Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

I think it would be interesting if you balanced the balls on the bridge instead of the robots. Maybe 4 points per ball on the bridge to make it more desirable than shooting hoops?

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

I don't think there is any team, except for the catapults, who could possibly pull this feat off...I'm sure some teams could figure a way out with some modification over the summer, but that seems rather difficult in current configurations.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Why not go nano-bot?

This is a FTC bot that releases a smaller bot to score the magnet ball.
Crazy.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

I just had an idea that I think would be very interesting. It would allow a triple balance during qualification matches AND allow a co-op bridge balance.

Here it is: allow alliance bridge balances at any time during the match. If you balance for 3 seconds, the balance is good. The referees would count the balance like a ref during a WWE match (big arm wave: one! two! three! give something like a touchdown signal, and then it's official - the balance is good). Then the teams can then unbalance themselves and continue the match. Balances score just as they would during an eliminations match - 10 for one robot, 20 for two robots, 40 for three robots. The co-op bridge only counts during the end of a match. If the alliance chooses to balance at the end of the match, regular rules apply (i.e. you don't have to balance three seconds before the end of the match).

The strategies could be interesting.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

While I do think this would be interesting, speaking as a referee I'm a little wary of something like this. It inherently invites controversy. "Our bridge was balanced, the ref counted wrong." and stuff like that. Just a concern of mine with this idea.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

I've been looking around, but can't find where to begin the application process. Has it begun? Or do you need to be invited to apply? :D

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Not yet available.

Wetzel

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

There are sensors built into the bridge that provide feedback that it is balanced. (pretty neat!) It shows up on the scorekeepers display and the head ref panel (I believe)

A possible process to implement something like this:

• Referee uses visual inspection of the robots/bridge coming to rest.
• Once that happens they raise one arm to signal the "start" of the balance period.
• In their other hand they are holding a countdown timer that that activate when they put their arm up.
• If the balance is successful, at the end of the timer countdown, they then drop their arm down vertically and point to the bridge/robots to signal a "good' balance
• If the balance is unsuccessful for some reason, they drop their arm down and sweep it "side to side" to indicate a "bad" balance

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Triple Balance Co-op is worth 4 co-op points. One robot has to be from the other team.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

In light of recent developments:
Triple balance co-op is worth 3 co-op points. Quadruple balance co-op is worth 4 co-op points.
(co-op balancing must feature at least one robot from each alliance, of course)

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

IRI seeding algorithm:

I was actually a big fan of the 2010 algorithm with a few tweaks applied. I thought it had the highest potential for doing a good sort on teams. Here is how I would do it for the IRI:

Winners seeding points: Winner score + Loser score + Constant
Loser seeding points: 2xLoser score
Tie score: 2xTie Score for all

What about the Co-Op bridge?
Co-Op is worth 10 pts. for a single balance to both sides. Co-Op is worth 25 points for a balance with 1 red and 1 blue member.

I personally think this carries the right balance for teams. The Co-Op gets doubled for both sides of the field. If the other alliance stands you up at the bridge, you can still get substantial points for it.
Close matches will have close qualifying scores. High scoring matches will provide high qualifying scores. There is a general dissincentive for reducing your opposing alliances score (this dissincentive is adjustable by moving the value of the Winning constant up or down).
This system also eliminates the incentive for 6v0 which was controversial in 2010.

I would award the Co-Opertition award to the highest Co-Op score that is not an alliance captain (possibly alliance captain or higher seed than the lowest seeding alliance captian).

I also think that this can serve as a future scoring model for future first games if they want to continue with the "Co-Opertition" aspect. It must be mutually beneficial to both sides, it must be more valuable if both sides participate. It must have some value if only 1 side participates (this should reduce hurt feelings of getting stood up to the prom).

This style of play would work for many first games. Having a common central goal. As it ties into both teams points, with my ranking system, the common goal is a doubler for both teams. This give it equal precedence for the Loosing side (loosers get 2L), and higher precedence for the higher scoring side (winners get W+L, therefore Co-Op scoring is 2x the value of W only scoring).
Co-Op points could be added in real-time to both scores, or Co-Op could be a seperate entity doubled up for each side at the end of the match.

For this years game, I would put the "winning constant" around 25 points. This should be a high enough value for teams to go for the win.

This is apretty big tear-up to the seeding algorithm this year, but I think it would be oworth trying out at a high caliber event.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Interesting, but I think the GDC finally came up with a good QS system that makes sense, with equal weight for winning and Coopertition, which is always stressed. I see the people in charge of IRI respecting that.

Plus, if FRC games are to appeal to the masses (which would be nice, right?), then both match scoring and QS have to be simple to explain to anybody--which they are right now.

I know that wasn't entirely related to IRI, but part of it sort of connected, and this was a chance to say it.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Here's a simple idea of how to work the co-op bridge. Instead of giving 2 Ranking points for each alliance, it would just double the Hybrid, Bridge, and Teleop points for that match to reflect in the standings

ie a final score of Red 61(18HP+10BP+33TP ), Blue 58(24HP+10BP+24TP) would really show Red 122(36HP+20BP+66TP), Blue 116(48HP+20BP+48TP) for the standings. This way, there is a premium to utilizing the co-op bridge but it doesn't offset the the amounts of Wins and Losses you have.

Now the question is what would you do if there would be a situation where a team would only earn 1 coopertition point.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

Eliminate it.

Re: IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas
 

This! Personally, I liked the 2010 seeding algorithm, if it had just a few adjustments, and I think this makes that work very well.