Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Ok, it this picture:

http://img160.imageshack.us/my.php?image=penaltymu4.jpg


The blue huge robot obviously extends over the "Imagginary" 80'' diameter circle.

Talk it up =]

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Yes, I think this may have been Dave taking a bit of artistic license. Not so much rule ambiguity here however.

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

By the way, all those problems would have been probebly solved if only we had the final score of the game in the animation.
Then we could have known aout penalties recieved for any violation and deduct conclusions.
Does anybody know why dont we have the final score this year?

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

It's not an 80" dia. circle ... it's a 80" dia. upright cylinder ... A robot outside of the opponents "home stretch" can be as tall as it wants.

That robot may actually be "in spec.".

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

I was not talking about its height, but about its length extenssion of the arm.

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Because you wouldn't easily see how many times each robot went around the track, but it should have been included nonetheless.

Tomasz Bania

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

There's something else wrong with this picture. The blue robot is breaking the red finish line plane from the blue home stretch. It's not breaking the 6 foot high rule, but it is techinically crossing a line in a clockwise direction. Infraction/penalty?

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

I'm inclined to agree with you. Though it is clearly breaking the 80" rule (the ball is 40", the robot is 38", and there's plenty of space in between), I would venture that this is also a penalty per <G22>. What Dave had in mind of how the game works is clearly quite a bit different from how it came out on paper. I'm really interested to see which interpretation is correct.

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Its a cylinder. but i do see your point, however the spirit of the rule is that it has to start small then i can get as huge as it wants.

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

no, at no point in the match can it be larger than 80" wide in that cylinder.

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Don't forget that the bulldozer robot violtates <G18>

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Does the blue multi jointed robot only get 6 points for hurdling the ball? Because its is supposed to be awarded 2 from <G10> then 6 from <G11> but it is touching the ball when the ball crosses the finish line. So it only gets 6?

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

No, it doesn't. It has a long post extending up for the flag. If that post ends above 38", it's legal. (Now, it might violate <R17>, but that's another story.)

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

um i'm just new here so i might not know but why whould this be important to the game or is this just to review the rules or just for the sake of arguments
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

It is bringing up discussion of the rules, which is always good, and the animation is NEVER a true definition of the game and will always have some flaws no matter how great it is. (The animation does not get updates throughout the season, whereas the Manual will, meaning The Manual is the governing document of our game, not the animation.)

I am one of the ones to agree with this post below as most of us are.

The 2007 animation had at least one uncalled penalty as well, so it's just a good study in who can find them and what not.

Also, Dave does this in his spare time over his Winter Vacation as a reference so we should all be greatful for this added resource no matter how many flaws we can sit here and pick out of it.


<rant>
Back in my day (Pre-2003) we had no animation of the game, and we liked the game anyways! LOL :p
</rant>

Oh, and we asked a ton of questions back then as well, so it's good at least some things never change. :rolleyes:

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

okay i was just really wondering tanks for answering mi question:D

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

I generally do not like talking about rule violations in the animation because it makes it seem as if the creator(s) did not fully understand the rules. However, I just had an interesting thought...

Maybe Dave WANTS to break some rules in his animation because:
1. He can
2. It allows us to analyze the game more, and thus discuss it more
3. He might just like messing with our heads (such as with the "clues" he gives during the offseason)

...just a thought

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

If you are referring to the <R16> violation, it was not an "uncalled penalty." It was noticed by the referees and after the match the offending animated team members were taken out behind the arena and erased. As no specific penalty is provided in the manual for <Rxx> violations, it was determined by the FIRST staff on-site during the animated competition that this was the most appropriate response. The only reason that you did not see this is that both the referee and the FIRST staff in attendance were off-camera when they dropped the penalty flags and later eradicated the team members in question.

OK, realistically, yes I know there is a penalty call to be made in the animation. The original idea was to call out this (and one other) rule violation as an example in the animation. However, the "explain the penalties" scene was removed during late editing as things were just getting too long. It gets difficult to cram a complete explanation of every aspect of the entire game into two and a half minutes of animation, and some elements have to be dropped.

That is why we keep telling everyone - the animation, kick-off videos, field renderings, etc are all for illustrative purposes only. The only COMPLETE AND CORRECT description of the 2008 FIRST Overdrive game is the one contained in the official FIRST rules (as amended). Use the other materials as you may see fit. Just be aware that there may be some discrepancies between those original items and the official rules as the rules are updated during the season.

-dave

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

Ok, now wouldnt that only be illegal for crossing the imaginary plane for the opponent hone stretch....but it was also crossing back over 2 lines. They said that they arent just lines...bvut imaginary planes that go on and on forever.....

Re: Another Violation in the Animation?
 

And they think a 30 sec animation is easy!!!! Wow, Dave had 2.5 minutes, thats like dog years for an animation team member (relatively speaking of course)

I'm surprised no one picked out the illegal motor usage on the flintstone cars in the "real world" game simulation.

Dave, thanks for clearifying the rule (or Ref's responce) we may need to practice that one in our shop-- Incase we are ever referees!

Now that we have all this cleared up, we can focus on real penalties and our real robots design to combat them!

Good luck to all.