Human Player

[mechlectrician7]

What is the purpose of the two human zones (12' 10" x 2' 6") marked blue or red located on either side of the field. I understand the white zones right next to the low goals, but it is the other ones that confuse me. Any information would be helpful and appreciated.

[brndn]

My understanding is that whenever a ball is thrown out of the playing field, a volunteer returns the ball to the nearest human player of that team, but I might be wrong. Also, rule G11 states:
BALLS may not be intentionally or repeatedly ejected from gameplay.
Violation: FOUL per instance.

Passing a BALL to a HUMAN PLAYER is within gameplay and not considered a violation of G11.

Emphasis my own. I guess the human players are meant to be passed to?

[yash101]

I actually think that there isn't much to being a human player this year!

[Tem1514 Mentor]

Look at this way the human players that are on the sides of the field get a front row seat which would be really helpful in scouting. Oh dear did I just let the cat out of the bag?

The one human player at the driver station will be very busy after every cycle goal.

[MooreteP]

These balls bounce, especially with a missed shot on a goal or a failed truss pass. The human players will perform an important function in keeping the balls on the field.

Even more important is how they return the balls to the field.
If they get their alliance ball, they can return it to the area of the most capable shooter, and finish the goal.
If they get the opposing alliances ball, they could roll a ball toward the weakest alliance member or to an area where the alliance has no presence.

I cannot find a rule that says if a Blue alliance ball bounces towards a Red alliance Human Player, that they can't possess it and return it to the field in a manner that negatively affects the Blue alliance.

If this is the case, then the human player will be more important than in most past games. (See Ladder Logic, or First Frenzy for important human player roles)

I think I am starting to understand this game.

[ToddF]

Human players exist to allow truss points to be scored by alliances without a robot catcher, while maintaining control of the ball. No catch points, but the ball isn't bouncing all over the field either.

[MooreteP]

Human players exist to allow truss points to be scored by alliances without a robot catcher, while maintaining control of the ball. No catch points, but the ball isn't bouncing all over the field either.

Given the geometry of the truss plane, I don't think many balls would bounce right at their Human Player. A launch commensurate with a goal shot might clear the human player and result in a foul. G11 is fuzzy. Was it a truss clear or a "pass"?

I think they are going to play a larger role.
Just trying to parse the rules to predict the permutations.

[Thad House]

These balls bounce, especially with a missed shot on a goal or a failed truss pass. The human players will perform an important function in keeping the balls on the field.

Even more important is how they return the balls to the field.
If they get their alliance ball, they can return it to the area of the most capable shooter, and finish the goal.
If they get the opposing alliances ball, they could roll a ball toward the weakest alliance member or to an area where the alliance has no presence.

I cannot find a rule that says if a Blue alliance ball bounces towards a Red alliance Human Player, that they can't possess it and return it to the field in a manner that negatively affects the Blue alliance.

If this is the case, then the human player will be more important than in most past games. (See Ladder Logic, or First Frenzy for important human player roles)

I think I am starting to understand this game.

I highly doubt that the refs would hand a ball to the other teams human player, because thats a tech foul according to G12. The refs would not cause a tech foul.

[MooreteP]

I highly doubt that the refs would hand a ball to the other teams human player, because thats a tech foul according to G12. The refs would not cause a tech foul.

I don't think refs will be involved in returning balls to the field. With a truss cross going out of bounds, the field personnel would most likely just return the ball in bounds near where it left. If the truss crosses repeatedly go out of bounds.....

I would like to see a Q&A on a blue ball bouncing at a red alliance human player and how they return it. Or even how they would return their own ball to the play field.

[Hallry]

I actually think that there isn't much to being a human player this year!

I completely disagree.

Look at this way the human players that are on the sides of the field get a front row seat which would be really helpful in scouting. Oh dear did I just let the cat out of the bag?

The one human player at the driver station will be very busy after every cycle goal.

Look at the parenthesis of G38. Who says that the human players MUST be in separate areas? Why can't they all behind the alliance station for example? Or one in a human player area on the side of the field, and the other two in the alliance station. Have one man the pedestal, and the other being a 'communicator' between the alliance drive teams, and the screen above the wall to make sure all assists are counted. Make the most of what your given. Just because they're called 'human players' doesn't mean they can't act like the 'analyst' from 2011. When life gives you chocolate powder...add some of your own hot water and make some hot cocoa! ;)

[FrankJ]

I cannot find a rule that says if a Blue alliance ball bounces towards a Red alliance Human Player, that they can't possess it and return it to the field in a manner that negatively affects the Blue alliance.


G32 Strategies employing HUMAN PLAYER actions to deflect opponents’ BALLS are not allowed.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

I think you want to avoid touching the opponent's ball. Even being helpful & keeping the ball in bounds.

[DStetzing]

The rule about not passing from one human player to another, does it imply that there can be two human players in the same area? Or do they have to all be in the three different areas?

[FrankJ]

Obviously one human player needs to be in the alliance station to inbound balls.
I can't think of reason you would want two human players in on zone. It might slow in bounding a ball.

[BBray_T1296]

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

[TruBlu13]

Human players exist to allow truss points to be scored by alliances without a robot catcher, while maintaining control of the ball. No catch points, but the ball isn't bouncing all over the field either.

I don't think a human player can score truss points.

3.1.4 Scoring
Points are awarded once per CYCLE for BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS in the GOALS, BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS over the TRUSS,and for each ROBOT CATCH. Additional points are credited to an ALLIANCE up on each GOAL base on the number of ASSISTS earned by the ALLIANCE for that CYCLE.

My understanding is that means that the human can't make any truss points because that was one of my first thoughts.

[lcoreyl]

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

that would be an assist yes. Don't worry about the passing between robots or robot to human. the ONLY thing that matters with assists is the possession. how possession changes from one robot to another doesn't matter at all.

robot 1 could shoot from the red zone and horribly miss and the ball goes out of the field and given to a human player who throws the ball at an opponent robot they don't like. the ball bounces around and robot 2 picks the ball up in the white zone. 2 robots possess in 2 unique zones. 2 assists. 20 points.

[lcoreyl]

I don't think a human player can score truss points.

3.1.4 Scoring
Points are awarded once per CYCLE for BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS in the GOALS, BALLS SCORED by ROBOTS over the TRUSS,and for each ROBOT CATCH. Additional points are credited to an ALLIANCE up on each GOAL base on the number of ASSISTS earned by the ALLIANCE for that CYCLE.

My understanding is that means that the human can't make any truss points because that was one of my first thoughts.

He wasn't saying the human actually scores the points--he is saying you can throw from a robot to a human (assuming you don't have another robot available to catch) to keep from needing someone to go retrieve the ball.

[Edxu]

From what I've read from Q&A, if the ball is going out, the Human player is technically allowed to hit it back into the court.

This means that you could significantly reduce cycle time by having a robot throw over truss to human player, and have the human player hit it to the robot in the next zone, thus having a controlled truss and assist.

[DStetzing]

Not sure if this is correct, but if a human player receives a ball from a robot in the white zone then passes it to a different robot in a colored zone, would it count as an assist? Like would it still count as a unique robot in a unique zone?

[pfreivald]

From what I've read from Q&A, if the ball is going out, the Human player is technically allowed to hit it back into the court.

This means that you could significantly reduce cycle time by having a robot throw over truss to human player, and have the human player hit it to the robot in the next zone, thus having a controlled truss and assist.

Pass over truss to human player, who catches it and feeds it to the next robot. It counts as an assist, is hard to defend against, and you don't waste time chasing a ball around the field.

[Ikillee]

What would happen if a human player caught an opponent's ball because it was accidently hit their way? Would it be a foul if the human player doesn't let go of the ball?

Couldn't find out about this by checking the manual. It only states that it's illegal for robot to do such things but doesn't specify how humans could get fouls other than stepping out of their zone and passing to another human player.

[EricH]

What would happen if a human player caught an opponent's ball because it was accidently hit their way? Would it be a foul if the human player doesn't let go of the ball?

Couldn't find out about this by checking the manual. It only states that it's illegal for robot to do such things but doesn't specify how humans could get fouls other than stepping out of their zone and passing to another human player.

It's a technical foul for a human player to knock the opponent's ball back into play if it is heading out of bounds under G32. I would think that if the human player CAUGHT their opponent's ball, they'd get a Technical Foul, worse if they held it. Q&A confirmed the T-Foul.




Think someone might need to re-read the Manual. No such thing as reading it too much...

[gpetilli]

Pass over truss to human player, who catches it and feeds it to the next robot. It counts as an assist, is hard to defend against, and you don't waste time chasing a ball around the field.

I totally agree that this is a great strategy. I have two concerns: 1) most teams will have trouble making a thrower that can be consistent at that distance. 2) if the human player misses, does it count as intentionally ejected from field and draw a foul?

We need a ruling on incomplete pass to HP.

[Andy Brockway]

The HUMAN Player on the side of the field is also used able to return the BALL that leaves the field per section 3.1.2.

This allows an inbound on the scoring side of the field versus the ALLIANCE side.

[pfreivald]

I totally agree that this is a great strategy. I have two concerns: 1) most teams will have trouble making a thrower that can be consistent at that distance. 2) if the human player misses, does it count as intentionally ejected from field and draw a foul?

We need a ruling on incomplete pass to HP.

On 1) -- Those teams shouldn't try this strategy, then.
On 2) -- I very much doubt it, if they try to catch it. Practice makes perfect!

[homerun33ss]

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

This is one of the ideas that our team was thinking about at the beginning of the year. Do you know if there is any documentation somewhere clarifying whether or not having the Human Player act as a middle-man in the assist process will still award you the points?

[pfreivald]

This is one of the ideas that our team was thinking about at the beginning of the year. Do you know if there is any documentation somewhere clarifying whether or not having the Human Player act as a middle-man in the assist process will still award you the points?

According to the definition of "Assist", it doesn't matter how a unique robot comes to possess the ball in a unique zone, only that it happens.

[Qbot2640]

I cannot find a rule that says if a Blue alliance ball bounces towards a Red alliance Human Player, that they can't possess it and return it to the field in a manner that negatively affects the Blue alliance.

If this is the case, then the human player will be more important than in most past games. (See Ladder Logic, or First Frenzy for important human player roles)

I think I am starting to understand this game.

This is an interesting catch...I originally took "An ALLIANCE may not POSSESS their oponent's BALLS." to prohibit this, as "ALLIANCE" is defined in such a way to include human players, but "POSSESS" is defined pretty clearly to NOT include human player actions. I tend to agree now, that the human player could be an active defensive participant.

[GaryVoshol]

This is an interesting catch...I originally took "An ALLIANCE may not POSSESS their oponent's BALLS." to prohibit this, as "ALLIANCE" is defined in such a way to include human players, but "POSSESS" is defined pretty clearly to NOT include human player actions. I tend to agree now, that the human player could be an active defensive participant.

That will have to be fixed. Else there's nothing to prohibit a HP from grabbing an opponent's ball and holding it for the remainder of the match.

[matthewdenny]

So now our team will have the following positions: programming, drivetrain, mechanical, pneumatics and linebacker.

[EricH]

That will have to be fixed. Else there's nothing to prohibit a HP from grabbing an opponent's ball and holding it for the remainder of the match.

True. G32 only covers deflection.

Devil's advocate on myself: An HP holding their opponents' ball is simply an extremely delayed deflection...

[Alan Anderson]

That will have to be fixed. Else there's nothing to prohibit a HP from grabbing an opponent's ball and holding it for the remainder of the match.

<G40> TEAMS may not extend any body part into the FIELD during the MATCH.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL.

You'd have to grab one that has left the field. That's not worth basing a strategy around, and I don't even think it's worth having a contingency plan for.

[TheMadCADer]

True. G32 only covers deflection.

Devil's advocate on myself: An HP holding their opponents' ball is simply an extremely delayed deflection...

If G32 doesn't prevent it, could it be argued that the ball is "stuck" and can be declared dead? You lose Assist points, but you can still play the match.

Even then, I expect someone to Q&A this, and the GDC will make the obvious ruling. Holding the opposing alliance's ball should be a penalty.

[Ikillee]

What if you have the 6 inch diameter arm pointed to the HP so the deflection angle is generally towards him/her. Then HP is the all star b-baller at your school. You'd be set?

[FrankJ]

Absent any ruling of the GDC, Any touching of the other alliance's ball is going to be considered a deflection. Holding the ball & refusing to turn it over to the field people is going to be failure to follow instructions & probably a red card.

It is interesting to go down this road. But don't ever think it is anything but a dead end.

[EricH]

Absent any ruling of the GDC, Any touching of the other alliance's ball is going to be considered a deflection.

Just to satisfy my curiosity, where did you learn this? Remember, words not specifically defined in the Manual are to be defined with the English dictionary. A touch is not a deflection; grabbing and holding is not a deflection. Knocking the ball back onto the field or changing its course to miss all field reset if it was on the way out would be a deflection.

That said, I would tend to agree that not turning it over to the field crew on request would probably end up as egregious behavior, and thus be eligible for a card.


Also, to this time REALLY play Devil's Advocate on myself, and on my own Devil's Advocate, and hopefully put this to rest, or not...
G12 calls out that an Alliance may not Possess their opponents' Ball. The definition of Alliance calls out that it's up to 4 Teams. A Team is the Coach, Human Player, and Drivers, also from the Glossary. Thus, no possession by Human Player.

The only problem with this reasoning is that the definition of Possess specifies that it's for a Robot (only!). Thus, G12 is a moot point, as an Alliance does NOT include the Robot, thus a Robot may Possess the Ball of the opposing Alliance indefinitely...

[FrankJ]

My superior powers of deduction :)
The general intent on G 32 is the human players are not to interfere with the other alliance's ball. You don't really think the GDC is going to rule any other way?

[Qbot2640]

My superior powers of deduction :)
The general intent on G 32 is the human players are not to interfere with the other alliance's ball. You don't really think the GDC is going to rule any other way?

Because I believe there to be a high likelihood of balls bouncing wildly out of play rather often (possibly overwhelming the officials ability to quickly return them every time - and thus slowing game play to an un-exciting tempo) I believe it possible that the GDC will permit an opposing human player to catch and return to the field a ball leaving the field in their HP zone. If that's the case, it would be in that HP's best interest to field it in a direction away from the opposing alliance's robots and goal. I kind of hope this is the outcome, because it will make the game more exciting to watch, and will reward alliances for better control of the ball.

I agree with you that they will rule that any prolonged holding of the ball to prevent play by the opposing alliance will be prohibited.

That being said...I won't be surprised if they rule that any deliberate contact by an opposing HP is prohibited (deflection, catch, etc.). But again, I hope not.

[FrankJ]

Q&A has already ruled you can't deflect the opposing alliances ball back unto the field. While catching the ball & quickly handing it to an official or other alliance's HP would be in the spirit of GP, I don't see the GDC allowing it. If you where to attempt to catch it & didn't it would a deflection & a penalty under any reading of the current rule..

[rylerman1]

If you have two robots that don't interface well (for whatever reason), One robot could pass to the human and then they could drop it into the other robot, completing an assist. At least, I think an (1) assist can come from robot>human>robot combos. Maybe I am wrong though

I actually wouldn't be surprised if a human player could be an assist in and of itself, let's say robot 1 is dead, so it never moves past the white zone, robot 2 starts with the ball and assists to robot 3 in the white zone, what if robot 3 gave the ball to the human player in the blue zone, is that three assists, I would highly doubt it, but just something to think about because FIRST does all sorts of crazy things with hidden rules trying to make us think.

[Hallry]

I actually wouldn't be surprised if a human player could be an assist in and of itself, let's say robot 1 is dead, so it never moves past the white zone, robot 2 starts with the ball and assists to robot 3 in the white zone, what if robot 3 gave the ball to the human player in the blue zone, is that three assists, I would highly doubt it, but just something to think about because FIRST does all sorts of crazy things with hidden rules trying to make us think.

You should probably reread the Manual. ::rtm::

[Alan Anderson]

...what if robot 3 gave the ball to the human player in the blue zone...

If the human player is on the field during a match, the alliance will be assessed a Technical Foul for violating <G40>, and the team is likely to be assigned a red card for egregious behavior.

[cglrcng]

Adding one simple suggestion for human players on the sidelines....I attempted to catch a full power shot ball on the down stroke (falling from about 10' high as our bot was on a concrete platform about 3' higher than I was standing), and they can rotate quite well in the air, the cover is both very slick and quite rough, and creates a lot of fingertip friction w/ that nylon cover & those seams (especially the zipper area)...Gloves will/may just save those unique fingerprints you like so much HP's...Just my 0.02 cents on the subject. (Just think rug burned hot fingertips and palms.....I cannot even imagine the tender nose or forehead areas w/ those bright red spots that may be very evident at Regionals and Champs this year!)

I expect to also see over time more than a few quite fast moving inbounders, due to the large size of the gamepiece possibly carried too high, trip and do a faceplant into the ball...The real question is...Will you personally laugh or wince w/ the HP? (Think "Gracious Professionalism" please!) Straps holding the safety glasses to the head may just help there.

[Chessmaster001]

Actually, after doing extensive research across the game manual, truss points can only be scored through being caught by a robot. As quoted from the game manual:
A CATCH occurs when a BALL SCORED over the TRUSS by a ROBOT’S ALLIANCE partner is POSSESSED by that ROBOT before contacting the carpet, the ROBOT which SCORED the TRUSS, or HUMAN PLAYER.

In explanation, only the robot(s) that didn't possess the ball before the truss throw are the only ones who can catch it; not the human player or the robot that threw it

[EricH]

Actually, after doing extensive research across the game manual, truss points can only be scored through being caught by a robot. As quoted from the game manual:
A CATCH occurs when a BALL SCORED over the TRUSS by a ROBOT’S ALLIANCE partner is POSSESSED by that ROBOT before contacting the carpet, the ROBOT which SCORED the TRUSS, or HUMAN PLAYER.


You're entirely incorrect as to when Truss points can be scored, AND the rule you brought in refers to Catch points instead of Truss points.

[Chessmaster001]

Thank you, it is not good to misread the game manual on the last saturday of the build; I misunderstood the difference between CATCH and TRUSS points

Edit: I misread that part of the manual MULTIPLE times XD

[Canon reeves]

I may be wrong, but would it be legal to use your ball to hit the opponents ball? As in they are about to score an assist and your HP gets the ball and throws it at the opponents ball? And to build on that, if you have a puncher robot and it can shoot towards the ground, as in strait, but couldn't you have it hit your opponents ball with your ball? or would it not be worth it because of getting your own ball? I saw another team today do that and their ball didn't go very far, but the opponents ball did? Just a thought I had, maybe I overlooked something, yall know how last Saturday build goes.:p

[Steven Donow]

I may be wrong, but would it be legal to use your ball to hit the opponents ball? As in they are about to score an assist and your HP gets the ball and throws it at the opponents ball? And to build on that, if you have a puncher robot and it can shoot towards the ground, as in strait, but couldn't you have it hit your opponents ball with your ball? or would it not be worth it because of getting your own ball? I saw another team today do that and their ball didn't go very far, but the opponents ball did? Just a thought I had, maybe I overlooked something, yall know how last Saturday build goes.:p

G32
Strategies employing HUMAN PLAYER actions to deflect opponents’ BALLS are not allowed.

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

[Canon reeves]

[QUOTE=DevenStonow;1343725]G32[/QUOTE
Ahhhhh I see, thank you.