Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

+2. It makes defense that much harder...

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

How about making tech-fouls 9 points like they were last year? (Or 12, since I'm fairly sure it was 9 points because that was the worth of a robot full of game pieces, and this year a robot full of game pieces would make 12 points). That way you don't change the dinamics of the game but the chances of a game being decided by foul points lowers drastically (well, 45% of what it was...)

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

I assumed it's worth 20 points because if you're shooting colored disks into the pyramid goal, one load of game pieces is worth 20 points. That makes it equivalent to last year's penalty.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

Sounds right, haven't thought of that... But I think that if you want to follow last year's penalty it would be more right to make it 12 points, because the pyramid goal is much more a bonus than a part of the main game, and you can only have a full cache of colored disks once a game. The white disks are the main game piece. This comparison might not be as accurate but it can create a game decided more by skill than fouls than the original, while not veering too much from the original penalty.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

I hope we can all agree that it would be silly if an elimination match at IRI were decided by a tie breaker in this manner. I know that FIRST implemented this because of issues in past years with elimination rounds taking too long with replay after replay (2010 for example). However, nobody wants to come to IRI and lose or win an elimination match that was really a tie. If the match is THAT close, I'm sure we would all want another match to be played...teams, spectators, and volunteers included. Ties just are not that common this year and on the off chance that one does happen, I doubt it will repeatedly happen in a single series.

The game itself I feel is great as is, but this is one flaw in the structure of the tournament that I noticed and was reminded of this weekend at Battlecry@WPI when there was a 33-33 tie in the Eighth finals.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

I agree a tie-breaker is not a very desirable to decide elimination matches.

However, I recall the 2010 IRI competition where the eliminations ran very late (four matches ended in ties!). Team 330 missed their return flight to Los Angeles (perhaps other teams also missed flights). It was a costly venture for their team (though somewhat offset by the Championship trophy!). As a spectator for the eliminations, it was incredibly exciting and emotionally draining. Most of our team members (and other teams) left before the finals were decided to catch flights home.

Team travel plans might be a factor in whether or not to keep the tie-breaker in place.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

What made ties so common in 2010 was the scoring system and the game itself. So many matches at the regional level ended in ties with tons of winning scores no greater than 2 points!

I personally would like the tie breaker to go back to forcing another match unless another 2010esq game comes around then a tie breaker clause needs to come into effect.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

Having a single (or a few) discrete value of scoring (ONE and TWO as was the case in 2010) and a small number of objects results in a game where ties are very likely.

Having plenty of different valued scoring options (ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, TEN, TWENTY and THIRTY in 2013) makes it so that a sort of perfect storm of scoring combinations has to occur for a tie to happen. This makes ties very unlikely. In short, with a game design like this year where ties are super rare, I agree with Brendan. It should be fairly easy for the GDC to predict also because you can just look at the sheer number of game objects and the values of scoring and get a good idea of how likely ties are.

Odds are we will see a very small number of ties in elims at IRI, but it would be nice to see this addressed prior to the tournament, before someone is forced to decide whether to crown a winner or play another match on the spot when there is a lot of pressure.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

I don't think there's any small change to the game play this year that can improve on the game much; the GDC really knocked it out of the park.

I like the idea of the penalty for interrupting a climb being modified to reflect the colored disks in the robot climbing as well. (To those who say this is a small change to the game play I say, you're not supposed to get penalties anyway, strategy is the same, therefore how teams play the game is the same, game play is the same).

I don't mind the idea of longer timeouts for teams who fell from the pyramid, but understand how it could make matches drag on and as someone who's never fixed a robot after falling I wouldn't know how useful it would be.

Re: Real IRI Rules Changes?
 

It already does. I think the idea of a technical foul = a full cycle of colored discs is somewhat intentional. The penalty is already 50 points.