![]() |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
A tall robot (or piece of polycarb, or a drop cloth held by a robot) doesn't interfere with the proper functioning of the sensor. The sensor is still working just fine - it just can't see what the operator wants it to see. Shining an IR laser at their camera, now THAT would be interfering with the proper functioning of the sensor.
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
we had an opponent in 2013 that used a green team shirt as a blocker on our alliance partner's full court shooter that used vision... I guess this is the type of strategy that is not allowed with this Q&A
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
How about 95's arm? When its vertical it's fairly tall and does a passable job of blocking shots. That wasn't a specific design goal, but we're happy it does it. I imagine it'll also block a cameras view of the tower.
Is our arm now illegal if a RI decides it is? Because it seems they certainly have the precedent to make that call now. ![]() What if I put a range sensor on the front of our robot and argue that its used to sense distance from the tower for shooting guidance, and if a robot gets between the tower and my robot then it's interfering with my robots sensing capabilities? That's obviously ridiculous, so why are cameras any different? |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
I did not hear of any referee calls at CVR of blockers violating R9-C (sensor interference). Regardless, there is significant ambiguity in the rules for both R9-A and C that should be clarified. With the rules as enforced at CVR and as clarified by this Q&A response, I would be worried if we had built a defensive blocker. As written, R9 ("robots shall not ... interfere with the operation of other robots"), could be interpreted as outlawing all defense. |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
As a corollary to this... What if I have a camera pointed straight in front of my robot with the intent of using it to locate balls on the ground, or to help me line up for crossing defenses? Does that mean opposing robots have to get out of my way and can't get between me and any ball or defense, just because they would be blocking my camera? From this Q&A, I guess as an LRI I would be forced to make a judgement call on robots with blockers - is the blocker sufficiently tall and sturdy enough that it can be considered a ball blocker?. It doesn't really take much for something to be sturdy enough to deflect balls from scoring, which leaves it pretty wide open. |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
mfw all tall, monolithic robots are now violating the rules for obstructing other team's "sensing capabilities".
GG tall 'bots; you must be this short to play Stronghold. |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
Quote:
With regards to your arm or other "tall opaque" objects, the same logic applies. If the design of the device is obvious that it is not specifically designed or intended to block camera vision, then the Lead Robot Inspector is unlikely to deem it illegal. This ruling is not a game changer. |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
Defense is going to get really fun Week 6 and later; aka by the time most teams have squished the bugs in their shooters :) |
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
Re: Your tall opaque robot is now illegal
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:37. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi