aminnich

I agree with you that you can make whatever you are building smaller, but in this case, some not have a ton of components for the not to perform like it should. You bring up the mini contest, the 200pcs maximum part count with the whole idea behind that contest. With the battle bot contest, the size constraint is just a percaution of "we don't want giant bots that would eat the other ones" which is fair, but I still think 45x45x45 is small. And Jim said the original size limit was 35x35x35

I understand why contestants are against changing the size limitations, but instead of a size constraint of 45x45x45, changing it to a volume constraint of 45x45x45 would be better. For example, the bison bot is 9L tall, this is mainly because the bot is able to be flipped over and still be able to drive (great idea by the way) For taller bots, they are more prone to get flipped over because they are top heavy. The problem I am having with my bot is the small constraint. I also want to make mine fairly short, but I keep finding myself having to build up instead of out, because I cant go out. My main body (fully functional and armored) is almost 45x45x45 without a main weapon. And this is with the main body super condensed inside, No room to room the wires at some spots. The real battle bots are fairly large, 45x45x45 is the size of one of the smallest bots. Ultimately, it is the admins decision, but I vote yes, change it from a size limit to a volume limit, keeping the same dimensions.

Your bot is very compact and looks tough. I am not sure about how reliable your drive train idea is going to be. If a bot take out the wheel connected to the motor, the crankshaft for that side is also destroyed. With my bot, I am having the most trouble with the space constraint. Yours is great, but if we had more space, I feel like you could add more motors for the crank to have its own motor, not having to reply on the rotation of the wheels. Like I said, the size constraint is the hardest part of this contest. And you originally were going to have the size constraint be 35x35x35, that would have been much harder. I would ask to make the size constraint larger, but this late in the contest, it probably is not fair.

Mine was on bricksafe, but I deleted those pictures since I took that one apart, rebuilt, took apart and I am now building my 3rd bot.... All the same style, but they are getting stronger each time.

I feel like with the past contests we have had WIP topics by now. I wonder why this one is different, is it because you do not want your competitor to know what kind of weak points your bot has?

I have been trying to make various different shapes using any kind of technic parts I have. I made a circle, no problem. I tried making a hexagon, failed I tried making a triangular prism, failed. I am trying to make these as compact as possible with some strength to them, I do not want them just to be able to be pulled apart. If anyone has thoughts on how to make these shapes and other shapes successfully, show them down below. I am curious what you guys come up with. PS, I was building them in LDD so that I would know if the placement of the pieces was considered "legal" or not.

So to reply to all, Suspension is just another thing you can add to your model. It makes the model more realistic and/or if the model needs in. The reason I started this was because I was disappointed with the suspension in 42043. I could try to make it better, but I have no idea how to do suspension, so I will have to learn as I go.

If you have suspension linkage parts do you always include them in your model? As some of you know, I just got the Acros truck, I already built it and already have it in pieces with plans to build and modify the B-model. This set was my first one with suspension, my initial thoughts were, eh, not the most exciting. But I do know that some vehicles, suspension is like the key point of the model. For the Acros truck, sure suspension is nice, but I do not think it is necessary. All the other models I have built, without any kind of suspension, were much more rigid and did not have any kind of flexibility in the chassis. The chassis needs to be super strong for the model to be a success in my opinion. Now, sure, adding suspension to your model adds to the complexity and I get why you would want to add it to your model. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying not to put it in. I think models with suspension (LEGO or non-LEGO) are much more realistic. Also, if the way the suspension was implemented in 42043 was not the strongest and that's maybe the reason why the model felt like it had a ton of flex, tell me how I can strengthen it for my future builds. Enough of me rambling on, I want to know what your thoughts are. Happy building

Hey guys, I got the Arocs today in the mail, and I finished it today, took about 5 hours to build. I have already take off the boom and dumper with plans to build the B model trailer and modify the main truck. Couple of comments on the truck it self. Sure the steering is a new clever method, but in my opinion I think it is very flimsy and not as strong as your tradition steering rack and gearing. That will be the first thing I change. The scale of the truck seems to be bigger the b-model logging truck (also cabover style truck), but it uses the same wheels. The Acros looks like a lifted truck that did not have the budget for bigger wheels and tires after the lift was installed. I will be lowing the truck (maybe getting rid of the suspension) and hopefully that makes it look a little better. Overall the build was fun, I have not bought a set since 42030 so I got a lot of new to me pieces that I forgot about. Also this was my first pneumatic set, so now I have that to mess around with. If anyone has thoughts on lowering the truck or how to strengthen the steering, I would love to hear what you have to say. Thanks, happy building

Just a small update, I got my bricklink order on monday and I got 42043 in the mail today. It is half built. Loving the build so far. Lots of new pieces to me.

I never said anything about a dummy bot. Building a second bot would just take away from my main bot, like you said. Plus, I wont have much time to make one, let alone 2. Once it comes time to make my video, I will have a brick wall or something to show my weapon, not a bot. Sure this wall will not simulate another bot with full on weapons, but it will give a general idea. Sorry for all the comments on how the bot should be done. This is Jim's and Milan's contest, we should not be trying to make up rules as we go. Sick to the rules or don't participate is my philosophy. Hopefully contestants stop worrying about how to present their bot, but actually building it.

Ya, I do not understand you have the m motor connected to the switch which controls the buggy motor. Why not just connect the buggy motor to the receiver directly.

For my video, I am planing on building someone from LEGO bricks to test my bot. I am not building a whole new bot to fight, but something to test my bot's abilities.

I love this new contest, I have been working on my bot everyday since. It is coming together nicely. You mentioned before that you had a bunch of bot build and I was wondering what kind of ideas you had. I am glad you started this topic. My thoughts for "Lifty" I like the drive steering design you used, you do not have to worry about a separate steering mechanism in the bot, instead each of the wheels are individually powered with caster wheels in the back. Having the battery box in the back as a counter weight was also a good idea. The lifting mechanism using a work gear is good for torque, but I am not sure the speed of lifting is fast enough. Also the lifter needs more of something to get under the opponent's bot. Overall the bot is small, which has its advantages. I like what you did and I am working forward to seeing what over bots you have in store for us.

If the toss up is between 42055 and 42053, I would go with 42055 without a doubt. Have you looked at the amount parts you get with that beast? It might not look the prettiest, but if you are not planning on showing it off, then who cares

I did not even think to ask about limiting the number of battery boxes, I just assumed you could use as many as you could fit. In my case I am using 2 because of the number of PF motors I am using. I battery box would not cut it. I need as much power as I can get. As for the wires, I figured out how to run them so that they stay in place.

When you get so far on your build that you decide to build it on LDD.... and nothing on LDD lines up. Buildings with circles is a pain

I mean I guess, but rubber bands still have a lot of movement with them. Zip ties will keep everything where I need them and nothing should move.

I just want to clarify before I do it. Are zip ties allowed to keep the wires away from all the moving parts? I usually do not use them, but in this build and I have lot of wires and a lot of gear moving around, I do not want to get a wire caught in the gearing. No zip ties will be used to hold the model together, I promise

Well, currently I have 8 motors for one channel, I broken that up into 2 receivers. So now I am going to have 4 receivers 2 motors each for one of the channels. I hope that makes sense.

I'll try adding more receivers to split the load and see if that helps

The receivers are not deep inside the models. I have the little black top sticking out of the model. I have noticed this problem on my past Mocs too. Could the problem be too many motors in one receiver (4 on one port, 1 on the other port)? Could a problem be that the receiver is too close to the battery box? I build and test my models are my basement, there is no sun light coming in. I don't know what the problem is.

Oh, ya duh you need to know that. I am using the power functions receiver

Not the bring a topic back from the dead, but I have an Sbrick question and I think be belongs here. Messing around with my TC11 build and noticed that the received are very much so delayed with the response from remote to the receiver. I find myself getting really close to the bot and then it will move in the correct direct. The obvious question is, Does an Sbrick fix this problem? If I was in the arena with my bot, I would not want to loose because my receiver does not have a good connection. Thanks

That makes sense, I didn't realize the turn table was acting as a gear (I mean yes it is a gear) but I thought it was just a place holder for the smaller gears. Thanks for the explanation