Quote:
Originally Posted by JVN
There are two questions to ask:
1. What is the GDC's intent?
2. Did they succeed at accomplishing that intent?
I'm surprised how many people in this thread seem to have drastically different assumptions about #1 than me. Maybe I'm misreading the GDC.
|
Quoting what appears to be the GDC's literal intent, for reference:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Team Update 3/20/2014
The rule change to G27 attempts to discourage ROBOT to ROBOT damage, while still allowing defensive play. On the FIELD, we want to encourage FRC Teams to work with their ALLIANCE partners to demonstrate their technical prowess and game play skills. While pushing and bumping are reasonable game play efforts, anything that resembles intentionally damaging behavior is not. Additionally, the change to G27 enables Referees to issue penalties for causing opponent ROBOT damage, even if not strategic or intentional.
|
Will they succeed? I think not.
The first large issue has been raised again and again - the amount of things referees have to pay attention to. There are three big items now that I think will cause debate this weekend. The first have been: human player zone violations alongside under G40, and scoring matches: assists, trusses, and goals (alongside the lag issues inherent in the FMS). I fear that the requirement of referees to catalogue and track every robot-to-robot interaction to see if 1) there is damage, destruction, or inhibition, 2)Is it accidental or strategic, is simply just piling something else upon the referees' plate that will not receive the attention it deserves (not to the referees' fault).
The second large issue is the possibility of attempting to draw fouls under this rule, despite the existence of G14 (which I have seen very, very rarely enforced). For instance, I can see the possibility that low-traction drivetrains that can be pushed readily by skid-steer drivetrains with lots of traction (e.g. mecanums, omnis versus tread wheels) could easily stage penalties to show "high-speed or aggressive" ramming, by not fighting pushing from the aforementioned skid-steer robots.
I am confused as to how the GDC expects the example actions in G27, "high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming", to satisfy their intent to discourage damage while encouraging robots to perform to their best. What is to stop robots with "technical prowess and gameplay skills" from running down the field with a ball playing offense, accidentally hitting a poorly designed robot, breaking something, and incurring a foul? Similarily, their additional intent "Additionally, the change to G27 enables Referees to issue penalties for causing opponent ROBOT damage, even if not strategic or intentional," is intended to raise the level of competition, encourage stronger design skills, or be fair (when it comes to discrepancies between robots' build quality), or do anything but encourage penalties like in the situation with the offensive robot mentioned above.
I hope that referees take these rules as invitations to make sensible, subjective, reasonable judgements that fall in line with the GDC's intent (WITHOUT the GDC stating so - that also seems like a major omission).