Quote:
Originally Posted by BJC
I really don't see a reason that both virtical and robot oriented cylinders could be legal. The only thing this could possibly result in is a greater varience in design and more robots climbing for 30-- which are both good things.
Regards, Bryan
|
Not to try and delve into the heads of the GDC members, but I believe they changed the rule so that it was reasonably policeable. You cannot within reason attempt to replicate the orientation of a robot that was hanging in the air with a cylinder that is perpendicular to the ground. However, you can very easily re-position a robot on the ground and see if it fits into a cylinder relative to the robot itself.
Making it so both configurations are legal would negate the purpose of the rule change to begin with, or so it would seem.