a) For starters, actual effective weaponry. What were TAN's weapons then? Pretend weapons? And you can't deny TAN's weapons were effective, even if you disagree with its battle philosophy(What they called "Horizontal Crushers", which weren't crushers at all. They were more clamps really, which did no damage whatsoever- a bit like gently gripping onto an egg to hold it, but not break it. All they did was just hold on and do no damage) Still they were real weapons, and they did what they had to well, which is the point.We've seen previously what those two are capable of, and right at the start, DI looked good in the First Round Melee, the way it tore into BOD. I think if it had gotten through, I reckon it could at least have gotten to the Heat Finals. We've also seen previously how unreliable DI is. I reckon it could have at least lasted another few minutes before breaking down. (Not necessarily- in some cases, it lasted alright- in the opening Melee of Series 6, it lasted throughout, and took out both Behemoth and Tridentate. In Series 7 however, it looked on good form as well, and had CAC not pitted it, I think it would've qualified- you can't really tell reliability from a few seconds of screen time in a new series. I might've looked at it a bit more fairly if CAC had legitimately immobilised it, but no. That would be too difficult for a pair of tongs with no effective weapons) The weapons were effective at what they were used for. And DI was beaten fairly - it was thrown in the pit, which last I checked, was a legit way to beat an opponent in RW. I seem to remember you championing pits against Naryar a while ago.And in my eyes, Gravity would've been a far better Dutch Representative in the Third World Championship, being what could be considered the first of Europe's generation of monster flippers. You answer my question asking how it would be better by saying it would be better. Explain, don't repeat. Anyway, in my opinion, it would have been a worse representative for the Dutch - it would have found Rawbot as easy as TAN did, but it wouldn't have had a hope in against Storm 2, unlike TAN who did have a chance. so for the Dutch, TAN was a better representative. (In terms of reliability perhaps, but in terms of excitement to watch, Gravity beats it easily, with its performance of throwing rather than pushing. Yet with so many international competitors, I don't see why they just set it out like the previous 2 World Championships, and made it a much larger tournament- that way, both of them could've entered, instead of one of them) I wasn't referring to reliability, I was referring to having a chance at winning against Storm 2. Excitement is irrelevant. Size of the competion is irrelevant. TAN had a much larger chance of beating Storm 2 than Gravity, so by that logic is was a better 'Dutch Representative'. No other reason.Would've been far more exciting to watch at least Opinion. Some prefer a war of atrittion like against bulldog Breed to a 6-second walkover against Dantomkia (And what about all these walkovers where it just used the pit to win in the first few seconds? It just turned what could have been good fights into predictable, scaled-up games of UFO grabbers)None of those existed. None of the 30 shortest battles in RW involved TAN - these went up to 32 seconds as the equal 29th shortest battles. And I, for one saw TAN's match against BB as straightforward as against Gravity/Scraptosaur - but no, it had a tough match and lost on a judges decision - so not predictable as you would think.rather than the tongs that ultimately used cheap tactics and the pit to get to its undeserved spots. Again, 'cheap' is your opinion, and whether or not you consider its tactics cheap, you cannot call the victory undeserved - TAN won fair and square. Also, Gravity used the low walls, a feature of the arena as much as the pit, to win its battles. If the fight was in the enclosed, pitless Battlebots arena, TAN would win pretty much every time. (Not necessarily. Many times in BB, it was proven that flippers could be successful. For one example, look at Spitfire- that took out Vlad the Impaler 2, an invertable machine, with no need for a pit or arena fences)I refer specifically to TAN vs Gravity, where I believe TAN would easily corner Gravity and pin it - winning on judges. b) Yes, but it utilised tactics that took advantage of Rammstein's battery power, before actually finishing it off using the pit. Do you really think that PA knew of the low battery power? I watched the battle, it just pitted Rammstein as soon as it got under it properly and the pit had opened (The pit only opened once Rammstein had been properly immobilised) I just watched the battle and it didn't actually appear to be immobilised, PA just pitted it as soon as the pit opened.On the other hand, Toecutter and Spawn of Scutter were demonstrations of how it utilised driving skills and no pit to win. Panic Attack's main tactic was unquestionably still to pit the opponent (You keep telling yourself that- like I say, it didn't use it EVERY time it fought, proving versatility even in situations without the pit. Without it, CAC wouldn't have gotten past the heats, let alone gotten into the Semis)Look me in the face and tell me Panic attack's main tactic wasn't to use the pit. Also, TAN only won 3 of its 5 fights by pitting its opponents. It beat Panic Attack and Robochicken on judges decisions. So it pretty much got through the heats and into the semis without the pit, it only pitted DI and that's it.Why do you consider the tactics cheap anyway? Because they don't give the opponent a chance? Because there's little entertainment value? Because the battles typically ended moderately quickly? A bit of all of those reasons, really. Robbing battles of any potential entertainment value (Opinion, and that doesn't make it cheap), overt reliance on the pit to win anything (As I've shown that was far from the case), getting rid of competitors that were far more entertaining to watch (Same point again and still an opinion) and deserving of qualification (Tripe - no robot is more or less deserving and even so, qualifying ahead of opponents isn't cheap), predictable (Still doesn't make it cheap), annoying (WTF are you on about, and STILL doesn't make it cheap), and one of the few robots I genuinely dislike (You don't like it, but that doesn't make it cheap). I don't say that often, but it's definitely earned the spot in my RW Hall of Shame. (Tripe again, and once more it doesn't make it cheap. You harbouring a dislike for it shouldn't put it in a Hall of Shame, it did NOTHING wrong, except irk you, it seems. The only people in the hall of shame should be the producers.)
Not hounded, just pointing out flaws.Quote from: GoldenFox93 on August 16, 2011, 11:30:54 AMa) For starters, actual effective weaponry. What were TAN's weapons then? Pretend weapons? And you can't deny TAN's weapons were effective, even if you disagree with its battle philosophy(What they called "Horizontal Crushers", which weren't crushers at all. They were more clamps really, which did no damage whatsoever- a bit like gently gripping onto an egg to hold it, but not break it. All they did was just hold on and do no damage) Still they were real weapons, and they did what they had to well, which is the point.We've seen previously what those two are capable of, and right at the start, DI looked good in the First Round Melee, the way it tore into BOD. I think if it had gotten through, I reckon it could at least have gotten to the Heat Finals. We've also seen previously how unreliable DI is. I reckon it could have at least lasted another few minutes before breaking down. (Not necessarily- in some cases, it lasted alright- in the opening Melee of Series 6, it lasted throughout, and took out both Behemoth and Tridentate. In Series 7 however, it looked on good form as well, and had CAC not pitted it, I think it would've qualified- you can't really tell reliability from a few seconds of screen time in a new series. I might've looked at it a bit more fairly if CAC had legitimately immobilised it, but no. That would be too difficult for a pair of tongs with no effective weapons) The weapons were effective at what they were used for. And DI was beaten fairly - it was thrown in the pit, which last I checked, was a legit way to beat an opponent in RW. I seem to remember you championing pits against Naryar a while ago.And in my eyes, Gravity would've been a far better Dutch Representative in the Third World Championship, being what could be considered the first of Europe's generation of monster flippers. You answer my question asking how it would be better by saying it would be better. Explain, don't repeat. Anyway, in my opinion, it would have been a worse representative for the Dutch - it would have found Rawbot as easy as TAN did, but it wouldn't have had a hope in against Storm 2, unlike TAN who did have a chance. so for the Dutch, TAN was a better representative. (In terms of reliability perhaps, but in terms of excitement to watch, Gravity beats it easily, with its performance of throwing rather than pushing. Yet with so many international competitors, I don't see why they just set it out like the previous 2 World Championships, and made it a much larger tournament- that way, both of them could've entered, instead of one of them) I wasn't referring to reliability, I was referring to having a chance at winning against Storm 2. Excitement is irrelevant. Size of the competion is irrelevant. TAN had a much larger chance of beating Storm 2 than Gravity, so by that logic is was a better 'Dutch Representative'. No other reason.Would've been far more exciting to watch at least Opinion. Some prefer a war of atrittion like against bulldog Breed to a 6-second walkover against Dantomkia (And what about all these walkovers where it just used the pit to win in the first few seconds? It just turned what could have been good fights into predictable, scaled-up games of UFO grabbers)None of those existed. None of the 30 shortest battles in RW involved TAN - these went up to 32 seconds as the equal 29th shortest battles. And I, for one saw TAN's match against BB as straightforward as against Gravity/Scraptosaur - but no, it had a tough match and lost on a judges decision - so not predictable as you would think.rather than the tongs that ultimately used cheap tactics and the pit to get to its undeserved spots. Again, 'cheap' is your opinion, and whether or not you consider its tactics cheap, you cannot call the victory undeserved - TAN won fair and square. Also, Gravity used the low walls, a feature of the arena as much as the pit, to win its battles. If the fight was in the enclosed, pitless Battlebots arena, TAN would win pretty much every time. (Not necessarily. Many times in BB, it was proven that flippers could be successful. For one example, look at Spitfire- that took out Vlad the Impaler 2, an invertable machine, with no need for a pit or arena fences)I refer specifically to TAN vs Gravity, where I believe TAN would easily corner Gravity and pin it - winning on judges. b) Yes, but it utilised tactics that took advantage of Rammstein's battery power, before actually finishing it off using the pit. Do you really think that PA knew of the low battery power? I watched the battle, it just pitted Rammstein as soon as it got under it properly and the pit had opened (The pit only opened once Rammstein had been properly immobilised) I just watched the battle and it didn't actually appear to be immobilised, PA just pitted it as soon as the pit opened.On the other hand, Toecutter and Spawn of Scutter were demonstrations of how it utilised driving skills and no pit to win. Panic Attack's main tactic was unquestionably still to pit the opponent (You keep telling yourself that- like I say, it didn't use it EVERY time it fought, proving versatility even in situations without the pit. Without it, CAC wouldn't have gotten past the heats, let alone gotten into the Semis)Look me in the face and tell me Panic attack's main tactic wasn't to use the pit. Also, TAN only won 3 of its 5 fights by pitting its opponents. It beat Panic Attack and Robochicken on judges decisions. So it pretty much got through the heats and into the semis without the pit, it only pitted DI and that's it.Why do you consider the tactics cheap anyway? Because they don't give the opponent a chance? Because there's little entertainment value? Because the battles typically ended moderately quickly? A bit of all of those reasons, really. Robbing battles of any potential entertainment value (Opinion, and that doesn't make it cheap), overt reliance on the pit to win anything (As I've shown that was far from the case), getting rid of competitors that were far more entertaining to watch (Same point again and still an opinion) and deserving of qualification (Tripe - no robot is more or less deserving and even so, qualifying ahead of opponents isn't cheap), predictable (Still doesn't make it cheap), annoying (WTF are you on about, and STILL doesn't make it cheap), and one of the few robots I genuinely dislike (You don't like it, but that doesn't make it cheap). I don't say that often, but it's definitely earned the spot in my RW Hall of Shame. (Tripe again, and once more it doesn't make it cheap. You harbouring a dislike for it shouldn't put it in a Hall of Shame, it did NOTHING wrong, except irk you, it seems. The only people in the hall of shame should be the producers.)Cheap in this instance is defined as 'stingy' or 'miserly' or 'shoddy' by Dictionary.com - TAN and its tactics do not fit with any of these words. Nothing you said proves that TAN is cheap, only that you harbour a dislike for its tactics.
Just accept it, tan was fair and exciting because the push and shove contest was exciting as a bot coul give a good push.Tldr, tan is fair.
obligatory battlebots 5 comment
T.A.N. also won without the pit, but lastly; what makes flipping bots out of the arena less cheap than pitting them. It was becoming a trend and to be honest I found TAN's matches better and much less like the rest of the series, which consisted of bots like Judge Shred 3 and M2 just OOTA'ing things.
I never really liked Panzer (the usa one). Or Tornado.
Least FavoritesBuddy Lee Don't Play in the Street (Should Have lost to Turbo/ Laziest engineering)Yes, because every robot that enters in a competition has to be superior in combat..Minion (Worst Driving Displayed in Season 2 vs Atomic Wedgy) Fair enough, it derping, but I still minion.Shaft (Looks like something that belongs in between two sheets of drywall) LOLWUTVoltarc/Voltronic (Why would you get rid of invertability in favor of wheel covers?) I didn't get that either, still like the bot tho.Revision Z (Loved their Driving, I just didn't get what the it did) Fair enoughRonin (Lags in DSL, not to mention was slow and boring) And its RA2 counter-part makes it bad why... ?Ginsu (First Vesion) (Too Heavy in the middle, almost split it in half just by driving the thing)Tower of Power (Just Why?)Agrippa (Team Delta confuses me, first they made a piece of crap. Then comes War Machine which was amazing) Most builders that start out are fairly inexperienced/don't have the monies to make something really awesome..Run Amok (Wouldn't survive a second in a legitimate competition) So...Robotica isn't a legit competition ?Missing Link (A Engine on wheels)
Author
Topic: Least favorite robot! (Read 126956 times)