Love the idea

Does anyone see a flaw in the current highly reworked resolution criteria

@Bayesian Would you count a scenario that might spawn on the battlefield if World War 3 happens? (Is the implication of "human play" necessary?)

@Bayesian To be dead, does a robot need to be physically unable to function and be broken? Or is a game rule that designates a lose condition enough to count?

@Quroe it needs to be broken. DEAD I say!

Would you count a scenario that might spawn on the battlefield if World War 3 happens

I genuinely don't know if that should count so consider that one undecided

@Bayesian To further the definition of "dead"...

Say, for the sake of argument, that each robot has to have a standardized transceiver/circuit that is continuously transmitting a heartbeat signal to a central judging device to remark that it is still alive. (This is a standardized weak spot that each bot needs to protect at all costs.) If this device breaks, and it no longer transmits its heatbeat signal, the game rules designate that that competitor has lost.

Does that count? (Inclusive, but not limited to?)

Uhhhhhh

@Bayesian I promise you, this isn't a gotcha. I don't have an example to wave in your face to ask for resolution if you say yes.

Let's simplify that whole paragraph. Does breaking a vital spot to knock a player out count?

@Quroe Tbc im hesitating bc it’s a good question and both ways to slice it seem fine, but yeah it definitely affects resolution probability which makes it tricky. Idk. What do you think makes for a better market..?

bc yeah people might wanna get a nice way to deactivate the bot to avoid damaging tjem and the bots being one-use, but also i like tje idea of tje bots getting actually destroyed so it’s a true battle to the death..

Where is the line vs existing robot battle contests?

I want to chime in too. How is this differentiable to a free-for-all Battlebots cage match?

hmmmmmmmmm gotta be humanoid robots

ok and it can't be a 1v1 of two humanoid robots, what's the minimum size of a group dwe reckon? 5? 10? idrk

@Bayesian Whataboutism Mode, activate!

@Bayesian Ahg, you answered before I asked. 😆

@Quroe the criteria were met in 1957??

10+ seems like a large number, maybe i should count it at 6 or 7?

@Bayesian 12 Districts * 2 Tributes = 24?

@Quroe hmm yeah that would make sense (but probably ppl would universally view it as a hunger games with some number lower than 24). i think i'll bump it up to 12

are there existing robots contests that are with humanoid robots that are teleoperated? hmmm

wait are there copyrights on hunger games that will make this annoying? hmm i might recreate this market or add less nebulous resolution criteria, thoughts @traders ?

@Bayesian what qualifies as "hunger games"? Is this about a group of participants being placed in a shrinking area and the last survivor wins? Not sure if the Hunger Games series introduced anything beyond this basic concept from Battle Royale.

Yeah I think what I had in mind is just battle royale

I have updated the description to clarify this