[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Mike Koch

..., FIRST is acting exactly like a typical Client does in the real world: changing specifications after the contract has been signed and work well under way, and with no deferment of the delivery date or adjustment in price.

And this is a good thing.

I agree completely.

However, meta-reasoning aside, the straightforward reason for IRI rules changes remains what it has been for many years, and it is probably the best reason I have for going to IRI as often as I am able to: we get to play and see a better game.

Originally Posted by IRI Committee

The intent of the IRI Committee is to minimize the changes to the game and avoid negatively impacting a team / robot / strategy that was implemented to play the game as originally designed, while also increasing the game challenge and level of play for the IRI. Our goals for these changes include: 1) Allow for high scores by minimizing the chance of running out of game pieces; 2) Minimize the number of match outcomes determined in the first second of the match; 3) Don’t invalidate an existing good design or strategy; 4) Keep the event safe; and 5) Don’t start a can-war arms race that encourages teams to invest significant time and resources into an ever-faster device to capture Recycle Containers from the step.
The committee believes the rule changes below meet these goals.