IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I remember an off season last year (Battlecry if memory serves me correctly) got really lenient with the zone incursion rules and teams abused the lanes all day long to get tubes they would not have been allowed to get during the season.

You remember correctly about the rule change at Battlecry, but it wasn't just referee leniency and team abuse of the rules.

Last year, Battlecry made one of their official rule changes (for the 2011 game) to have the protected lanes end at the lane divider, instead of continuing to the tower. The change was an official rule change published and announced to all teams competing at the event, not just a leniency by the referees. Accordingly, it wasn't that the teams were abusing the rules -- they were just playing by the Battlecry-modified rules.

Actually, I think that Battlecry "shorter protected lanes" rule change was the best I saw all year for any of the off-season tournaments we attended -- it eliminated nearly all of the "accidental lane crossing" penalties. However, the rule change did tip the game balance a little more towards offense than defense.

Back to the theme of the original topic -- in general, I like rule changes (for IRI or other off-season tournaments) that are very minor tweaks that don't really affect the balance of the game but are instead to "fix" problems in the rules that weren't apparent before the game was really played but that are consistent with the original game design. I tend to like rules that get rid of "incidental" penalties that don't give a significant advantage/disadvantage to either team (this year's accidental touch of the other alliance's bridge for a 9-point penalty is a good example of a penalty that could be changed).

However, I really don't like rule changes that tip the balance to one kind of robot, as there are teams that designed their robots to play the original game, and changing the game rules often has the effect of essentially "playing favorites" to some types of robots.

For example, giving a 3-point bonus to all shots from the far side of the barrier would favor long-distance shooters over fender shooters, so I don't think such a rule change would be fair. Similarly, a rule change which gives more points for Kinect hybrid-scoring over non-Kinect hybrid-scoring wouldn't be fair to all teams, either. Add to that list rule changes that allow robots to hold more than 3 balls, or receive bonus points for balls scored from on top of a bridge, or

Part of the realization is that *any* rule change tends to favor some robots over others -- the trick is coming up with rule changes that really serve to help all teams!

Even rule changes that initially seem to help all teams equally are likely to favor some teams over others. For instance, increased match length will favor robots optimized for shooting rather than balancing, as increased match time gives more opportunities for teleop baskets, but doesn't give more opportunities for balance points. Longer matches would also favor teams which use less of their battery during a match -- however, those teams might have intentionally designed their robot to use most of their battery in a regulation-length match.

In sum, I tend to like rule changes which reduce annoyances in the penalties without affecting game play.

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Marc S.

2) After the hybrid period the game stops until the head ref gives the OK to start again.

This solves any issue of hybrid balls not being worth full points due to either going in after the bell or because of a jam. There have a few matches that have been stop and replayed mid match due to a jam that occurred in the hybrid period, again this solves that issue. The pause could also be just 5 seconds to keep the flow of the match going.

I like this idea!

One of my pet peeves with the scoring system this year is seeing robots shoot balls right before the end of hybrid that end up being scored as teleop points because the balls didn't trigger the auto-counting system soon enough.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Marc S.

2) After the hybrid period the game stops until the head ref gives the OK to start again.
This solves any issue of hybrid balls not being worth full points due to either going in after the bell or because of a jam. There have a few matches that have been stop and replayed mid match due to a jam that occurred in the hybrid period, again this solves that issue. The pause could also be just 5 seconds to keep the flow of the match going.

Many previous games have had this in place - why not this one? Maybe the GDC just didn't realize how much autonomous scoring there would be... could they maybe implement it for championships?

[EricH]

Idea: There are 20 basketballs on the field. Yes, that's 2 more than normal. But those two extra basketballs are special. They're +3 if scored during either Hybrid or the end game. Each alliance starts with one. But...

They're NOT the normal basketballs. Either they've been given a funky covering, or they're actual basketballs (or you could just wrap a Poof ball in duct tape).


And, make more than 2 on the Coop bridge an extra bonus--1 Co-op point per extra balanced robot. If you really wanted to be devious, the Coop bridge also gives points based on how many robots are on it, at 10 for one, 20 for two, etc. If only one alliance is represented, that alliance gets all the points and no coop points. If both alliances are represented, each alliance gets the same amount of points (the highest possible) and coop points.

[Nawaid Ladak]

It looks like things may actually work out and I may very well find myself n Indianapolis that weekend (summer classes are either all online, or end on Wednesday's).

I absolutely love the money ball idea. It sort of reminds me of the NBA's 3 point shooting contest. where the last ball on the rack is worth 2 points instead of one. Maybe inserting them at the 30 second mark and having them count for 2x the basket amount (2, 4 or 6 points). This could sort of have that super-cell endgame effect we saw in 2009.

I also think changing the number of basketballs used per match could make the game more interesting, Lowering the number could create a game similar to breakaway where ball control was key, or increasing the number of basketballs could have a plentiful effect and make the game play out more like Aim High or Lunacy.

[Hawiian Cadder]

I think that ALL the spare balls should go on the cooperation bridge at the begging of a match. At IRI almost everyone will put up a strong hybrid score, so incentives for a team to write code that beats every other robot there to the middle bridge would be cool. This would also make defense robot that cross the bump in hybrid important because they would have a reason to start the match between the opposing robots and the fender.

[Greg Needel]

Here are my rule change suggestions, I would not implement all of them, as some of them are contradictory, but each on their own should enhance the game in a different way. I really support the first one.

• make the co-op bridge be worth 10 pts for a balance in eliminations. This way it is still better off to triple but would only be a 10pt difference if you got a double + the coop. Also this would be really exciting action for 2 alliances that can't triple. fight over the bridge at the end or score those last few points.

• put more balls on the field, Increase the number of balls from 18 to 24-36, should increase the scores in the matches and will take away starvation choke hold strategies. You can accomplish this by either putting them on the bridges or allowing teams to pre-load 3.

• Allow triple balancing during the qualification rounds, if a team does it they get 1 extra coop point (3 total for the winners)

• Go back to the old ranking system where win-loss-tie determines the main ranking and then use co-op points as the tiebreaker.

[jspatz1]

Lasts year's IRI rules trimmed down the mini-bot scores, and added emphasis to teleop play by adding more scoring with ubertubes. This year's huge point bonus for triple balance could be trimmed from 40 to 30. That's still big enough to justify doing it, but would not overwhelm the teleop scoring quite as much.

[SM987]

Just make the co-op bridge the tie breaker as (IMO) it should be. Or alternatively implement some "king of the hill" battle for the middle bridge as part of the endgame. Getting rid of the lanes sounds fun as well.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by SM987

Just make the co-op bridge the tie breaker as (IMO) it should be. Or alternatively implement some "king of the hill" battle for the middle bridge as part of the endgame. Getting rid of the lanes sounds fun as well.

Well that would make for interesting strategy as teams would probably draft a "cannon fodder" bot to battle for those points "for the sake of the alliance" and save scorers from potential elimination participation ending damage from such battles or ignore going for such points altogether if it's not worth the trouble.

[Aren Siekmeier]

I still don't know why people want to nerf the coop bridge. It's an awesome game feature in every way.

[Ankit S.]

Originally Posted by SM987

Or alternatively implement some "king of the hill" battle ... as part of the endgame.

What if the bridges lost their distinction of red/blue/coop, and at the end of a match teams had to race to the bridges and balance on any of bridges. The alliance with the most robots balanced across the three bridges would get a bonus.

In case of a tie, the alliance with the largest number of their own robots on a single bridge gets the bonus.

[rcmolloy]

Still going to edge on the three point line...

Gaffer's Tape in a semi-circle tangent to the top of the key like on a real college/high school/elementary court. Beyond that line, every ball shot has an additional 2 points added to the original score only in teleop.

[JosephC]

Originally Posted by Multiple People

Let's remove the lanes!

This just made me remember a "God Bot" strategy I was talking about a few days ago.

1. Build a robot with a intake that was tall enough and wide enough to cover the whole feeder station opening.

2. Have your alliance make 7+ shots in hybrid mode. These all have to go in; if they don't additional balls have to be shot in during Tele-Op.

3. Immediately park your robot in front of the opposing alliance's feeder station.

4. Continuously shoot 3 pointers.

Because of the 6 ball holding limit; the Inbounders would have to throw at least 1 ball into your robot, since they can't throw it any where else. Once you score that ball they have to throw another one into your robot. Thus creating a constant scoring machine, much like the one 469 had in Breakaway.

In a regular season event this strategy only works until the opposing alliance comes to your side of the field and hits you; as you are in their lane. However, if IRI announces that they are removing lanes, I'm going to force my team to redesign our robot .

Originally Posted by rcmolloy

Still going to edge on the three point line...

Gaffer's Tape in a semi-circle tangent to the top of the key like on a real college/high school/elementary court. Beyond that line, every ball shot has an additional 2 points added to the original score only in teleop.

Great idea, although I'd prefer an additional 1 point.

[efoote868]

Another idea, to enhance "coopertition."

During qualification, bridges are worth no points except for coopertition. A balanced bridge with two robots on it is worth 1 point, a bonus point is awarded if there is one robot from each alliance, for a maximum of 6 points.