Robot Wars Wiki
Advertisement

Structure[]

I don't like this template, particularly the part where Disc-O-Inferno is named as a minor competitor, whilst all five of the other robots in the annihilator are named as notable, as well as a few of the robots eliminated at the Mayhem stage in their only appearance anywhere in Extreme 1. Even if this is a mistake, I just dont't like the division, and would prefer it to be structed like the Extreme 2 equivalent of this template. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 19:18, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

It makes no sense to me whatsoever. So how should we divide it?
  • Main Competition Competitors: Any robot from the All-Stars, Mayhem/Annihilator, Tag Team
  • Minor Competition Competitors: Those that competed exclusively in the Challenge Belt, Wild Card, Vengeance, plus Single Battle Event Competitors

ManUCrazy 20:27, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Please, let me explain (since obviously I created this, so I know what I'm doing). Yes, Disc-O-Inferno did WIN the annihilator, but answer me this....was it mentioned in the Robot Wars Extreme Official Guide? The answer is no. What about Arnold A. Terminegger, or Axe Awe? The answer, again, is no.
Quite simply put, it is through that book that the structure is based on. The "Notable" competitors are the ones mentioned in the book, the well known ones, the "All-Star" ones (and I don't mean by the tournament). The ones not listed are the "minor" ones, the lesser knowns, the ones not expected to do well, the ones not covered.
Every robot in the Notable section is covered in the book. Everyone in the Minor section isn't. That's what seperates them. So whilst Disc-O-Inferno did win the annihilator, not mentioned in the book, so I had to class it as "minor". In fact, I don't think it SHOULD have been there anyway. I'll explain if you want me to. CBFan (talk) 21:06, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I do understand your logic behind it, but I still don't like it. We should keep consistency, using Major and Minor Competitions, like the Extreme 2 version. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:09, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
But that means we have to redo the Extreme Series 2 template as well. CBFan (talk) 23:33, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
No we don't, ManUCrazy and I are proposing that we change it to match the Extreme 2 one. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 06:56, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
You don't understand. The Extreme 2 template was done when the All-Stars was counted as a "Major Event", not seperate like the New Blood. Besides, the international competitors are missing. That's why I'm saying it needs a redo. CBFan (talk) 08:35, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
Ah yes, I understand now. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 09:06, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
But it's OK, I sorted it out now. CBFan (talk) 09:59, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Push to Update[]

I know this has been discussed briefly elsewhere, but nothing really ended up coming of it, so I'll try again here - there has been discussion on updating the Extreme 1 (and by extension the Extreme 2) template to remove the "Major Event" and "Minor Event" headings which are largely vague. I'm all up for this and I do have an image in my head as to how I see it, but I'd like to discuss it through first.

  • The All-Stars, Tag Team Terror and Annihilator/Mayhem competitors each get their own little heading since they were the main events across Extreme 1, followed by the "single-battle" events (which includes the Vengeance, Wild Card and any one-off event). Obviously the international and forces robots can stay as they are.
  • The Annihilator and Mayhem competitors can be split by sub-headings like we use for our Series 8 and 9 templates.
  • The All-Stars competitors take priority at the top of the page.

The only thing I'm trying to decide on is who gets priority over the Tag Team competitors and the Annihilator competitors. I can see arguments for both sides, to be honest. CrashBash (talk) 08:03, February 25, 2019 (UTC)

I still fully support the reworked table, and think that the Annihilator & Mayhem section (divided by subheadings) takes precedence over the Tag Team Terror. I will also note that your definition of the "Single Battle Events" competitors will consist only of the Wild Card Warriors, and the House Robot Rebellion competitors Scorpion and Plunderbird 5 (who also entered Vengeance battles). Perhaps we should split this up into two rows, as Plunderbird 5 is the only Vengeance competitor which didn't enter a "major event". TOAST 09:40, February 25, 2019 (UTC)
OK, lets try a little experiment. How does this look to you?

Not bad, although I was thinking something more like this. Does this seem an improvement to you? TOAST 13:06, February 25, 2019 (UTC)

Not bad either. I just feel that separating Plundorpion from the WCW robots in that way feels a little cluttered in comparison. Also I can't help but feel TX-108 should still remain on a separate line as is consistent with our other templates, but that may just be me. CrashBash (talk) 13:49, February 25, 2019 (UTC)

I don't think the TX-108 thing is terribly inconsistent. We have Gabriel in a different section of the Series 9 template to the other reserves based on it having an untelevised whiteboard fight (alongside TR2 which had a televised whiteboard fight). TX-108 is the same, it had an untelevised Wild Card Warriors match like Gabriel's whiteboard, in the same section as The Executioner & Friends which had televised Wild Card Warriors fights like TR2's whiteboard.
There's no perfect solution to the House Robot Rebellion competitors, both of our dummy templates take up as much space as each other, I mainly prefer mine because it does away with the "Minor Event" terminology altogether. Neither one feels more or less cluttered than the other in my opinion. TOAST 16:24, February 25, 2019 (UTC)
Either way Crash, could you publish your version to the live template, as either one of our options are better than the current layout. TOAST 20:30, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
Advertisement