Showdown Judging Criteria


Showdown Judging Criteria v2:

Updated 1/9/23

Written by Ryan Bratley.

Weapon Effectiveness:
  • Weapon effectiveness is a measure of how a robot’s weapon or weapons are used to reduce the functionality or ‘defensibility’ (permanently or temporarily) of the opponent. What constitutes effective weapon usage will vary by weapon type – for damaging weapons such as spinners it will primarily involve doing damage, whereas for a control bot it will involve gaining control of the opponent.
    • Overturning an opponent should be considered effective use of a lifter or flipper, especially where this seriously impedes the opponent’s own effective use of its weapons.
    • Attacks which use a weapon in an unconventional way (e.g. a lifter being used to grab an opponent) should still be scored if they are effective.
  • Frequent but ineffective attacks (such as light taps with a waggle-stick) should not be scored under this category, but will contribute to scores in other categories.
  • In situations where a robot uses its drive power and the arena (IE slams and pins) as a weapon, this is considered to be the effective use of drive as a weapon regardless of what other weapons are available to it. Attacks of this type therefore should be scored under this category, however they should be considered to be worth fewer points than equivalent attacks made with an active weapon.
  • Aggression is a measure of how actively a robot engages its opponent. Frequent attacks should be scored highly under aggression regardless of their effectiveness or whether they use a weapon, and more risky attacks (eg those into the path of a weapon) should earn a higher score.
    • An ‘attack’ is not necessarily every individual activation of a weapon. For example; a grabber using its grabber to let go of and re-grab a pinned opponent would not be a second, additional display of aggression, but repeated strikes from a hammer would be.
      • Prolonged pinning which does not result in repeated activations of a weapon can be considered as a show of negative aggression.
  • Strategic breaks from attacking (such as to reposition or spin up a weapon) should not negatively affect aggression scores.
  • Frequent avoidance of attacks should harm a robot’s aggression score, but may be scored under control.
  • Freeing a stuck opponent, or otherwise prolonging a fight which could have already been won, should score extremely highly on aggression.
  • Control measures the precision with which a robot is controlled. Examples of good control might include:
    • Attacks which successfully target weak spots or avoid the opponent’s weapon
    • Successfully using the arena to aid in attacks
    • Successfully evading/escaping grapples, pins, and pushes towards the wall or pit
    • Consistently occupying advantageous space in the arena
  • The judges’ perception of how easy or difficult a robot is to drive should not impact scoring in this category; however, in situations where a robot takes damage which clearly makes it harder to control, control points may be awarded for successfully adapting to these changes.

Disclaimer: Building, maintaining and fighting combat robots is dangerous and comes with risk that must be assessed on a person by person basis. We cannot be held liable for any personal injury, loss of property or money from partaking in building, maintaining, repairing, testing or fighting combat robots even when following our guides and rulesets.