock/paper/scissors going on. Whoopdie-fucking-do. You have a weapon, but are too scared to use it even when you are in complete advantage? To me, that is a sign you are either a) not in as much control as you thought or b) are not actually aggressive so much as you are scared.
I'm also going to say this - Beta had ample opportunity to fire their hammer without fear of immediately gettting it ripped off. Even if it wasn't a good hit, they still should be encouraged to do it and the fact that they didn't, to me, says Rotator still held a dominant element of control because they stopped their opponent from even attempting to use their weapon(s). I don't get why that isn't some kind of clause that states that fear of using your primary weapon amounts to surrendering points in one or two categories. I get that they want Duck to get more points, but the solution is to give more value to "reflected" damage or in osme way say "an opponent that hits you yet does more damage to itself counts all against the attacking bot" is a much better rule. As is a rule or sub rule that states that purposely leading into an active weapond with obviously reinforced armor can count as control points if damage to the attacking robots weapon happens. This still would lead into Beta's hands officially - they say "Hey, hit our reinforced wedge!" and when it doesn't do much but Rotator's disc still spits out a belt or two and they slow down, no one is surprised when Beta wins.
Thanks for doing this.
Will disagree on the aggression point though. Rotator didn't actively try and deliver it's weapon into Beta as it was on the back foot the whole match. Beta was actively attacking (albeit with its wedge) the whole match, but some aggression must score more than no aggression. If Rotator scores more it suggests a spinner can win aggression just by turning it's weapon on.
The damage scoring is interesting but appears perfectly inline with the rules.
I agree with Beta winning, while it was a lot of pushing there was still a lot of excellent driving by John Reed and control! This might actually be one of my favorite matches!
Wow I can’t believe you are the actual guy who made Bloodsport. Amazing job man. Your robot is amazingly powerful!
Bloodsport is definitely not the work of just a single person. Justin Marple did a lot more work on the design than I did. I just helped with some of the manufacturing of parts and keeping it repaired at the event along with the rest of the team. But still, thank you for the kind words!
Oh yes I know. I am a HUGE fan of battlebots. And when I saw you and your team destroy skorpios, I knew that you could pull of some upsets and go to the top 16.
I mean skorpios is a huge legend. And you won! What is it like a battlebots?
I get asked that a lot so I made this! ruclips.net/video/4D0Bba4Jb04/видео.html
Oh ok thx. I mean I can’t believe I’m chatting with a Battlebots competitor. Like wow.
Beta won strategically, in the case of manual weapons (hammer, axe, flipper etc.) you have to wait for an opportunity to strike. Rotator (always active weapon) had 3 full minutes to go for Beta's weapon but it broke towards the match end merely because Beta turned his back right into Rotator's spinner, clearly Rotator team were so disorientated and didn't even aim for Beta's weapon, strategy should matter too.
To be fair to Rotator, they were going for Beta’s hammer for the whole match, climbing up its wedge, trying to disable it like Tombstone did(look it up), but Beta was too well-armored for that tactic to work.
Personally I think that beta should have the aggression points mainly because of the fact that his driving was aggressive and rotator was off balance and running almost the entire time. The hit on the hammer was not a controlled hit and should not be worth any points. And with control obviously going to beta beta is the real winner of this fight.
Eh, the decision kinda highlights how shitty the Damage/Control/Aggression criteria are. If you have no control over the match, it follows that you won't get the same chance to show aggression. There's overlap between the categories that are difficult to remove.
However, I disagree with you about aggression. 2-1 to Beta looks right to me. Yes, it didn't use its weapon (which was not a surprise to anyone who has watched John Reid fight a spinner) but it initiated more attacks. Rotator did it's best as you say, and did use its weapon but *and the footage you used highlights this* when Rotator drove towards Beta, it was wedgelets first. That is a demerit towards aggression just as much as Beta shoving it's tank wedge into Rotator's spinner.
I think Lisa's score card explains why Beta got a damage point. 'Beta dominated'. She felt that Beta won, so she scored the fight to reflect that, presumably Derek felt similarly (and gee, I wonder which judges built low-damage robots that relied on control and which judge lost a fight they dominated because their primary weapon died). If Battlebots removed the 'thou must use your weapon to score 3 aggression points' she'd have given Beta 3 aggression points rather than 2 and a damage point. Full disclosure I do think Beta was better driven, more aggressive and completely nullified Rotator. I'd have scored it as a Beta win too.
I understand why you and others feel differently, but y'know. That's why it's controversial, not 'wrong'.
My point in making this video was in part to highlight the fact that these rules and guidelines *exist*. The fact that Battlebots made these rules and requested that judges follow them is in part an effort to keep the spinner heavy meta alive for the sake of what they determined to make for good TV. I would tend to agree that Lisa felt from watching the fight like Beta won and then scored her card to justify that decision. However the existence of these guidelines is entirely to prevent exactly that from happening.
Honestly if I were unaware of the guidelines I would absolutely have thought Beta won as well. But the point remains that there have been and continue to be cases where the judges subvert or ignore the rules in order to vote how they 'feel' is right, and the moving goalposts that this creates makes it impossible for the builders to actually be able to effectively strategize for the fights.
For instance, if Victor read the guidelines as closely as I did and interpreted them the way that I did, he would have felt like he absolutely needed to go spinner-first into Beta the entire time, and use his forks offensively very few times. I would argue that is exactly what he did in an attempt to win. And the fact he didn't win as a result may well have been no fault of his own, but rather a difference of opinion between himself and the judges.
I think this case is a tricky one because there wasn't any hard and fast rule broken, but rather some studious interpretation needed to decipher what the outcome here should have been based on the existing rules at the time. But there have been fights in the past where the guidelines were not followed, or were interpreted differently, which makes it very difficult as a competitor to actually know what to do to win.
@@JustCuzRobotics Why did rotator need to use its wedgelets when they could have ran a double disk which would have made it harder for Beta to attack either side of the bot?
I'm not Victor so I can't be sure but I am pretty sure that main weapon he chose was too heavy to allow a second weapon.
@@JustCuzRobotics if that is the case we will only see rotator use two disks in fights they are guarenteed to win instead of top tier fights a loss to the fans :(
@@JustCuzRobotics "The fact that Battlebots made these rules and requested that judges follow them is in part an effort to keep the spinner heavy meta alive for the sake of what they determined to make for good TV."
The fact that you wrote this makes me respect you, simply because this is an acknowledgement of manipulation by the show producers, quite frankly, in violation of the spirit of the sport. This sort of thing reminds me of the Sixth/Seventh Wars from Robot Wars.
If pushing the opponent around wins you the fight all bots will be wedge bots. Frankly I think the audience always sides with wedge bots in moments like these (Skorpios vs Icewave, Tombstone vs Gruff, Duck on multiple occasions) because watching one machine push the other around feels dominant. Fights between bots like Duck, Gruff, Blacksmith and others with nonfunctional weapons are not only boring, they are impossible to judge meaningfully because both just push eachother until someone votes on the prettiest. "Control" is meaningless and useless unless you translate it into something, preventing the other machine from moving freely at the cost of your own moving freely is not something that should grant you points it is double immobility, anyone can build a fat wedge with wheels and push stuff around. Real control is being able to manipulate the position of the opponents machine while maintaining the mobility of your own, and since the value of control can't be measured meaningfully i'd prefer it if damage was the only category being scored on. If you want to increase the value of control make the hammers do actual damage and add meaningful terrain.
If a battlebot lacks the capacity to disable an opposing battlebot it should not be in the competition in the first place.
its becasue a bot who has a weapon thats always active does not mean its hits count for much , and its not like they are not functional the just cant be used against horizontal spinners for clear reasons.
honestly, if the intention is to encourage active weapon use, the rules and judging criteria need to be revised to make that crystal clear. if beta had fired it's weapon, it's nearly certain to have been destroyed. thus, beta did not fire it's weapon. essentially, as long as rotator was spinning it was disabling beta's weapon, and as such should have won full damage points.
Good luck on the fight against Endgame tonight! I know it's already been recorded and stuff but I'm rooting for you! And thanks for more information with this video, my last question asking about your opinion left me a bit confused, but only because I'm kind of slow lol. Good luck!
Congratz on the win against End Game guys!! You guys are quickly becoming one of my favorite teams :D
Thank you!!
All competitive sports have rules designed to balance gameplay. It could be team limits or a spend cap, but it's there. Robot combat tends to have a rock/paper/scissors setup between highly destructive weapons, defensive bots and control bots. A wedge can best a spinner, a wedge has little answer against control bots (including flippers), and control bots often struggle against destructive machines. The problem is that the current rules are set to give destructive weapons an edge, now even to the point where an obvious win by Beta gets called into question.
Robot Wars had the exact same problem, but weighted towards control bots. They were just starting to come around by series 10 by limiting the pit and removing the round robin stages and BattleBots needs to tweak things too. Balance is important and makes for better television. Watch that fight again, but imagine a different rule set was applied. Beta still wins. And it won in this match too, despite the odds, because even with the damage it was still functional, still aggressive and RotatoR offered nothing in return. But pit Beta against Gruff and Beta would struggle. BattleBots needs better balancing, but Beta beat RotatoR.
Interesting. Until I started visiting forums and RUclips videos after the episode there was no doubt in my mind that Beta won and the judges made the correct decision... There is still no doubt in my mind Beta won.
I think that this raises the greater issue, as this kind of judging promotes spinners to be the only way to compete, as they deal the most damage. I do feel that this is where the UK series offers more possibilities for other bots other than spinners to see success, with things like the pits, and parts of the arena designed for robots tobe flipped out of. It doesn't subtract from the amazing power of the spinners, but adds an alternative to all-out damage, and means that the focus is put on the driver more so, and makes it vital to make a stable and drivable bot, as much as a damaging one. This reason is why I think you see more varied designs see success in the UK wars, over the US scene. Damage is cool to see for sure, but there is so many more ways to take this sport than just out right driving. Maybe Battlebots would benefit from having the addition of something like a pit, it would mean that more tactical driving would have to be performed, and flailing robots with huge power would offer much more of a risk. But this spinner meta is almost getting dull for me
If we accept Team Beta's reasoning - that it didn't want to employ the hammer and have it it the blade on Rotator. There for their strategy going (which they did cite before the match) was to try an flip Rotator and then hammer the unprotected bottom. Thus, their initial approach was on of control in order to get that flip. And almost on que, Rotator's spinner did finally catch the hammer head which it knock off. Now Beta was truly weaponless so it was operating under the alternate rules. But intentions aside, the weapon was not employed, Rotator did the only damage - winner: Rotator.
I was going to get on here and state all my arguments in harsh fashion, but then you completely made my argument for me! As for changes to scoring decisions, maybe creating a category called resiliency. The definition of resiliency is "the capacity to recover quickly from difficulties; toughness." Rotator definitely recovered quickly from the difficulty Beta showed(mainly ramming, but dealing no real damage only cosmetic) but the same can't be said of Beta(as his main weapon got disabled). With this extra category I believe Rotator would have won. Since Beta never fired their weapon and only tried to ram Rotator into the wall, Rotator recovered quite quickly. However, when Rotator knocked off Betas hammer, there is no quick recovery from that. The end result could be different if Beta used their hammer; but they didn't.
In the end I do believe the judges judged this battle incorrectly. This change in scoring may help alleviate that pain.
I had thought while watching that Beta won fairly, if narrowly, because of the terms "Control" and "Aggression", since they did appear to drive with more control and were often the aggressor. After your analysis quoting the rules of how each of those terms is defined (especially regarding the play between aggression and weapon use) tho, I'd agree with you in that Rotator should've won. Regardless, both are amazing bots and teams (Beta is one of my favorite bots for the technology put into it) and I hope they each get fair shots in the rest of this season and future ones.
This fight felt very similar to the Robot Wars Series 7 title fight between Typhoon 2 and Storm 2, where Storm 2 did all the hard work with its control and aggression, but was the only bot to take any sort of damage.
In my opinion, it would seem wrong for one bot to work so hard on taking control of the whole fight, only to lose it because of a "little bit" of damage.
On that basis, and no disrespect to all parties involved, I believe Beta was the rightful winner of the decision, because Rotator couldn't really do much when it was being tossed around like a ragdoll, despite the lucky hit on Beta's hammer.
Explanation of the rules aside, my scorecard would say:
Damage - 5-0 Rotator
Aggression - 3-0 Beta
Control - 3-0 Beta
Total - 6-5 Beta
Beta smothered Rotator the entire fight, so I totally understand why it won most of the aggression points and ALL of the control points. What I think is a MORE controversial decision was the fight between Tombstone and Gruff, since Gruff smothered Tombstone the exact same way WHILE USING ITS PRIMARY WEAPON and STILL lost the fight. I’d love to see a video on that mess.
What does strong advantage mean? Personally I would give rotator 3 damage points as in the context of battlebots, beta took a low to a average amount of damage. Heck they probably only had to undo and redo some bolts in order to fix a new hammer to their robot.
Many people have been saying that discounting beta on account of not firing would be to punish it for a legit strategy they chose against their opponent (waiting for a good hit).
What that does, is discount how good rotator was at not dying/being corralled as per their strategy! Beta controlled the fight yet still couldn't execute on their strategy nor flip rotator nor cause it damage against itself to fail nor even just pin it for a moment. Victor has built a robust and hardy robot and it should be congratulated to work in immaculate condition after that long, not just be dismissed as "they were bullied they should lose"
I don't personally see "not dying" as being a point scoring thing, I have to note. Rotator's an amazing bot, I love it, it's still unique in an increasingly "meta design" era and I adore the black and gold look. I almost always root for them. I hugely congratulate their survival, but I can't justify "not dying" as a thing to hold it up in judging.
@@Retrosicotte it throws a spanner in the argument that beta was completely powerless to do anything but abstain from firing. Rotator "not dying" contributed significantly to the lack of aggression and damage. People argue beta didn't have a choice. But that is why they didn't have a choice
If this was season 2, Rotator would have won unanimously. During that season of battlebots, if your weapon broke, and it went to the judges, you were almost guaranteed to lose.
Hard disagree about the aggression thing - Rotator wasn't displaying anywhere near the aggression Beta was. In fact, Rotator wasn't really attacking at all, its weapon hits were mostly just it turning the weapon towards Beta as Beta charged in which isn't "showing aggression". Ramming counts less towards aggression than using a weapon, but the amount of ramming Beta did in the fight meant overall it should get far more points than Rotator would with its working weapon.
YOU'RE RIGHT, THE PROBLEM IS TH...WHY IS CAPSLOCK ON
sorry about that. by any reasonable assessment of those events you're right, the problem is that _the rules they were supposed to be judging by_ were intentionally written explicitly wrong as part of an attempt to force the competition towards more explosions.
normally they ignore their rules and call a fight wrong in order to make a controversial decision to stick in there every couple episodes to help generate controversy, kinda funny that this time around the controversy was them ignoring them to call a fight correctly. worst I can think of off the top of my head is copperhead vs mammoth, they called a fight in favor of a bot who rules-as-written should have had a solid 0 in all 3 categories with a possible argument for 1 under damage (literally failed to scratch the paint during the fight but they _did_ make contact with their weapon which makes things fuzzier).
Just from watching that fight, I could tell that Beta was absolutely dominating the whole time, and to me, that's what was the most important. If you set aside the judging rules, Beta would have won that match anyways, probably by a lot more (imo).
Sure, their weapon broke. But it's not like he was going to use it anyways lol, it was a hammer against a top spinner, if course it was going to break.
When team Rotator was talking trash after the fight, my opinion of them dropped immediately. Like, you were on the receiving end of that, did you not feel that pressure? If I lost like that, I'd be applauding the other team instead.
did you see how they were acting during the fight the driver was cheering his bot being bullied around the box because he thought his active spinner would give him an easy win since he new beta couldn't use his hammer against it.
Problem is the rules for scoring are stupid....
I like the analysis.
One hit does not equal a win. Please let that sink in.
Tell that to Tombstone...
That is true
@@ThatBuilderBoi but how can driving 1st half the fight tell that to beta thrn
Keep making these please
This fight is what people get for complaining about Sawblaze and Brutus's fights.
I understand all you say and agree Rotator should, with the current rule, have won. But when watching the fight i thought beta was doing all and rotator was bullied the whole time. The bottomline for me spectator is that it was a pretty enjoyable match. I however understand the frustration of the builder and the hard work of the judges. Should there be judges or just make it a public decision if no knockout. It's a show let's decide who made the best show.
lifters only has 1 weapon
When Hydra/ Jake won against Huge/ Johnathan. A massive shield on the front of the bot that prevented Jake from even having an active weapon. Team Beta is doing the same thing here. Its ridiculous.
"I hope I didn't start a flame war in the comments" I think that's exactly what you want ;-)
Well I don't want everyone mad at *me*. They can flame war with one another though 🔥
Congrats for that Win in Episode 4
I agree that rotator should've won but beta did not let rotator do its thing except for that big hit that took off the hammer of beta, beta had control and aggression because it wouldn't let rotator move around much but now thinking about it yes rotator shouldve won by damage and main weapon hits
Yep. According to battlebots own rules, Beta should not have won. I'm guessing that the Judges scored the fight the way they did because Beta visibly dominated the fight, and they don't know the rulebook by heart. I personally like Beta more than Rotator but they didn't deserve that decision.
With the guidelines I'd still call this a close fight, if I was judging I'd feel hard-pressed to not award Beta more points on control and aggression even with the guidelines. Rotator did no deliberate damage, it was just a shame that it nicked the hammer after the ram. I'd probably make the argument that the weapon still somewhat functioned at that point just to give the win to Beta in my head. Had the fight gone on, I don't see Rotator coming out on top.
The judges should definitely change that they should have fired the hammer at least once, that decision definitely made me mad
yet look at liftwrs then has primary weapon
A bit late to the party, But I really think that both Beta and Hyra's wins were fair and totally well earned (Lumped Hydra in aswell cause its a very similar situation). Both robots were incredibly well driven and controlled to be able to successfully control and dictate each fight.. both of their strategies were far from fool proof. I really enjoyed both fights and think that it's a shame that such a technical and strategic fight is so frowned upon.
That’s my main problem also it’s way too inconsistent.
Yeah it would be easier if there was perhaps a way to indicate the bots with health bars? If that's possible at all?
I don't think there is a practical way to do that. Sadly damage will always be somewhat subjective too as to what is worth more.
@@JustCuzRobotics in terms of DMG it would be nice if the judges at least went into the box and looked at the bots for a before and after even if really quick
I Think The Scoring Should Be A 10 Point System Like Boxing & MMA
5:36 can we say the same for icewave vs skorpios?
Let’s face it, beta’s just so good It can beat rotator without a weapon
And only bot with major damage. It should win the nut.
This makes me wonder if control bots are allowed in the arena, they do not inflict damage with their weapon, just by hitting them in hazards, walls and flipping.
Beta was acting as a control bot, they controlled the entire fight.
The difference is for a lifter bot like Gruff, its primary weapon is a lifter. If they get under another bot and drive that bot into the screws with the lifter used to raise that bit off the ground then they are using their primary weapon to do damage. Beta is a hammer bot and wasn't using its weapon in order to push Rotator at all.
@@JustCuzRobotics but look the agression and driving skill by beta then
Rotator did zero deliberate damage, thus rotator didn’t deserve all of the damage points. I feel like in this instance, aggression and control overlap each other. Rotator was on its side the whole time so he wasn’t delivering his weapon in a controlled manner. At that point the driver for rotator could just turn on his weapon and put the controller down and still get aggression points, it makes no sense. What I’m saying is rotator didn’t do enough deliberate damage to earn full damage points as per the guidelines and wasn’t in control at all, thus showing almost no aggression. I think beta clearly deserved the win but the guidelines being so weird stunted that a little, but even with the guidelines in place i think beta still deserve the win
Late to the party, but I'm still trying to catch up on this season.
I tend to look at "spirit of the sport" over "rules as written". The rules are there to help maintain spirit of the sport and Beta was not actively trying to take advantage of that.
I look at it this way, if a random person were to turn on their TV and THIS fight was airing. And they watched Beta dominate Rotator, only to have Rotator win they'd be thinking "that doesn't make any sense, Rotator didn't really do anything except accidentally hit his hammer!" And would be an absolute turn off to anyone watching.
I know if I watched an MMA fight, and saw this guy pummel this other guy, and accidentally broke his hand in doing so, the judges wouldn't say "since he broke his hand, he automatically loses!" I wouldn't respect the sport if I saw that.
While I get the technicalities, I would rather Spirit of the Sport rulings over a rule in place to avoid boring bots from entering the competition with fake main weapons. And I say all of this as a huge rotator fan.
The sport grows better when it's more fun to watch. And seeing everyone whine and complain about technicalities of rules is not fun.
On a side note about this fight why did rotator use that configuration it doesn,t make sense?
so that beta could not fire his hammer thats what happend here rotator set up to prevent beta from being able to fire at all.
You can see it in so many ways... I understand Beta won by JD, but i guess i could also understand if Rotator won.. The fight is more than just some point in only 3 categories, in my eyes beta was dominant. And also, 4/5 in damage point for rotator by destroying the hammer tip is a bit overkill i you think about it... I would personnally score 4/5 in damage it Beta was smoking, not moving well, or with a non functional weapon... But once again, we never knew if Beta's hammer was working in the first place i guess..
The fact is, it was a very close fight, and we don't need to be mad about it.. If Rotator won it would have been the same debate.
So I know this is kinda old at this point but I was just made aware of this controversy so I wanna throw my two cents in.
I wanna shoot holes in your "per the guidelines" bit. If we are to go by specific wording of the rules why even have the judges weigh in on aggression at all? There's only three points to give. That also being said it's hard to show aggression when you're the one being pushed around an entire match. I mean you can growl and claw towards my face all you want but if I got you held out of arms reach you're not going to get me.
Most of the damage by Rotator seems to be incidental throughout most of the fight. Sure they run at Beta and get that weapon to connect for a moment only for that wedge to go "Yea how about you don't". The argument for Beta not using its weapon imo comes down to strategy as well. I can't remember 100% but I think I heard somewhere that they have only a few good swings in that hammer before it's out of gas. Sure they missed a few moments they could have taken a swing after pushing Rotator into the wall but they know that hammer gets knocked off rather easily and when that blade is spinning it would be incredibly stupid to take a swing. There's still a few moments they should have as I don't think the arc would have put the hammer anywhere near the blade but whatever. If I were the driver my plan would have been to keep them under control attempting to get that blade stopped or even considering flipping them over. The latter would be dangerous but would allow me to strike at them without the fear of the blade blowing my hammer off. And from watching the fight this is definitely what it seemed like was going through their head during the fight.
After the fight I have to come to the same conclusion the two judges in favor for Beta did. Sure, the damage Rotator did was more significant but at no point were they in control and because they were never in control and due to the design of their robot they couldn't show any aggression. If they had a hammer to swing or a lifter or really anything but a type of spinner to show some "GET YOUR HANDS OFF ME GRRRR" attitude then sure maybe I could award them a point or two depending on how that went. But with that design they had no control and because they couldn't regain any control they had no aggression. Implied aggression I just can't count because I mean... it's Battlebots... if you aren't trying to eliminate your opponent one way or another why are you here? I can only judge you on what you do during the fight.
Sure. I'm just a random dude. I don't judge for any events and I certainly don't have a bot to fight with though that would be awesome. I don't have the experience others do. But i'd like to think i'd have done similar driving Beta, and from my understanding of the rules even after your explanation here I would vote for Beta as these two judges did.
Beta does seem to cause rotator to spit out a weapon belt at the 2:51 mark, which could be seen as somewhat effecting the functionality of rotator. If the judges noticed this then the 4-1 damage score seems more reasonable. Although i feel under the current rules Rotator should have won 4-1, 2-1, 0-3.
That belt was left in the arena from another fight. Rotator only has one and it's weapon was still working throughout the fight.
Fair, do you know what fight it came from or is that spoilers.
Each to there own!! I’m in the other side of the fence but understand your opinions ;)
just imagine if BETA hadn't shown ROTATOR how to beat TOMBSTONE , that would have been another loss for ROTATOR . Only joking lol.
That being said, this was almost a carbon copy of John Reid's Terrorhurtz fight against Carbide.
In my opinion, beta is still fair because it's still uses a wedge that was already designed, not like hydra who did that, and john reed plays fairly, unlike jake
jake played fairly and inside the rules
I agree that Beta won this one, Beta's aggression and control overwhelms that one small "damage" that was done on the hammer. I'm even quite surprised and vexed that Rotator team thinks they won, when they got bullied for the full three minutes.
Every1 should watch 1 fightfrom season 2
yes more opinions please
Merry Christmas and good luck against endgame
Well I would have agreed but beta lost it's hammer so it's tough
Beta lost. They have no multitasking skills. Zero timing when they could have used the hammer, year after year.
I would have to agree. Beta did have control over the match and was the aggressor but did not use their main weapon.
Knowing this you have changed my opinion
Thanks for the video. I wonder how it would have been scored.ifnyou replace beta with duck. Beta used their bot to get the job done. I feel you should be penalised for not putting your weapon in danger.
Except there are other rules around scoring that do precisely that. beta actually could have lost Control points for intentionally putting its weapon in the line of fire of Rotator's (and this DID happen to Shatter fighting Malice).
This is scorpios vs icewave pt2
This was great thanks!
SawBlaze vs Razorback season 2
I think that as a spectator looking at the fight you would assume that rotator won but the way that these fights are scored I agree with the judges decision and I think that under the battlebots rules beta won.
Look at agressive nd driving skill frombeta you will see why he won
Rotator won.
Really? I don’t understand the decision made by judge, they know the rules but i think they ignore the damage made by rotator👎🏾
why not look the driving skills and agression by beta then?
Quite frankly, Beta's win vs Rotator is exactly why it lost to Tombstone 2 seasons ago.
Back when it fought tombstone i heard that if it did win it was way to damaged to continue, apparently beta took some massive internal damage when tombstone took the hammer off
Well yeah but the difference was that in the tombstone fight was that it stopped working after the second firing
@@pauldoe3201 more like the difference was that the hammer was no longer attached pretty much. the chain was gone (it was electric back then, as opposed to the new pneumatic version, and one of the bulkheads what torn apart.
The real kicker though is that the damage Beta suffered vs Tombstone was an exact result of what Beta was trying to do to rotator: Turning an opponent over in their charges with the wedge.
@@233Deadman exactly, it’s the only sensible way to take on a horizontal spinner, or anyone for that matter
@@pauldoe3201 only sensible way for a machine like Beta to take on a spinner like that. Other designs can do things very differently, for example drums and verts can deal damage in return, and might even choose to risk a weapon on weapon hit.
😪😪😪😪😪😪😪 beta have won the end 😪😪😪, anyways these robots are just for entertainment anyways😪😪😪😪😪why bother exlaiming your knowledge waste of time😪😪😪😪
Rules are rules. I am not changing anything by discussing them. Not sure why you're upset, Beta still won the fight and my video changes nothing about the remainder of the show.
@@JustCuzRobotics You might not think you're changing anything, but what you ARE doing is highlighting the showrunner's motives for why the rules are written this way....and THAT might cause change in the long run to make things more fair.