Quote:
Originally Posted by wireties
"Moving or positioning a Basketball to gain advantage is considered actively controlling. Examples are..." The bizarre "protect the balls in the corner" strategy is not enumerated in the examples but that does not make it legal. The GDC can't cover every crazy possibility, nor should they have to. In my opinion, the intent of this rule is beyond question. If one (with intent, not accidentally) put 4 balls in the corner and parks in front of them, you are controlling them - period. Further I think most refs would red card (per G45) a robot for repeating this offense.
Feelings (aka integrity, sportmanship and ethics) play a unique role in the engineering world. It is simply not possible for a customer to create a SOW or reqs that cover every possible design flaw or feature. It is ethical to point this out to the customer and (if there no cost/schedule impact) to act in accordance with the clarified intent of the design. This is the proper path for an ethical young engineer - might as well start teaching them (and setting the example) now.
This question is on point and the GDC did NOT choose to reply. As I said above they can't comment on every silly scenario.
|
I think this strategy is far from "bizarre, crazy, and silly". Game piece starvation and hoarding has been used frequently in previous game (2011, 2009, 2008, 2006). The only time ethics even came into the conversation was in Galileo 2008, when robots couldn't possess their opponent's trackballs and
obviously tried to.