Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Limitations too far? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71414)

Andrew Schreiber 07-01-2009 20:36

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 795239)
I'm not on the GDC, but I've got one.

They thought the rule was bulletproof as it was. Then the 10 or so of them turned the game over to 10,000+ high schoolers and as many mentors, who immediately started looking for ways around the intent of the rule by using the letter of the rule.

So the GDC decided that clarification was necessary, and issued it.

Im sure you are right, but sometimes I would like to hear more from them about why things are there. I know that sometimes rules are just made to challenge us, I'm ok with that, but some rules, such as the rule about expanding beyond bumpers, would deserve an explanation. Honestly, I think that a lot of the issues many of us are having come from our lack of understanding WHY a rule must exist.

suj 07-01-2009 21:16

Re: Limitations too far?
 
i agree this new game limits us horribly and it makes so many ideas crushed preventing innovation and big concept to first but i bet there may not be many rockie teams registered so there uping the diffuculty to veteran teams

Molten 07-01-2009 21:17

Re: Limitations too far?
 
All the rules they right are to challenge you. The more like the real world the better the challenge. In the real world, you are going to be given rules for no real good reason. A boss might tell you he doesn't like your design and not tell you what is wrong with it. He might tell you if anything is wrong with it. As for the reaching outside of the original dimensions, I don't know about you but that is one rule that I'm having trouble working with. It is because of this that I think that it is the best rule of this game.

Remember: If life was too easy, it wouldn't be worth the trouble. The same goes for the game.

for_the_horde! 07-01-2009 22:05

Re: Limitations too far?
 
i do agree. but no good to complain. we just have to deal with what we have and not what we want (i'm thinking, let us extend outside the bumpers:D ) would anyone happen to know how you are positioned during autonomous? i know that your trailer has to contact the wall, but assuming that your trailer is touching the wall, are you free to angle your robot as desired? that would help alot in autonomous, especially considering the low traction conditions.

usbcd36 07-01-2009 23:27

Re: Limitations too far?
 
You can angle your robot any way you want, provided you do it by eye (no measuring devices).



I've never been so frustrated while reading a topic on CD. The GDC is not going to renege just because some of their rules are considered unfair.

More and more, I see people forming opinions too early. Not just in FIRST, but in school and the real world too. If, after the championship, 90% of the robots really are the same, and few or none managed to overcome the "unreasonable" challenges, the GDC has failed. Until then, however, there's nothing constructive in criticizing these restrictions. This has been said before, but the real world is not reasonable, and restrictions don't go away because they're ridiculous. Better to accept them and spend time working around them instead.

The truly ironic thing is that most of these restrictions appear to have logical reasons behind them. If a robot crashes into a wall or other robot with an extended manipulator, there could be damage to either or both of colliders. If teams built robots that could descore balls or block their trailers, they could eliminate the need to maneuver entirely. Just because the restrictions don't seem right to teams doesn't mean they aren't there for a good reason.

Andrew Schreiber 08-01-2009 00:09

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by usbcd36 (Post 795477)
I've never been so frustrated while reading a topic on CD. The GDC is not going to renege just because some of their rules are considered unfair.

More and more, I see people forming opinions too early. Not just in FIRST, but in school and the real world too. If, after the championship, 90% of the robots really are the same, and few or none managed to overcome the "unreasonable" challenges, the GDC has failed. Until then, however, there's nothing constructive in criticizing these restrictions. This has been said before, but the real world is not reasonable, and restrictions don't go away because they're ridiculous. Better to accept them and spend time working around them instead.

The truly ironic thing is that most of these restrictions appear to have logical reasons behind them. If a robot crashes into a wall or other robot with an extended manipulator, there could be damage to either or both of colliders. If teams built robots that could descore balls or block their trailers, they could eliminate the need to maneuver entirely. Just because the restrictions don't seem right to teams doesn't mean they aren't there for a good reason.

First, there is ALWAYS a reason to question rules. I dont know about you but any society where questioning rules of a governing party is discouraged is not one I want to part of. I highly doubt that Chris expects the GDC to change the rules now but he has an issue with something they are doing, are you telling him that he should just shut up?

As I said, I know that there are a lot of reasonable explanations for the rules, I think most of us agree with them, but there is a difference between having the person who wrote a rule tell why it was put in than having some college kid tell us that the rule is there because so and so. No offense, Im sure you are smart and understand your stuff but you are NOT on the GDC and as such really can't explain their thinking.

The scenario you described where a team eliminates the need to move entirely is just good problem solving. How is the GDC deciding they want robots to have to move a good reason? To me that is an arbitrary decision they made to make the game more exciting. Nothing wrong with wanting an exciting game. As far as teams potentially getting parts broken, that has always been part of the game, making your stuff robust enough to withstand collision.

bduddy 08-01-2009 00:12

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by usbcd36 (Post 795477)
You can angle your robot any way you want, provided you do it by eye (no measuring devices).



I've never been so frustrated while reading a topic on CD. The GDC is not going to renege just because some of their rules are considered unfair.

More and more, I see people forming opinions too early. Not just in FIRST, but in school and the real world too. If, after the championship, 90% of the robots really are the same, and few or none managed to overcome the "unreasonable" challenges, the GDC has failed. Until then, however, there's nothing constructive in criticizing these restrictions. This has been said before, but the real world is not reasonable, and restrictions don't go away because they're ridiculous. Better to accept them and spend time working around them instead.

The truly ironic thing is that most of these restrictions appear to have logical reasons behind them. If a robot crashes into a wall or other robot with an extended manipulator, there could be damage to either or both of colliders. If teams built robots that could descore balls or block their trailers, they could eliminate the need to maneuver entirely. Just because the restrictions don't seem right to teams doesn't mean they aren't there for a good reason.

I fail to see how this criticism in general is not constructive, even if the GDC is not going to listen. They have showed a pattern of (occasionally!) listening in the past. But even then, that's no reason not to. That's like saying it's not constructive to criticize the President, because he's probably not going to listen. That may be true, but criticism of politicians is a cherished value here in America. Yes, it is healthy that the game have a reasonable amount of restriction, but at the same time we are not building these robots because we have a high-dollar contract to do so; we are doing it to learn. If the game prevented us from doing that, it would deserve criticism.

Now, I don't think it does; while I do have my issues with it, I do in general like this game. But there are issues that are, IMO, hard to defend, and the "no extending beyond your footprint" issue is one of them. It has been allowed in nearly all competitions before, and yes, there have been collisions, but one of the challenges of the game has been to build a robust robot.

Hanna2325 08-01-2009 00:17

Re: Limitations too far?
 
This probably has been said, but it seems like too much (due to all the restrictive rules) is being placed on hand-eye-ball-trailer coordination - not design, ingenuity, driving, etc

Still, there are some solutions, and it will be fun to see how everyone approaches this year's competition.;

Molten 08-01-2009 02:41

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber (Post 795511)
are you telling him that he should just shut up?

He was doing it in a very GP way. But yeah, I think that is the message he has gotten from many of us. I don't mean to raise a fuss but I'm tired of hearing people complain because the game is hard. The fact that it is hard is what makes it worth doing.

Also, the reason they aren't giving a response as to why is because they are too busy monitoring all the teams out there that are confused by the rules or just simply trying to get around them. Let them answer the important questions of what and how. Then, ask them why. Until then, you should be busy with the bot.

GaryVoshol 08-01-2009 08:01

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber (Post 795227)
A stab at what Chris was talking about, we were discussing descoring our own goal. What we found, after hours of looking at it and reading the rules, was that we could fit it into our robot. The catch? We would have given up a large percentage of the space in our robot. Who is the GDC to tell us that we can't make that tradeoff?

They're the GDC. ;) No, seriously, they can change things as they see it necessary. Much better now than after Week 1 Events.
Quote:

If they wanted us to not fit it in at all they should have designed it so we absolutely couldnt do it. We designed within the rules as they stood, why should they be able to come back and say, seemingly with no explanation of why, that what we were doing was illegal?

Perhaps if the GDC would release an explanation of why they decided a rule needed clarification we would all feel a little more at ease.
Team Update 1 did provide some rational for the rule changes - they were clarifying what they thought they had already said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 795239)
I'm not on the GDC, but I've got one.

They thought the rule was bulletproof as it was. Then the 10 or so of them turned the game over to 10,000+ high schoolers and as many mentors, who immediately started looking for ways around the intent of the rule by using the letter of the rule.

So the GDC decided that clarification was necessary, and issued it.

I agree with Eric. When you work with the concept of a game, and then try to put that concept into rules, part of what should have been written down might get missed. It's crystal clear to the committee what their intent was (in their minds); getting that clarity across to all the teams is something else.

If the Rules had statements from Kickoff saying, "Thou shalt not block thine trailer." and "Thou shalt not descore." and "Thou shalt not exit thy bumper perimeter." would we be having this discussion? We all would have gone, "Aw, crap, there goes that idea." and then got on with the design process. We wouldn't have anything to argue about. (Well, there's still <G14>, but ... :p )

So the bigger question becomes how can the GDC ensure that the rules come out as intended, the first time? I have one thought on that which I can't share now but will follow up on through proper channels as the season progresses. Anyone else with ideas is free to contact FIRST individually or make their feelings known in the feedback mechanisms that are available each season.

Al Skierkiewicz 08-01-2009 08:27

Re: Limitations too far?
 
I think you are all right. The GDC went overboard this year.
Do they think we can face the challenges of everyday life on a 1/6 gravity moon?
Do they think we can exist with a limited size robot?
Do they think our teams can handle a weight limit of 120lbs?
Do they think we can overcome programming issues for driving on ice?
Do they think we can use new electrical parts and be effective?
Do they think we can overcome these adversities and survive?
Do they think we can use humans as an effective addition to a mechanical strategy?
Do they think we can figure out how to pick up those balls made of plastice and spandex?
Do they expect us to do all of this in just six weeks?
And the answer to all of these questions is YES! This is the 40th annivesary of man's first step on the moon. Remember kickoff? The average age of the engineers working on Apollo was 28 at the time of the landing, making them 18 when John Kennedy challenged them, "First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him back safely to the earth." You guys have 40 years of technological advantage over those engineers and all you have to do is get your robot to move a few feet and pick up some toys. Let's get moving!

johnr 08-01-2009 08:40

Re: Limitations too far?
 
The gdc could solve alot of problems at kickoff by changing that one segment were they play some kind of tv game. One hour before telecast they take a group and show them everything. Have them sign something or take away their phones. Then use their questions in that segment. I think the questions of blocking and descoring would have been brought up.

GillSt.Bernards 08-01-2009 14:17

Re: Limitations too far?
 
They are trying to even the playing field between the teams but that is not going to happen no matter what they do. Teams with more experience are going to have an easier times then rookies and second year teams. I am not sure it is worth it though.

They are not letting us get extremly creative this year because they're are so many rules. I guess we will have to find different ways to be creative then ew have in the past.

Molten 08-01-2009 14:21

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GillSt.Bernards (Post 795924)
They are not letting us get extremly creative this year because they're are so many rules.

No, they are not letting us get 'extremely creative', they are forcing us to be 'extremely creative'. The fact that this game has so many rules, forces us to be 'extremely creative'. Be grateful for the challenge, it is preparing you for life.

EricH 08-01-2009 14:24

Re: Limitations too far?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GillSt.Bernards (Post 795924)
They are trying to even the playing field between the teams but that is not going to happen no matter what they do. Teams with more experience are going to have an easier times then rookies and second year teams. I am not sure it is worth it though.

They are not letting us get extremly creative this year because they're are so many rules. I guess we will have to find different ways to be creative then ew have in the past.

Please do not attribute reasons to the GDC, especially ones that Dave has already addressed elsewhere (I believe it was in the <G14> thread, or one of them).

And, once again, if you guys are complaining about limitations now, I'm going to make a proposal for next year. I'll give you the details now, though.

It's one simple rule: "All robots shall be built using only what is in the KOP, plus $x from [insert supplier], plus a certain amount of a, b, c, and d materials from the local Home Depot." Oh, and the KOP will include items that are not in component form.

All I'll say is that it's happened before, back in the "Dark Ages" before alliances.

Now go look at those robots from the early to mid 90's. (Aside from many of them being built to handle balls...) What do you see? Creativity.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:28.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi