2014 IRI Rule Changes

[Chris Fultz]

Below are the rule changes for the 2014 IRI. These will be documented and included in the team pack and will be reviewed at the drivers meeting.

1. No inspection, Honor system on legality. +5 pounds allowed. Gross / obvious violations of robot rules will be identified by the referees and must be corrected before the robot continues.

2. There is no zone requirement for possession.

3. A 4th ball may be used for autonomous. All other autonomous rules are unchanged.

4. A trussed ball which is untouched by another robot and enters the low goal will be considered scored.

5. The basic foul of G21 is removed. Continuous / repeated violations will still be a technical foul. Contact outside the safety zone will still be enforced.

6. G14 will be modified to allow for “no call”.

7. G12 will be modified so that an immediately rectified possession of the opposing alliance ball (from a truss shot, human play or field crew action) will not be penalized.

8. Elimination Alliances are 4 teams. The Alliance captain determines which teams play each match with no requirement on who plays.

9. One member from the non-playing team may be part of the drive team group and will be considered a COACH.

10. Draft order is 1-8, 1-8, 8-1.

[Gregor]

Thank you.

[Pauline Tasci]

This is going to be an awesome off season..

[Hallry]

This is going to be an awesome off season..

That's an understatement.

[Pauline Tasci]

That's an understatement.

Its going to be a spectacular event because these rule changes are awesome.
better?

[magnets]

2. There is no zone requirement for possession.


Hmm.
This is interesting.

[EricH]

Hmm.
This is interesting.

That DEFINITELY makes life easier on the referees, and allows for higher scores. (One button per team, don't have to judge which zone, etc....)

I can think of one event at least that is going to be "encouraged" to adopt that particular change, partly because of said "easier on the referees".

[Nick Lawrence]

The dropping of the zone possession REALLY changes the game dynamic.

For the better.

I'm also glad they fixed some logistical issues, most importantly the truss into low goal fix.

I would bet large amounts of money that the right combination of three robots can score 400 in a normal match with these rules. Looking forward to a fantastic IRI!

-Nick

[Lil' Lavery]

Mixed feelings on #2. Wish #9 allowed for some of the 4-human player strategies used at Champs.

[AdamHeard]

Only thing missing is getting rid of the pedestal (just penalize if 2 balls are in play).

Even without that, awesome changes!

[billylo]

Thank you. I am looking forward to the webcast.

Note to Frank: the FRC community will thank you if you manage to pick the brains of the IRI rules guys next season. They can definitely help.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

Number 2 really changes the game. Imagine 3 roller bots with one being double sided. You could probably do a train manuever with each robot bumper to bumper. May not even be worth trussing anymore. Excited to see how the competition plays out.

[saikiranra]

Super excited, especially because these rule changes apply to Chezy Champs as well.

[GKrotkov]

Most of these rules I understand and appreciate, for example, I love the addition of more balls in autonomous, it's perfect to showcase the outstanding teams at IRI, and the more relaxed rules will be a nice change of pace. And who, seeing rule change #4, could resist the mental image of that one team that scores twenty point cycles in about 5-10 seconds? (I know it probably won't happen, but it would be so cool!) However, I can't think of a good reason for the lack of zone requirements. I felt that it forced teams to specialize in a specific part of the game, which fostered teamwork in general. Or I could just be being staid. Can anyone tell me why this rule is being implemented?

[MrTechCenter]

#4 should be applicable to the high goal as well :p

http://youtu.be/kV6qKAbFkV8?t=1m43s

[magnets]

The removal of the zone rule makes the "park your robot on the sides of the field and cycle balls really fast" strategy feasible. The inbounder robot parks in the corner and shoots it to the human player, who immediately puts it into the second robot (against the side of field in third zone), which rolls it into the third robot, which rolls/shoots it into a goal. Rinse and repeat. All robots would be in a corner, so you can't push them out of the way.

[Botsup]

Thank you. I am looking forward to the webcast.

Note to Frank: the FRC community will thank you if you manage to pick the brains of the IRI rules guys next season. They can definitely help.

Frank,

Better yet, please come to IRI this year!!! I am not sure if they will have corn dogs but I will personally buy you a nice, big, juicy ear of Indiana corn!

[Hallry]

Frank,

Better yet, please come to IRI this year!!!

^Frank, we'll probably end up having an extra hotel room if you'd like...

[Kevin Leonard]

As much as it helps the game flow- I really dislike the removal of the zone requirement for possessions. It removes the benefit of teams that built their robots to be able to truss from the white zone.

[Boe]

As much as it helps the game flow- I really dislike the removal of the zone requirement for possessions. It removes the benefit of teams that built their robots to be able to truss from the white zone.

This is exactly what I thought. Now long range trussers are a lot more valuable then before.

[BobbyVanNess]

2. There is no zone requirement for possession.



Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way, but it only says possessions, not assists.
From the 2014 FRC manual... "ASSISTS are earned when a unique ALLIANCE ROBOT POSSESSES the ALLIANCE’S BALL in a unique ZONE"
That still remains, and thus as written, it doesn't mean zones don't count.

[Karthik]

Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way, but it only says possessions, not assists.
From the 2014 FRC manual... "ASSISTS are earned when a unique ALLIANCE ROBOT POSSESSES the ALLIANCE’S BALL in a unique ZONE"
That still remains, and thus as written, it doesn't mean zones don't count.

That's a sound argument, however the definition of POSSESS (quoted below for convenience) makes no mention of any ZONES.

POSSESS: (for a ROBOT) to carry (move while supporting BALLS in or on the ROBOT), herd (repeated pushing or bumping), launch (impel BALLS to a desired location or direction via a MECHANISM in motion relative to the ROBOT), or trap (overt isolation or holding one or more BALLS against a FIELD element or ROBOT in an attempt to shield them) a BALL.

So the inference that this rule change intends to eliminate the zonal requirements that pair with possession to create an assist, seems fairly sound.

[Samwaldo]

2. There is no zone requirement for possession.

I understand that it helps the Refs out ALOT! but whats stopping you from a 3 robot line? 3 robots could push any defenders and they can probably cycle fast enough to skip the truss.

Dont like that rule but agree with all others. Love the 4th ball

[Bryce Paputa]

This is exactly what I thought. Now long range trussers are a lot more valuable then before.
I think this is a good thing because unless they can change their shot power like 33 or 118 can, then range past 30 ft or so is a trade off for accuracy in the high goal. It should also make the game feel more natural because teams wont be forced to go to specific zones before passing off the ball.

Overall I love the rule changes.

[BriteBacon]

3. A 4th ball may be used for autonomous. All other autonomous rules are unchanged.

Is this just for elimination matches or for qualification matches too?

[Iaquinto.Joe]

Is this just for elimination matches or for qualification matches too?

I believe it is every match.

Quality rule changes here. Excited for the stream. This opens up a whole new realm of possibilities for strategy. Bold prediction time: First no penalty 400+ score. In Quals.

[EricH]

Bole prediction time: First no penalty 400+ score. In Quals.
I'll throw in that Elims will have a 450+ no penalty score, and a 500+ score due to some form of G28 or G22 or both.

[waialua359]

#2 alone will have a greater impact than the rest combined!

[Joe Ross]

Note to Frank: the FRC community will thank you if you manage to pick the brains of the IRI rules guys next season. They can definitely help.

I'm sure with 8 weeks of hindsight, the FRC GDC has some pretty good ideas too.

[Nick Lawrence]

I'm sure with 8 weeks of hindsight, the FRC GDC has some pretty good ideas too.

Yes. Lets not pick on the GDC, they have the hardest job:

Trying to predict what thousands of minds are going to think and do their games and manuals.

-Nick

[Chris Fultz]

The rule changes are intended to keep the flow of the game going, reduce referee workload, and allow for some slightly different strategies. We don't believe the changes give any one style / capability a significant advantage or disadvantage.

Yes, the reference to Possession means Assists.

Yes, 4 game pieces available in autonomous for the entire competition.

We chose to keep the pedestal in the loop because changing that created more potential issues, like "when is a ball scored", "What if it goes in and rolls back out, but the team has put another ball in play", ... The potential for more issues outweighted the benefit of changing this one.

I think you can tell from the minimal changes that we like the game pretty much as is. As someone stated above, we have the advantage of seeing hundreds of matches and being able to use that knowledge to make just some minor adjustments.

[XaulZan11]

Chris, will the deflection strategy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f217-wddnbw&feature=youtu.be&t=22s) (employed by 4334 in that match) be interpreted as a possession at IRI?

[waialua359]

Chris, will the deflection strategy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f217-wddnbw&feature=youtu.be&t=22s) (employed by 4334 in that match) be interpreted as a possession at IRI?
Possession Strategy.:)

[Jscout11]

Possession Strategy.:)

This was the first thing I thought of when I read the new rules. Just awesome

[mateoland]

Two other changes I would have added since I am of the opinion that the truss catch was a severely undervalued skill (considering robot design and driver ability):

1) Double or triple the catch points. It would make it more in line with the difficulty of the skill, but also would make teams think twice about forgoing the truss play with the "lack of zone" play introduced.

2) make a truss shot & catch by yourself worth the same or slightly more than #1 above.

Just a thought,

Matt

[Chris Fultz]

Two other changes I would have added since I am of the opinion that the truss catch was a severely undervalued skill (considering robot design and driver ability):


The reason we did not change this value is that teams made design decisions on catching based on the point values. If the point value for a catch was always 30 points, then we believe more teams would have designed catchers.

We don't want to make rule changes with that kind of impact.

[mateoland]

The reason we did not change this value is that teams made design decisions on catching based on the point values. If the point value for a catch was always 30 points, then we believe more teams would have designed catchers.

We don't want to make rule changes with that kind of impact.

Gotcha!

I do think the original gamemakers missed something special by undervaluing that skill.

[EricDrost]

Gotcha!

I do think the original gamemakers missed something special by undervaluing that skill.

Debatable. It was hard enough to assist with teams already. If the point value were higher, I'd bet more teams would spend their resources on catching at the expense of improving their intake/outtake ability.

Ideally more teams built robots like 1712 (quick drivetrain, big catching area, good intake/outtake, no shooter), but most teams bite off more than they can chew.

[Ben Martin]

Ideally more teams built robots like 1712 (quick drivetrain, big catching area, good intake/outtake, no shooter), but most teams bite off more than they can chew.

I really wanted to draft these guys all year. We could never really justify it as a first-round pick from where we were seeded, though.

Love the rule changes, and very glad that catching optimization moves down on our off-season priority list.

[BriteBacon]

Yes, 4 game pieces available in autonomous for the entire competition.



So dialing in our two ball will be worth it after all! :)

[thatprogrammer]

1-8, 1-8, 8-1 huh. #1 alliance gonna be so overpower.

[cadandcookies]

1-8, 1-8, 8-1 huh. #1 alliance gonna be so overpower.

They've been doing it like this for a while... the field at IRI is significantly deeper than any regional or even Championships.

[Jay O'Donnell]

1-8, 1-8, 8-1 huh. #1 alliance gonna be so overpower.

This is normal for IRI. Due to the amazing quality of all of the teams at IRI all 8 alliances are usually fairly even.

[KrazyCarl92]

For clarification's sake, what will be the requirement for preloading auto balls with 4 of them? As per the official FRC rule <G05>, each of the three balls correspond to a particular robot/team:

G5
For ROBOTS starting in the white ZONE, the TEAM may preload one (1) of their ALLIANCE’s BALLS such that the BALL is touching their ROBOT.

For ROBOTS starting in their GOALIE ZONE the TEAM may decide if the BALL is: staged between the TRUSS and the ZONE LINE and not contacting an ALLIANCE partner, or removed from the FIELD for the MATCH.

If a ROBOT does not report to a MATCH, its ALLIANCE may decide if the BALL is: staged between the TRUSS and the ZONE LINE and not contacting an ALLIANCE partner, or removed from the FIELD for the MATCH.

Are three of the balls still subject to the stated rule? Can the fourth one be in possession of a robot that already has a ball, or must it be placed in the white zone not contacting a robot?

Depending on the interpretation of the changed rule, I could easily see the dominant autonomous strategies being slightly altered. Would 2 robots each possessing two balls to start and a goalie bot be legal? Would 2 robots, each possessing one ball with a second next to it on the carpet not in contact with a robot and a third goalie bot be legal? Would one robot be able to pre-load 2 balls, while the other must have a ball placed on the carpet not in contact with it while the third robot sets up in the goalie zone?

Basically are there still restrictions regarding the preloading/placement of balls and if so, how is the additional ball handled given that there is now 1 more ball than robot on the field per alliance? The answer to these questions could have significant impact on how teams prepare their auto routines for IRI.

[Chris Fultz]

The 4th ball rule wasn't meant to be confusing.

The basic FIRST season rule applies, but if the team wants to use the 4th ball, it can be placed the same as if there was an "extra" ball during the regular season.

And a robot can only start touching 1 ball (just like regular season).

If the alliance wants to start with 2 robots in the white zone and 1 in the goalie zone, then the 2 extra balls can be placed the same as if there was an "extra" ball during the regular season (1 extra for each robot or 2 extra for one robot).

And, i would say that if an alliance wants to start with just 1 robot in the white zone, then the 3 extra balls can be placed the same as if there was an "extra" ball during the regular season.

So, if someone wants to make a 4 ball autonomous, and they can convince their partners to go to the goalie zone, well ....

PS - THIS WILL BE CLARIFIED AND CONFIRMED AT THE DRIVERS MEETING -

[KrazyCarl92]

And, i would say that if an alliance wants to start with just 1 robot in the white zone, then the 3 extra balls can be placed the same as if there was an "extra" ball during the regular season.

This would seem to imply that multiple goalie bots is legal. Is this intended?

[AdamHeard]

This would seem to imply that multiple goalie bots is legal. Is this intended?

It's legal as long as only one has a pole up at a time (per season rules).