Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory
That's the problem...it will be completely unenforceable in a consistent manner. As Jared noted, as long as a robot doesn't protrude through the chute there is no reason for this interpretation of the rule to exist.
Now it will be a judgement call that will be different for every ref when it could easily just be determined by "was the robot inside the chute or not?". That would have required no judgment and there would be no issue.
This is going to create a huge problem for the average team that was planning on human loading their robot...it's not clear that a robot can human load, period, without letting the tote fall completely to the floor without touching the robot at all in the process. Plus as written, a noodle cannot be transferred directly to a robot or put into a can that a robot is holding. Surely this is not what the GDC intended?
This opened a huge can of worms that I hope the GDC prematurely responded to without considering all the implications of their response.
|
Emphasis mine.
I wonder if that was the intention? By the end of 2013, some human players could load a full set of frisbees in a few seconds. By adding all the barriers that slow down human loading, the GDC is adding another tradeoff between picking up from the floor and human loading. If human loading didn't have the gate or the "control" requirement it would clearly be the quicker, easier, more consistent way to load totes. All of the limitations make the choice much less obvious, especially considering how good some of the Ri3D intakes were and how much time teams have to further develop those designs, come up with their own, and train drivers.