Battlebots and FIRST
 

I was just wondering what FIRST contestants think of Battlebots. I heard a while back that some teachers didn't like the show because it encouraged violence (or something).

I don't like it. There's no veriety, all the bots use pretty much the exact same. I like the analogy that it's the WWF of robotics.

There's no veriety, all the bots use pretty much the exact same.

Not to be argumentitive, but isn't this an *exact* description of FIRST? I mean to a layperson, there is a heck of a lot more variety in BB than FIRST.

I don't think this is a very important aspect and I suspect it's not the real reason you dislike Battlebots. There are so many other parts that even I don't like, but variety is not a big issue yet.

Dan

My Personal Thoughts...
 

While I don't have the "BB must fall" mentality of some FIRSTers I've talked to, BB still leaves a somewhat bad taste in my mouth. The few BB shows I have seen have shown to me that in most cases, the participants seem to put as much time and effort into their machines as we do ours. The "bad taste" that I get comes from the inability to justify putting that much time and effort into a project, when I know all the while that defeat means not only a hung head at the end of a day, but a box of parts to bring home, rather than the machine I arrived with. For those who can justify this, I wish them luck in whatever event they choose to participate in.

Ok people i just want to come out and say it Battle Bots SUCKS!
here is my reasoning.
1. You invest all of this time and have a really big chance that your bot will become pile of bolts. Where in first you can come to a competition with a box of bolts and other teams will pitch in and help you build a bot.
2. No matter what anyone says losing in FIRST is alot better then in BB. You get to meet all of these great people. A kid that loses in BB is sad and really does not have any emotional support like that in FIRST.
3. You dont get to meet great! people like in FIRST. I would truly trade winning the nut for the pleasure of knowing all of the wonderful people on this message board.
Some people on my team want to start a BB team but i keep telling them wait till competition and you will be blown away.

You're competed in FIRST but not in BattleBots; so you're comparing your experiences to your very extensive assumptions.

I've competed in FIRST, Robotica, and BattleBots and I know you would never believe that everyone at each competition was totally helpful, respectful, and kind.

I really could go on and on about the spirit of BattleBots and Robotica--and I have in previous threads, please refer to them--but the truth is you guys will never believe me if you don't want to.

For those of you who don't like BattleBots, think the competitors are mean, etc. I encourage you to come over to the BattleBots forum. Ask absolutely any question you have about anything robot or science related and these guys will help you. If they're willing to help their soon-to-be opponents, then who wouldn't they help, right? There are 150,000 posts on it right now, you can search those too.

http://www.delphiforums.com/battlebot_tech

Dan

PS I've referred them over to this webpage many times, especially with the IFI controllers they're using now, and they love it....so they owe y'all one anyways

Like a moth to a flame.....
 

Like a moth to a flame…..better yet…from Don Quixote… “….march into hell for a heavenly cause”


Consider this….

FIRST and BB are different experiments, but they share some common ground. Let's try to find it.

We should be teaching students not to make assumptions.

Dan has an open mind about BB/Robotica and FIRST…This speaks volumes about Dan as a person and as a gracious professional. Dan has an open mind because he works hard to keep his mind open. Sounds simple enough right?

Not so. Keeping an open mind takes a lot of effort. Dan serves as a good example. We should all practice keeping an open analytical mind about the things we DO and THINK about.

The practice of adopting, believing in, or voicing strong opinions about ideas or methods of which we have no empirical data is frowned upon in science and engineering…

Accomplished scientists and engineers test theories and hypotheses.

When engineers think hard, develop mechanical concepts and then test them…they are defining themselves as professionals. Your family physician has taken promises to “Do no harm”…your mentoring engineer promises to.. “Make no assumptions”.

I’d like to refer everyone who bothers to read this thread to a very exciting and illuminating, engineering website.

http://www-me.mit.edu/Research/DesManResearch.htm

This site contains the course notes for the MIT Design and Manufacturing I , ME course. These notes were authored by Professor Alex Slocum…Alex runs the MIT 2.007 course…a course that was conceived by Woodie and served as the inspiration not only for FIRST, but for the process of learning engineering by DOING engineering at hundreds of universities worldwide.

If you are a teacher, then please, take the time to read the megabytes of wisdom offered in these notes! If you are a student of engineering design…then you would be unwise to miss this opportunity. If you are a practicing technical professional then you’ll enjoy Alex’s POV.

One of the key underlying points Alex makes is that good design is “Deterministic Design”. Deterministic Design is an engineering creation process founded on the scientific method. A principle stating that you cannot know something to be true unless you perform the experiment that validates the assumption. He terms these experiments BLE’s or bench level experiments…but the point remains constant, good robust designs come from ideas that have been tested …..not from assumptions.

BB and FIRST are experiments…..(refer to all of the above) If you haven’t done the experiments…you don’t have the data. Once you have the data…the conclusions you reach are all yours….

Think about this.

When your team gathers in the early weeks to develop designs for your robots…and a member of the team advances an idea or concept that is “Bleeding edge”…and is asked why the team should commit thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars to that idea….they respond “Because I think it’s the best idea”…..doesn’t that fly in the face of reason?…There is a chasm between thinking and knowing…an eternity if your thinking is too far a field of experience.

So,

I try to offer points and counter points, not to champion one experiment over the other, but rather to keep the river of ideas flowing…and to break down the “Beaver Dams” of opinion and assumption.

Good and bad are subjective concepts …but facts are worth pursuing in the quest for any objective…

Here is some data gleaned from experiments my students and I have performed.

1.) All BattleBots are not catastrophically damaged during a BattleBots event….in fact most are not catastrophically damaged during an event…and they go home happy and no worse for the experience. We are currently building our 3rd and 4th BB. Intelligent designers insure their robots have “Mouth guards, shoulder pads and Locktite on their nuts.” These machines are built to score points and to absorb mechanical energy…remember, it is often necessary to win up to 8 matches in order to claim the silver nut.
2.) All robots break during competition. That’s why we have machine shops and spare parts at the FIRST competition sites.
3.) FIRST is about Inspiration and Recognition and education, and that is a good thing. FIRST and BBIQ are different “Experiments”.
4.) BattleBots IQ is about education. BBIQ is a student centered program that recognizes the benefits of learning through active participation and recognizes the educational benefits of failure. BBIQ teachers and mentors sign a registration form attesting to the fact that the BBIQ robots were wholly designed and built by students….not by teachers or mentors…as I’ve pointed out, this does not make BBIQ better or worse than FIRST, It’s just a different experiment. It’s like shop class used to be…but these are not bird houses! (Although I love building bird houses)
5.) As an educator responsible for the emotional and social well being of the students under my charge, I see no difference in the “Crowds” at either event…I’ve seen good and bad sportsmanship all my life…the “Bell Curves” remain constant…my son and his friends are in my class, and on our BBIQ engineering team!.

We should all visit again 10 years from now…FIRST, BB and the many versions of mechanized competition that will follow will be markedly different. They will evolve to meet the needs and expectations of the participants. They will all improve, and the levels of sophistication will be extraordinary. Witness the birth of home computing in the early 80’s…I still have a Trash 80….anyone have a Sinclair?

In closing I am willing to risk the following statements in an effort to counter the deconstruction of communication I am witnessing all over the Internet….and to “Raise the bar…”

Poor spelling and deliberate vulgar language is the bad breath of the written word…we (including myself) should always endeavor to practice better textural hygiene.

I wish to support Michael and Joe in asking that all responsible adults and students endeavor to “edit” their posts and to practice the same careful discipline they employ in creating their robots, to the creation of their written thoughts and ideas…BOTH FIRST and BBIQ are founded on a deep respect for the importance of maintaining high standards employed in the communication of ideas…..

Mr.B


http://www-me.mit.edu/Research/DesManResearch.htm

This is FIRST not battlebots and in first you can not got out on the playing feild with a saw and try to distroy other robots, but on the other hand contact is allowed and i can say from experiace that having a compotion where it is allowed or even encuraged is not bad if you build a good robot you will have no problem if you have a question about the competion we had with lots of contact it is under the OCCRA post (Oakland County Competitive Robtics Association) my opinion my be one sided because we won but it is the truth in my book

Just build a good solid robot and dont worry about it:cool:

I like them both (first and BB) look for my robot to be entered next year under the name 'Silverado' in the Middleweight Class.
It should be fun to see what Air over Oil Intensification can do out there.

One cool thing I have been learning is ProEngineer to model the robot.

My personal views: since I like Battlebots doesn't mean I am going to go out and crash my car into someone/something. Its entertaining to me, its a game. Huge amounts of engineering go into these Bots just like first, many are now using our control system or the Isaac. Just because something is destructive doesn't mean it is automatically bad. Its been said before 'No one gets hurt at a BattleBots event'

If this years game is like football think about football players. Ever look at how they walk 5 years after they retire, leg/knee joints have been ruined, concusions, scars. How about AutoRacing there are accidents in almost every match that total out cars, people die get hurt, 'rubbing's racing'.

Just to be sure it clear our robot is not designed to hurt anyone elses, it won't be a box with 12 motor tank drive to push people around either. The task will be to get balls and goals as fast as possible

Matt

Re: Battlebots and FIRST
 

When I first saw Battlebots I was not too excited about it because at forst, the bots there were all similar. Also,, I saw that most of the "killing" mechanisms looked frightening to humans, but they seemed silly when going up against a steel clad robot. (big chopping axes and swords)

My other problem with it was that you built this design marvel only to have it beat to pieces in the end. (even if you win)

But after watchjing it for a while I saw the design creativity starting to come out. Subtle changes like wedges, spinning momentum bashers, symetrical shapes that are either self-flipping or operate in any side.....I could see the engineering thinking occuring.....and lets face it, making something tough and indistructable is always one of the main engineering challenges in all designs.

So, I have grown to appreciate Battlebots....and BTW, I love Junk Yard Wars because it actually takes people through the thought process of the people and their creation.

All are a way to turn Engineering to Practical....which is one of the problems that people have appreciating Engineering.....it all seems like "book knowledge" and they just don't understand that all of the products they buy and take for granted were Engineered and created.

BTW: I also recommend the Trinity College Fire Fighting Robot Contest to any of you who might want to get into Autonomous robots. It seems simple, until you try to do it....and like First, you will NOT find a better more helpful group of people!

Here are my past fire-fighters:
http://www.tiac.net/users/bigqueue/h...e_fighter.html

Here is a link to the Fire FIghting Robot Contest:

http://www.trincoll.edu/events/robot/

Enjoy,
-Quentin

FIRSTer and BATTLEBOTer
 

Okay, some of you guys are making me sad.

I'm into both BattleBots AND First. FIRST is what got me into BattleBots, and I am actually working on a combat robot.

BattleBots is a sport of strategy, just like FIRST, only FIRST plays by a specific set of rules and a game play. Battlebots is more of the gladiator style game. Crush or be crushed.

The people there are so nice. Everyone has something interesting to bring to the table, even the bots that get destroyed. You will never find a better group of people to be in a pit with (well, unless they have massive work and only five minutes to do it in- then, things get a bit sticky).

I think people just need to keep an open mind. To you, it may be boring. To others, it's cool.

Like the Superbowl. I was utterly bored yesterday until U2 came on. And, I had to work through it, listening to people in the store talking about the teams and football. I don't follow it, so I was bored out of my mind.

Don't badmouth it just because you don't really like it.

Oh well-
Kat

I watch the show a bit here and their, but it isn't great. FIRST is **much** better than BB. But you do have to give it to BB and Robotica (which is better than BB) for advertising their product. Whenever someone asks me if I'm on the robotics team, the first thing out of their mouth is, "Is it like (insert destructive robotics show here)?" I say it is much harder and more intresting because there are more people, more matches, and since you can't use weapons, uses more stratage. Although BB isn't great, Junkyard Wars is great. Imagine building something made out of junk in one day inorder to compete in something.

i was into battlebots, but then it just got stupid after a while, and i stoped waching.

At our space where we work, we wrote Battlebots on the door to confuse the dumb people.

Let me help you out, Kat
 

OK, folks, time for me to put in my two cents...

I have some significant feelings about Battlebots. This discussion appears to have gotten to a point that my feelings are irrelevant, however. As a result, my feelings will remain unsaid.

In essence, when you talk about Battlebots in comparison to FIRST, you're really comparing apples to oranges. Sure, they're both arenas to compete robots, but the forum of each competition is completely different.

Nonetheless, the strategy and the mission are still the same. Entertainment and teamwork, combined with imagination, aluminum, steel, electrical components and zippy ties :) .

So, the competitions are different, but at the same time, they're quite similar. Kat, congratulations on your awesome idea to build a combat bot. I wish you well. Everyone else, support your fellow robot-eers!

Until next time...

~ Chip ~

i think that BB is kind of cool but is now losing its appeal as illustrated by its ratings. It has even resorted to adding carmen electra(a great addition for any show but BB) to its cast.

i also think that FIRST is leaning towards the BBs spectrum though. This year, for example. it involves more hitting and shoving. In some of our matches, bots would be hitting our wing when it wasnt even attatched to a goal!!! maybe i am wrong but i would rather see a robot perform a difficult task than to see a box of steel with a chainsaw on top ram into another box of steel with a rotating saw on top.

maybe i am wrong but i would rather see a robot perform a difficult task than to see a box of steel with a chainsaw on top ram into another box of steel with a rotating saw on top.

What makes you think BattleBots is easy?

One thing i have to say is adults need to get over this "Oh my god that could be inturpurted as violence, then it would teach our kids about violence, then we'd have another school shooting, ah ah ah". Its the same with video games, music and movies. Trust me no normal child that sees to robots running into eachother will want to go on a rampage. America as a whole needs to get out of this "any violence will turn our kids into psychopaths". If your an adult and you don't like battle bots because it promotes violence between bots then you haven't been to this years compititon, sure we don't have blades but we did hit eachother hard. Sure we don't try to damage eachother but we don't go out of our way to avoid contact with other bots. Violence is human nature and if you think that exposing a child to any form of violence will scar him for life then when hes 18 and steps out into the world out of the cave you've kept him in he will go crazy at the sight of it. Do your kids a favor and don't listen to Tipper Gore she dosen't really know what shes talking about.

Just my $0.02

You seldom, if ever, find the same students on both the chess team and the football team. But does this mean there is something inherently wrong with either sport? Of course not.
IMNSHO, anything that gets the football players to build robots is a wonderful thing, even if it is Battle Bots (*gag*). Still, it surprises me that ppl who call themselves FIRST junkies could stand to play battle bots.

Still, it surprises me that ppl who call themselves FIRST junkies could stand to play battle bots.

It really shouldn't! The people who compete in BattleBots are as kind and graciously professional as FIRST. Don't associate the actions of the robots with the actions of the people. The whole competition is about having fun and everyone understands and agrees with the rules--so how can this contradict with FIRST?

I'm helping a BattleBots IQ team (it's a high school competition)--their event is this week in Universal Studios--and they went through the exact same process you went through in building your FIRST robot. And they'll compete in the exact same atmosphere as you; the robots will be doing different things but the cooperation and spirit are the same.

Don't forget that Comedy Central is not associated with BattleBots; they simply pay for the rights to the match footage. So the whole "aura" of that show isn't exactly in sync with the reality of the competition.

Dan

While i've only had firsthand experience with FIRST, I know people on several BB and robotica teams, and they all involve the same basic principals of Gracious Professionalism and focus on strategy and engineering that FIRST does, despite how comedy central might portray them. The only robot show I think is truely bad is TNN's Robot Wars, where losing robots are crunched and torched by overweight "house bots" weilding flamethrowers. Also, the fact that a WWF wrestler hosts it doesn't help. I just hope that we don't get into the "us vs. them" mentality that has taken over so many other online groups I participate in (such as the Pocket PC vs. Palm and Sony vs. Palm in the handheld world, Star Wars vs. Star Trek, etc).

Hmmmm.......
Battelbots IQ is a competitor to FIRST
Universal is a competitor to Disney
Battelbots IQ is held in Universal
First is held in Disney

Coincidence, I think not.

i speak from exp, ive played football, bball, track. But i still do FIRST and i was on the chess team for a short time, b4 the season started, i just never went back lol


pont is, anyone can do anything they feal like doing.

That sums it up.

NEXT!

I find it funny that at the end of battle bots it says "A FIRST televison production" their not the same but its kinda ironic.

From what I've seen of Battlebots, the only thing I have come not to like is the way the show presents itself. The announcers making it sound like a football game, and some of the one liners that are used are just sad and pathetic.
As for the community of Battlebots, I have not competed in it, so I will not comment. If it's anything like what I've met here in FIRST, though, I'd be surprised. I'd be hard pressed to find a community like FIRST anywhere else.
As for the engineering aspect of battlebots- I have seen some truly creative designs. Sure, I have seen some truly crappy designs, but you also have to look at Snake and another one using blades for legs (I forget the names of both of these, but they were truly awesome to behold. Very creative.)
FIRST is actually teaching me enough so I might just make my own Battlebot to give it a try.
As for comparing it to first- I definately think the FIRST games are better. However, imagine how much more taxed your mind would be when designing a robot that may live to be one day old and cease to exist. Not that I'm saying it's a fun thing for me, just for people that love rebuilding. :D
So don't hate Battlebots. Just don't watch it if you want. Screaming it sucks or going out with Battlebots must die mentality is simply idioicy (the ironic part is I have no clue if I spelled that word right), the same idioicy that we learn about in our history classes, just on a smaller scale. Think about it.
Be open minded people!

true dat

I hadn't meant to imply that BB was any less graciously professional than FIRST, any more than a football player is less sportsmanlike than a chess master. I just meant that the BB comp. is run more like a competitive sport.

Touche! Thrust! Parry!
 

Lemme back up Dan and take this on section by section.....

1) The Show is not at ALL an accurate depiction of the life at BB, it's all the fun with your friends in the Pits that makes it as cool as it is. Sooooooo many Inside Jokes, Pranks, and general comradery goes on in the pits. I spent about 70% of my time at BB and about 30% fighting and watching fights, the show doesnt give you that.

2) Community. I bet you have the same idea in your head for FIRST, "These people are AWESOME!" I hope it's at least as good as what we have. My Friends at the Events are what I look forward to the most, not the competition itself. My friends Jerome Eric Chris John and Josh all helped me rebuild my utterly trashed 210lb robot in 2.5 hours at robot wars and was finished in time to make 1st place in it's event. Jerome put about 1200$ worth of stuff in there with about a 50/50 chance of getting the thing trashed. and he did it like it was nothing.

3) The Creativity is there, but you wont see it on television. You see the outer shell, armor and weapon. It may be an external copycat of another robot, but inside it may have a truly innovative feature that only the fellow builders saw. Many robots are copycats of other robots because their design is effective, that's all. If the design wasnt so good, it wouldnt be copied, would it? And even if it wasnt, it would be an oppurtunity to engineer an improvement to that design.

In total, I have spent about 8000$ of my own money on combat robotics. I must come out and say that I think spending a lot of your own money inspires you to use "Thrifty" engineering as opposed to sponsored/school money.

Besides, many people have had FIRST/Combat event crossovers and still had a great time. Remember, Battlebots is By far not the only combat event.

Lastly, here's a lil Phrase that applies to all robotics in general:
"Cheap, Fast, or Good; Pick 2!"

Peace,


http://forums.overvolt.net

S.E.C.R.
N.E.R.C
N.C.R.S.F.
Robotcombat.com
Battlebots Forum

Battlebots is hear to stay that's all I have to say. :cool: It rhymes.

he he he :p :p :p :p :p

Trust me, I have talked to a few Battlebots competitors and have done extensive reading, and I am preparing my first personal robot for the competition.
You don't like it, don't watch it.
The pits are desinged the same way as in FIRST, everyone helps everyone else.
Just unlike FIRST, bbots doesnt tell tehm to do that.
trust me, the TV spruces it up to make the team members look like some mad scientist.
And if you buy into everything the tv says, and trust me im not a mean person, you are an idiot.
::bows::
RESEARCH BEFORE YOU COMMENT.
It's like saying you don't like fish while never eating it.
It's called ignorance.

I dug up an old post but I'd like to add -

You guys complain about the way Battlebots is presented. The competitors hate it as well, even Trey and Greg(The owners) dislike it. Bill Dwyer is a great guy - he is truly interested in the sport. Anyone else can go away and never come back. Comedy Central puts on the show, they just use the match footage and do whatever they wish with it. For those of you who read the BB forum. Go away Crayon, go away! =P

"I personally can't stand Electra and think that she is about as bright as a black crayon (not that I have an opinion or anything)

-Buzz"

-Dallin

Question
 

How's that different from Pro/DESKTOP ? I've been learning Pro/D on my own for my little pet projects and my Eagle project. Just wondering.

BB is gettin Lame, It was fun the first season but thats it.

I wish it was better :(

I think Battle bots is very similar to FIRST only with out the time constraints. Which is good:D

Battlebots is awesome! (As you can see, I'm a big fan of Battlebots) I try to catch each show but sometimes I can't. Oh well. Yet, I think it's a good show. :D

Errr trust me there is plenty of ignorance about battlebots and its spinoff's. I have found plenty of stuff that simply isn't true and have been used as support for bashing battlebots.

i personally like battlebots. it encourages people to learn about technology, physics, programming, and all the other cool stuff we learn about. it is done in such a way that the public says "oh, that's really neat!" i mean, when we say we're on the robotics team, what's the first thing out of people's mouths? "OH!! are you in BATTLEBOTS! :)" "err...no, not exactly, we focus more on-" "oh... :(" *people walk away* seriously, they expose the public to the field of robotics somewhat more efficiently than FIRST. everybody knows what battlebots is about, but when you say "FIRST" they say "wha?:confused: "
please don't use the excuse that they destroy eachother, because their pits are similar to ours wrt gracious professionalism and helping eachother out.
i think the show is really cool, in that it is spectator friendly. it's easy to understand. it doesn't take 5 minutes to explain it. I like to watch it, to look at the designs, and the ways that their builders solve design problems. i think that i would definitely like to present some of the ideas i have gathered to the team for next year's robot.
lastly, i like it because it is bonding time for me and dad. we sit down with a bowl of popcorn, critique the designs, speculate, and afterward, draw ideas out, and discuss the matches, and how things could have been handled differently.
battlebots has given me a very positive experience in my usually-not-so-great-relationship with my dad, and i appreciate that.

I have to admit, I get tired of people asking 'Are you Battlebots?'

But still, it is robots competing.

FIRST competitors disrespecting Battlebots is like the Army disrespecting the Navy, or The Beatles disrespecting the Rolling Stones.

It's like...Milli disrespecting Vanilli.

So while I might not like the show on Comedy Central, from what I've read here, it sounds like a lot of fun, so I'm all for it.

Errr big problem in saying that because they aren't robots of course the machines we build in First aren't really robots also. The more choice term would be ROV of course robots is much easier.

BB is in many ways like FIRST. and yes the only dif is is that there is no time constraints to complete objectives. thats all i gotta say

Of course it depened on what competition you entered. Robotica if I remeber correctly had a time limit from when they said they were going put the show to when the robots had to be built.:)

Yeah. Dean likes to pull the lever on the big hammer and stuff! Woody loves to watch those spikes gorge the metal of the robots!

Yeah....

BB is only like FIRST in the respect that they build moving objects that run via remote control. Concept, execution, and other things are tottaly different.

Battlebots may have been the best thing to happen to robotics in terms of letting people know about the "sport", but it gives a bad representation overall. I can't tell you how many times I'm talking to people not involved in robotics about our FIRST team, and the first question out of their mouths is always "do they fight?" and "do you to Battlebots" Its hard to explain to ppl whose only exposure to robotics is BB that it takes much more design skill and creativity to build a FIRST bot designed to do a complicated task than to bolt a circular saw to a overgrown RC car. There are exeptions in BB though, there are many finely engineered and designed bots, as well as many innovative designs. Unfortunately the trend seems to be towards bots that are cheap to build, have one huge hit per match, but get blown apart easily. The rules of Battlebots also hinder creative thinking, because basically everything goes. Why not limit some of the weapons used so that designers need to find more innovative and creative ways of inflicting damage other than brute force?

I disagree. Battlebots made robotics a household name, sure, but that removes some of the intrigue of a robot competition. Look at Disneyland. It's quite possibly the best theme park out there, and the first to boot, but every start up has had not a big of success due to the brand name associated with DL.

People are interested in firsts, and don't care about seconds, even if they are better.

my 2 cents
 

OK, honestly, I think Battle Bots is cool. I (like many other posts i have read in this thread) think that it is just presented in a horrible fashion. Comedy Central doesnt show you what its like in the pits, or what the competitiors attitudes towards opponents really are. It seems to be a lot like FIRST, except there are any build time limits, so it gives you a chance to design and build a better robot (in some cases, I have seen FIRST robots that seem to be better deisgned/ built than some battle bots).

There is one thing i dont like. Most people seem to get this frame of mind that Battle Bots is what robotics is all about. Everytime someone walks in on a meeting, or sees the robot, or even just hears me mention robotics, they instantly ask me if I do Battle Bots. Then I say no and they suddenly loose all interest. Thats the only thing I dont like about Battle Bots, otherwise I think it is cool

There's only 1 goal, no real intellectual challenges.

Agree.

Whole thing behind BB:

Build, smash, collect rolyalties.

Agree.

Whole thing behind BB:

Build, smash, collect rolyalties.
---------------------------------------

....which does absolutely nothing to address why 95% of the builders lose A LOT of money (mostly through travel and hotel costs), never get on TV, and never see any royalties.

This also doesn't explain why the same people who competed in BattleBots are now starting small regional events. No prospects of royalties or toy deals here. Just some guys getting together to talk about their favorite hobby and share their work.

Dan

But the love of something doesn't equal up to a better comatiton. There are a lot of people setting up fake wrestling matches a la WWE, but is it better than golf?

The object to the game still remains the same: Bash, destroy. No intelectual input whatsoever.

The object to the game still remains the same: Bash, destroy. No intelectual input whatsoever.
--------------------------------------------------

No intellectual input? How does the simplicity of the task reflect the difficulty or amount of "intellectual input" required?

The goal of NASCAR is simple; drive a lot of laps faster than the others. NASA's goal was simple; put a man on the moon and then get him back.

Athletes on TV make their sport look easy and perhaps BattleBots is no different. I suggest you open up your mind beyond FIRST a little.

Consider how much MORE difficult engineering is when you don't have the safety of a kit and materials restrictions. What if you had to choose between hundreds of motors and batteries and controllers and hundreds of alloys of metals with various heat treatments?

Since you feel building a BattleBot is so intellectually trival; I highly suggest you make one. You will be at a considerable advantage since most people have great difficulty with it.

Dan

PS be careful, misspelling "intelectual" is a dangerous irony

Franky, most people know that my spelling ability is about as good as Gore remembering the forieng countrys.

Now lets look at the intellectual level of BB.

Sure, lots of robots have some good designs. But un-like in FIRST, good designs are usually just trashed by some bot that can move fast. Look at the huge worm one (can't remember name). It had one of the best programing and some complicated functions, but was beaten by the average robot. The run-of-the-mill shover.

I have and can look beyond FIRST. This isn't the first time that someone has said this to me about anything. But from what I've seen, when people say this, it's usually because they can't.

As for building my own bot, well, two big problems arise. Money and location. Richmond, VA and about $100 isn't going to cut it.

It depends on what your definition of good design is. As a robot to fight snake was a horrid design to use but as a creative display of engineering I agree it was a good design. What I consider a good design are robots like warhead that actually have some pracitical weapons and look good.

Might as well jump in and keep beating the dead horse.

First off, I like both competitions. I went to the Las Vegas Battlebots competition (as an audience monkey, but I still saw quite a bit), and I've been on FIRST, like almost all of you here. Yes, there are some pretty "vanilla" designs in Battlebots. But before we go off the deep end and talk about how FIRST is so much cooler and unique, allow me to summarize the standard first designs I've noted over my 2 years experience:
1. Goal Grabbers
2. Ball-grabbers
3. Generalists (those that can grab goals and balls)

These 3 types of robots make up 99.5% of any of the robots you'll see in a FIRST competition. If you're at the right regional, you might see one or two robots that uniquely buck the standard classifications listed above. Now, if a FIRST competition is so much deeper than a Battlebots competition, how is it that we 600-ish robotics teams can seemingly churn out only 3 different types of robots?

Also, I'm not sure where this "compete in Battlebots, make loads of money" mentality came in. The champion award for the superheavies, last time I checked, was about 5,000 dollars. Subtract from this to all the stuff BSMFIRST listed, and assuming your robot rolls through like an invincible juggernaut of death (not likely), you're not going to make much. The only robots I can think of that are the ones that paid for themselves are Ziggo and Biohazard (and the fact that their drivers are also quite skilled plays a part).

Asking why people compete in Battlebots is kind of like asking why we compete in FIRST. Education aside folks, the regionals are a fancy way of saying "look what my team built!" We use thousands of pounds of metal and wire to make robots that run around and pick up/move things around, simply for the sake of showing that we can. Aside from those who we pay for parts/arenas, FIRST does not benefit anyone, at least not right away, and neither does Battlebots.

However, robotic competitions are set to become to robotics like racing is to cars. Some of the best technological innovations have come out of racing. What's to say that some Battlebots/FIRST monkey, having tinkered with a part for 20 hours straight, couldn't potentially come up with the equivalent of the Holy Grail for robotics? Yes, a lot of advancements will come out of a lab. But keep in mind a working airplane came from a couple of bikemakers in Ohio.

I'm sure Mr. Kamen is a nice person, and has a lot of great qualities. However, he seems to have a chip on his shoulder. While he's earned it, he seems to pull it out whenever he talks about other robotic competitions. I've done a parody on his dislike of combat robotics, but I'm not sure what makes him so angry about it. Hell, some Battlebots competitors have even helped some FIRST teams. Think about it: these guys have designed robots that can hold together, and we're teaching kids how to build robots that hold together. What a great concept! And, like so many people have stated before me, these combat robotics competitions have good sportsmanship. Yes, you're going to have your Gage Cauchois's. But, you're also going to have a lot of decent people who just enjoy tinkering with things.

Why do people build things that are going to get broken? Folks, they do it for fun too. Have we become so locked on "YOU ARE HERE TO LEARN" that we forget that you can do it just to screw around? RA is a good example. In its fight vs. El Diablo (2nd season, didn't make TV), the robot was pushed under the hammer and smashed to pieces. It left the arena in a trash bag. Its owner allowed the beating to continue far beyond what would have been allowed. Why? Because he saw everyone was having a good time. He didn't seem to care about losing: he had a blast, and that was all that mattered (it's interesting to note that he brought the outside tire shell into the melee. Everyone was rooting for it).

The area Battlebots could improve in, however, is that it never shakes anything up. Every year, the arena maybe has 1 or 2 new hazards that don't really do anything. Titans like Ziggo and Biohazard are almost guaranteed "you lose" matchups.

Yes, Battlebots is different from FIRST. But just because it's different from what we prefer (and how much Kamen throws a hissy fit about it) doesn't mean it's bad by default.

-Reed
"It's long, rambling, and has no point...PERFECT!"

While we thurn out only '3 differnt styles', the problem is that unlike BB, FIRST changes every year. Goals are almost ALWAYS used. If you were here in previous years, you would know that many other things beside balls were used. Floppies and possible weights this year. On the other hand, BB never changes and has a greater possiblity of more diverse robots.

Which brings me back to my original point: if FIRST inspires more creativity than Battlebots does (and BB apparently requires no intellectual input), why is it that Battlebots tends to churn out more unique robot ideas than FIRST does with the game changing every year? Restriction on parts plays a part, to be sure, but that in and of itself does not solely explain this phenomenon.

The robotics team I'm on has been at it at least 2 years before I came aboard. The problem is that the last two years have been somewhat similar, with the exception of how the scoring works and some field modifications. You can't fault FIRST for this: they're trying to save money during a time in which corporations are looking to maintain the bottom line. However, the problem is that for the past two years they haven't changed the competition dramatically enough to break from the aforementioned 3 different kinds of robots. Yes, there's a difference between a 2001 and a 2002 goal grabber. However, a 2001 goal grabber could've been given a quick retrofit and been just as competent as a 2002 goal grabber built from scratch.

The games change, but they haven't changed dramatically enough to really cause any massive change in the three main groups of robots. The years before I came on the team were obviously dramatically different. Still though, it's been "take x object, put high up, deposit (if applicable)" with a few bells and whistles attached. Even then, that doesn't really get much attention: the balls on the field are worth so little in almost every competition that there's almost no incentive for a team to build a robot to pick them up. Of the ones that tried that I saw, only the Sea Dogs' robot (I believe) had any sort of success picking up balls.

Finally, Battlebots and FIRST are plagued with the same problem: the metal on wheel bots. At least in Battlebots wedges have some weaknesses: if you want to be a champion in FIRST, just slap some wheels on a chassis, a goal grabber or two, hold the goals in the end zone for 2 minutes (last year) and you'll win almost every time. Folks, I've seen it happen a lot. If alternate methods aren't worth the effort you put into them, than people aren't going to be very creative about their robot designs.
Simple as that.

yeah
 

Since I am way too lazy to read all the posts, I am not sure if this was mentioned.
At the end of the battlebots credits. FIRST is listed.......... hmmmm any connection?????

subliminal messageing

No, really, some participants use the Innovation FIRST controller.

Nah First and First are totally unreleated companies. This has been brought up before.
Yup thats pretty much it.:) Except its a really broad challenge and so simple. Also there is more time.

Ah, the simple life!
 

Life is so simple when you are young! 6 weeks of building FIRST, a couple days of compettion, and 40 some weeks of bashing others!

Maybe this year will be the year that the FIRST competition gets some TV time, and some of this jealousy will dissipate.

Battle bots is canceled so we won't have to worry about this any more