Team Update 2 (2016)

[Hallry]

https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.n...Updates/02.pdf

[IndySam]

Really disappointed they didn't fix G18 for climbing. This task is going to be very hard.

Looks like getting off a couple extra shots and challenging may be the way to go.

[SenorZ]

If it were easy it wouldn't be worth triple the points, right?

We've been trying to come up with ideas that allow for shorter robots that will have a low potential of violating this rule. It is challenging.

[Kevin Sevcik]

I'm confused about the complaint of extreme difficulty. Ri3D 1.0 looks like they've built a legal mechanism, or one that could very easily be made legal with a bit of frame extension on the front. It doesn't seem all that complicated for a tall robot, really. Now is it complicated for a short robot? Yes. But I suspect the GDC wanted to encourage a bit of innovation and effort beyond just copying tape measures from 2010.

[Jarren Harkema]

The updates to G25 and G40-1 Really nerfed some of the innovative strategy ideas. I guess they really want us to play this game as it was intended.

My question regarding G28 is this: If you can't contact an opponent in your courtyard, regardless of who initiates contact, how does G11 apply? It seems that G28 takes precedence, which means an opposing robot can cause the other alliance to foul without recourse.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jarren Harkema

My question regarding G28 is this: If you can't contact an opponent in your courtyard, regardless of who initiates contact, how does G11 apply? It seems that G28 takes precedence, which means an opposing robot can cause the other alliance to foul without recourse.

If they aren't even trying to hang, then I think I could make a pretty good case to call for G11. Or, to be even more obvious, if they're chasing you around trying to make contact, and G11 isn't called, it might be time to have a chat with the Head Referee.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Jarren Harkema

The updates to G25 and G40-1 Really nerfed some of the innovative strategy ideas. I guess they really want us to play this game as it was intended.

My question regarding G28 is this: If you can't contact an opponent in your courtyard, regardless of who initiates contact, how does G11 apply? It seems that G28 takes precedence, which means an opposing robot can cause the other alliance to foul without recourse.

RE: updates to G25 and G40, I think the last time anyone played chicken with the GDC and won was 469 in 2010. These rule changes were coming.

RE: G28, I assume that is the case, but that is something that a Q&A could help codify. They don't want a robot blocking a challenge or scale, they want that robot challenging/scaling. Very 2011-esque rule, but that's probably how it works.

EDIT: Eric has a better handle on it... if that kind oif action he mentioned is repeated, it probably even ventures into a T6. The GDC doesn't want robots intentionally ignoring the opportunity to challenge by either screening up robots in the courtyard or chasing each other in the box.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Jarren Harkema

I guess they really want us to play this game as it was intended.

Originally Posted by Jarren Harkema

My question regarding G28 is this: If you can't contact an opponent in your courtyard, regardless of who initiates contact, how does G11 apply? It seems that G28 takes precedence, which means an opposing robot can cause the other alliance to foul without recourse.

The G11 blue box seems to make that pretty clear. It's a G28 penalty unless the team that would benefit from the G28 is clearly only trying to draw a penalty and not try to, say, CHALLENGE or SCALE or score a boulder.

[Jarren Harkema]

Good points all, thanks for clarifying. Wil and Kevin, I probably should have thrown a bit of sarcasm behind my statement, I figured these two areas were going to get fixed, it's just interesting to see how they resolved it.

[New Lightning]

I get that the GDC wants robots to play the game and challenge the tower themselves; however, I feel like it stifles late qualification round strategies of trying to limit your opponents getting additional ranking points and potentially overtaking you in the rankings. For example if your up on a team in the opposing alliance by 3 RP's. Your opponent is winning the game by more points than you could possibly score by trying to challenge yourself and their tower isn't weakened so no extra RP for you. It would make more since to try and deny your opponent the extra RP from capturing your tower rather than uselessly gaining game points for yourself.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by SenorZ

If it were easy it wouldn't be worth triple the points, right?

We've been trying to come up with ideas that allow for shorter robots that will have a low potential of violating this rule. It is challenging.

It's important early in the season to consider it as a extra build time vs extra value decision rather than end-value.

The decision to put time and effort into SCALING is only 10 points over CHALLENGING.

[gigaboggie]

Team 3042 has published our thoughts on strategy on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXxx-IzsraM
We discuss our plans for building and strategy this season and we also discuss interactions that we expect during matches.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by JesseK

It's important early in the season to consider it as a extra build time vs extra value decision rather than end-value.

The decision to put time and effort into SCALING is only 10 points over CHALLENGING.

Teams that know they will "run out of points" in this game should and will attempt scaling.

Teams that don't know they will "run out of points" in this game should not attempt scaling.

Teams that don't know which of these categories they fall into should definitely be in column B, but some of them will try to be in column A. That makes things interesting.

*this serves as a small personal window into my subjective analysis of the game and you can weight my opinion based on a variety of available data, including my team's record if you want to easily discredit this observation

[SenorZ]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

Teams that know they will "run out of points" in this game should and will attempt scaling.

Teams that don't know they will "run out of points" in this game should not attempt scaling.

Teams that don't know which of these categories they fall into should definitely be in column B, but some of them will try to be in column A. That makes things interesting.

*this serves as a small personal window into my subjective analysis of the game and you can weight my opinion based on a variety of available data, including my team's record if you want to easily discredit this observation

Category A will also have teams who (mistakenly) think they have to try to scale the whole 6', rather than just 1.5'.

[z_beeblebrox]

Originally Posted by SenorZ

Category A will also have teams who (mistakenly) think they have to try to scale the whole 6', rather than just 1.5".

1.5"? Don't bumpers need to be above the low goal for scaling to count?