View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-03-2005, 17:53
ldeffenb ldeffenb is offline
Registered User
AKA: Lynn Deffenbaugh (Mr)
None #0386 (Team Voltage 386)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 75
ldeffenb has a spectacular aura aboutldeffenb has a spectacular aura aboutldeffenb has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via ICQ to ldeffenb Send a message via AIM to ldeffenb Send a message via Yahoo to ldeffenb
Re: How on Earth are spectators meant to easily discern who wins?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik
but the 30-pointers seem excessive. I can understand the non-interference rule, but -30 if you accidentally bump another robot while it's getting a tetra seems extreme. Ditto -30 for an antsy teenager jumping out of his human player station during autonomous mode. Warnings seem like they would be appropriate here.
Okay, consider this: This is the first year that real live human people are coming up next to the playfield *without* the Plexiglas wall. The 30 point penalty, when you think about it, is to *absolutely discourage* *ANY* pushing/shoving/ramming near where these people will be. When a 'bot is in or entering the loading zone, there's a person there or about to be there. If anyone hits that 'bot, even accidentally, that person is endangered.

The rules for our drive team are to give the opposition's loading zones a wide berth. We'll do whatever we please near the goals, but *NOT* at near the loading zones. I wouldn't want the opposition harming my students (or my wife as she works for the field crew), so I'm not going to endanger their students either.

I, for one, firmly believe the 30 point penalty is sufficient and has a *very* good reason for being so stiff. Anything less would be ignorable by high scoring alliances and would lower the overall safety of the game.

Just my $0.02 (2 cents).

Lynn (D) - Team Voltage 386 Drive Team Coach
Reply With Quote