IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

I agree with the FiM vs. MAR match, not so much about an Einstein rematch.

What about FiM vs MAR vs World Champs? Of course, there could be the issue if one team is on more than one of the above alliances, but I think it would be fun to see if the depth at the district system championships is better than the divisions at the championship.

I suppose you would go FiM vs MAR and let the world champs have the bye in the first round.

Another option would be to pit FiM vs MAR vs Einstein, vs IRI champs in a 2-out-of-3 tournament (or round robin). That could be cool as well, except for the situation where a team like 67 is in 3 of the 4 alliances above.

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by Duke461

Reason being? (Not offended or anything, I'd just like to know)

I think that having the two alliances compete again isn't fair for either alliance. If the previous winner wins again, it could make the losing alliance look really bad to be defeated, or even blown out twice. If the previous loser wins, it makes both alliances look neutral or possibly like the winning alliance might not have deserved their win. And while none of that could matter at all, the time spent could be better served with something else that we haven't seen before.

I think a simple best 2 out of 3 exhibition match between the MAR and MSC champions would be all IRI needs.

[Chi Meson]

'Scuze me for interrupting, could someone quickly point me to a thread, or explain briefly about the IRI method of alliance picks? I noticed in past events there are *four* teams per alliance in eliminations. Obviously only 3 play per game, but what are the rules behind the "multiple 3rd-pick"? Thanks in advance.

[mwmac]

No serpentine, each alliance has to pick one backup alliance member to play with in event of damage etc.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by mwmac

No serpentine, each alliance has to pick one backup alliance member to play with in event of damage etc.

The 4th alliance member isnt limited to replacement by damage. You could play with any set of 3/4 on your alliance through any elimination match.

[mwmac]

Originally Posted by dodar

The 4th alliance member isnt limited to replacement by damage. You could play with any set of 3/4 on your alliance through any elimination match.

Correct, I hit enter prematurely...

[qzrrbz]

Originally Posted by mwmac

No serpentine, each alliance has to pick one backup alliance member to play with in event of damage etc.

Actually the 4th robot is picked serpentine style, with 8th alliance getting 16th robot, 24th robot and 25th robot, and 1st alliance getting 9th robot (counting the captains as the first 8 robots), 17th robot, and 32nd robot. Make sense?

[qzrrbz]

Originally Posted by qzrrbz

Actually the 4th robot is picked serpentine style, with 8th alliance getting 16th robot, 24th robot and 25th robot, and 1st alliance getting 9th robot (counting the captains as the first 8 robots), 17th robot, and 32nd robot. Make sense?

I might add, the 32nd robot has usually won a regional or two at IRI!

[OZ_341]

Originally Posted by EricH

First, the simple one. The first match at IRI is FiM champs vs. MAR champs.

ummmm....... We are still just hoping to just make it into the IRI elimination rounds someday. We have not achieved that monumental feat yet. As I have mentioned before, going to IRI is a truly humbling experience.
Although we are looking forward to going to IRI this year, if we are invited.

Best of luck to everyone at Champs!

[EricH]

Originally Posted by qzrrbz

Actually the 4th robot is picked serpentine style, with 8th alliance getting 16th robot, 24th robot and 25th robot, and 1st alliance getting 9th robot (counting the captains as the first 8 robots), 17th robot, and 32nd robot. Make sense?

I think I can simplify it a bit.

Full IRI picking:
Alliance captains
First pick, 1-8 order.
Second pick, 1-8 order.
Backup pick, 8-1 order.

All teams not selected are out of the tournament but encouraged to watch and cheer.

They have a very deep field, so it isn't uncommon to see a very good team go in the backup round or not at all. Due to wear and tear from multiple events, it also isn't uncommon to see the backup called in, though it is never required to use the backup. During eliminations, any three robots from an alliance can be used in any match.

[artdutra04]

The rules and point values this year... are actually pretty well calibrated for the effort/reward. For the first time in quite a while, I don't think anything major needs to be "fixed" by rules changes at offseason events.

So onto rule modifications enhancements:

• Extend autonomous to 20 seconds long.
• Allow each robot to preload 3 balls, for a total of 24 balls on the field.
• Pause the match between end of autonomous and beginning of teleop to allow any ball jams to be resolved.
• A triple balance on the co-op bridge during qualification matches is worth 3 CP.
• Make incidental contact with opposing bridge the same as key/lane fouls: only penalize it if an opposing robot is touching the bridge at the same time. (I'm only proposing this one because often balls that roll close to/under the opposing alliance bridge during a match are more or less dead balls for the rest of that match. It's too risky to try to get those balls under the current rules. Purposeful contact, such as tipping the opposing bridge to get the two balls on it, should still be penalized regardless of whether an opposing robot is touching the bridge).
• Add G25 as a second exception to G44 to solve the controversy surrounding getting pushed onto an opposing alliance bridge during a balance attempt.

However, here are some things that I think should NOT be changed:

• Do not give different point values for shots beyond a certain distance. Keeping track of what balls were shot from where will be a major pain if there are two, possibly three robots shooting at once. It opens up too much possibility for controversy.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

A triple balance on the co-op bridge during qualification matches is worth 3 CP.

I like this, even more than doing anything about the scoring with two. (Assuming, of course, that each alliance has a robot on there. Gotta keep the spirit. )

Actually, about all of Art's post had me nodding my head.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by OZ_341

ummmm....... We are still just hoping to just make it into the IRI elimination rounds someday. We have not achieved that monumental feat yet. As I have mentioned before, going to IRI is a truly humbling experience.
Although we are looking forward to going to IRI this year, if we are invited.

Best of luck to everyone at Champs!

Not sure how many times you've been there, but I'm sure you'll get the invite and make eliminations also this time around.

We plan on making it a 3rd year in a row, being that we dont have to pay the entrance fee.

[Wetzel]

I'm excited and talking with 2914. I don't think a team from DC has been to IRI yet. There has been a push for support that I think might help this, and this might help that.

Wetzel

[lemiant]

Art seems to have some really good ideas. The only thing I would change is:

Originally Posted by artdutra04

Allow each robot to preload 3 balls, for a total of 24 balls on the field.

Don't increase the number of pre-load balls. First this will decrease the reward for more innovative autonomous programs (coopertition and alliance bridge) while allowing less time per ball. Also the additional balls on the field will largely change the dynamics of ball control and invalidate ball-hoarding strategies that could turn out to be really interesting at IRI.