Game Manual - Team UPDATE - 2014-03-04

[mman1506]

Originally Posted by Jay O'Donnell

I interpreted it the same way. Not sure what human player would go over the field when no robot was around anyways. Train your human players.

I saw 610's human player foul numerous times when catching the ball from the volunteers.

[Bob Steele]

It took a little analysis but the new rule does help

First and the biggest thing.... is that UNLESS a robot is reaching over the side of the field.... a human player can use the entire zone up to the field edge. You can't reach in at any time but you can extend right up to it.

The limitation occurs when you have an adjacent robot that is REACHING OVER the side line. THEN if the robot is close you cannot enter the Safety Zone.

This means that if your robot is sitting in front of you and NOT extended outside the field you can reach up to the side line (but not onto the field)

This is eminently reasonable... it allows a robot to extend slightly over the side of the field and then it protects the human player by moving his legal zone back only during the time the robot is reaching outside the field.

This is a good change. If anyone really expected that they would allow human players to reach into the field they were dreaming. This is a good and safe change... I applaud the GDC for the quick action which both protects the students and allows for a better game with less fouls

[orangemoore]

I think the changes made to the manual are appropriate but now the next step is to see how they respond to the non rule issues that are problems. Hopefully the FMS issues are reduced.
This year so far I feel bad for refs because of how hard their job is this year and how difficult it is to be in that position.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by Danny Diaz

Indeed they did, much more than I expected them to be able to do in less than a week. I am very satisfied by the changes they made for Scorekeepers in Week 2, I am looking forward to Arkansas this week!

-Danny

Can you talk a little bit about what those changes were? Are they listed somewhere?

[2789_B_Garcia]

This change to G28 is aggravating. Over the course of three matches, the top half of our robot was ripped off of our frame because other teams were driving around with their collectors out as we were trying to defend against them, and some of them even appeared to deploy their collector into our frame while there was no ball around to collect. We cited G28, and no penalties were given to the other teams. We got fed up trying to repair our robot and finally just put pool noodles and gaffers tape on it to prevent from accidentally possessing an opponents ball...

Now with the rule change, if another robot damages our robot inside our frame perimeter, we'll be told that our robot's actions were the "catalyst" for the damage because we were playing defense...which means we not only extend beyond our frame perimeter at our own risk, we also drive at our own risk, as well. Last week, we saw debris all over the field, electrical components being ripped out of robots, and now the rules change says that it's our fault if we are playing defense?

I love playing defense, but I don't want to play battlebots, and now it seems that if I'm playing with a robot that has high-scoring capability, I can deploy mechanisms and extend as I wish because if it destroys a defending robot, it was their fault, however, as a defensive-oriented robot with a simple collector, if I extend my collector and it violates the frame perimeter of a high-scoring capable robot, would the same call be made?

I love this game. It was designed for teams like mine. Teams that want to contribute to an alliance, but don't have the manufacturing capability, resources or mentors to pull off some of the powerhouse robots we have seen...and I'm not bitter to any of the teams that can pull it off...our team sees them as sources of inspiration and we learn so much from our interactions with these teams...this years game held so much hope for our team because we interpreted the game such that FIRST had finally gotten coopertition right, and had designed a game in which small teams like us could make a big difference in matches. Now I feel like if we don't drive a solid block of metal on wheels around at our next event, it'll be our fault if anything happens to it.

[PriyankP]

I was really hoping for a rule that speeds up cycles when balls go out of bounds.

If they change the rule to allow the refs/people around the field to inbound the ball as close to its exit point, it would speed up the game by A LOT.

I saw that the volunteers don't really know what's suppose to happen when a ball goes out of bounds - especially in the first 30 games of quals. Right now, they're suppose to give the ball to the human player and then the ball comes back into play - this adds anywhere between 5 and 15 seconds to the cycle.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by PriyankP

I was really hoping for a rule that speeds up cycles when balls go out of bounds.

If they change the rule to allow the refs/people around the field to inbound the ball as close to its exit point, it would speed up the game by A LOT.

I saw that the volunteers don't really know what's suppose to happen when a ball goes out of bounds - especially in the first 30 games of quals. Right now, they're suppose to give the ball to the human player and then the ball comes back into play - this adds anywhere between 5 and 15 seconds to the cycle.

Something like "if no human players are present in the HUMAN PLAYER ZONES on the ALLIANCE's opposite end of the FIELD, any ALLIANCE BALL exitign the FIELD will be returned to the closest place it left by field personnel."

You can avoid a lot of unnecessary field resets this way.

[Rynocorn]

Originally Posted by PriyankP

I was really hoping for a rule that speeds up cycles when balls go out of bounds.

If they change the rule to allow the refs/people around the field to inbound the ball as close to its exit point, it would speed up the game by A LOT.

I saw that the volunteers don't really know what's suppose to happen when a ball goes out of bounds - especially in the first 30 games of quals. Right now, they're suppose to give the ball to the human player and then the ball comes back into play - this adds anywhere between 5 and 15 seconds to the cycle.

I'm guessing that by not modifying this rule FIRST is just telling us that we better not let the ball go out of bounds. I can't imagine that they would have not discussed this particular problem amongst themselves when making all the changes. That's my hypothesis

[Woolly]

Originally Posted by 2789_B_Garcia

Now with the rule change, if another robot damages our robot inside our frame perimeter, we'll be told that our robot's actions were the "catalyst" for the damage because we were playing defense...which means we not only extend beyond our frame perimeter at our own risk, we also drive at our own risk, as well. Last week, we saw debris all over the field, electrical components being ripped out of robots, and now the rules change says that it's our fault if we are playing defense?

I'm not sure that's how the rule will be interpreted.
I'm seeing it being more like this:
If you drive into a protrusion that's already out and damage your robot, that's your fault.
However, if the offensive robot extends their protrusion just because you're trying to play defense (there is not a ball around to pick up), then I don't see how you're the catalyst for the damage. In all likelihood, both robots would be fine if the offensive bot keeps it's arm in. Due to the actions of the offensive robot, the damage occurs. G28, damaging or delibrate contact to the inside of the frame perimeter, offensive robot, technical foul, 50 points added to the defensive bot's alliance's score, continue play.

[PriyankP]

Originally Posted by Rynocorn

I'm guessing that by not modifying this rule FIRST is just telling us that we better not let the ball go out of bounds. I can't imagine that they would have not discussed this particular problem amongst themselves when making all the changes. That's my hypothesis

I really hope that isn't the case... it makes no sense for teams to throw the ball out of field - it will still add at least 5 secs to the cycle time (and this is assuming you have an instant touch pickup).

By allowing the ball to be quickly placed on the field, people who don't know the rules can still enjoy the scoring aspect of the game.

Oh well, I hope that the time it takes to return the ball to a HP is not as high as the 2nd week competitions begin.

[JosephC]

Originally Posted by PriyankP

Oh well, I hope that the time it takes to return the ball to a HP is not as high as the 2nd week competitions begin.

As long as teams have HPs in the zones on the other side of the field it'll be fine. Its when Field Reset has to run the ball down the field to give it back is when it takes 15s. Especially since we aren't actually allowed to run (atleast at center line we weren't).

[mwtidd]

Originally Posted by Rynocorn

I'm guessing that by not modifying this rule FIRST is just telling us that we better not let the ball go out of bounds. I can't imagine that they would have not discussed this particular problem amongst themselves when making all the changes. That's my hypothesis

Its somewhat like a throw in in soccer

[martin417]

Originally Posted by Bob Steele

It took a little analysis but the new rule does help

First and the biggest thing.... is that UNLESS a robot is reaching over the side of the field.... a human player can use the entire zone up to the field edge. You can't reach in at any time but you can extend right up to it.

The limitation occurs when you have an adjacent robot that is REACHING OVER the side line. THEN if the robot is close you cannot enter the Safety Zone.

This means that if your robot is sitting in front of you and NOT extended outside the field you can reach up to the side line (but not onto the field)

This is eminently reasonable... it allows a robot to extend slightly over the side of the field and then it protects the human player by moving his legal zone back only during the time the robot is reaching outside the field.

This is a good change. If anyone really expected that they would allow human players to reach into the field they were dreaming. This is a good and safe change... I applaud the GDC for the quick action which both protects the students and allows for a better game with less fouls

I think you are misinterpreting the rule. A robot CANNOT reach over the edge of the field per G21.

The way I see it, if a robot is there at all (adjacent to the HP zone) you cannot break the plane of the safety zone. It could even be an opposing robot, there just so you have to keep your hands back.

[Christopher149]

Originally Posted by martin417

I think you are misinterpreting the rule. A robot CANNOT reach over the edge of the field per G21.

The way I see it, if a robot is there at all (adjacent to the HP zone) you cannot break the plane of the safety zone. It could even be an opposing robot, there just so you have to keep your hands back.

Well, with no opinion on G21, the pictures in Figure 3-7 all show the ROBOT with an appendage sticking past the GUARDRAIL, but not past the SAFETY ZONE.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by martin417

I think you are misinterpreting the rule. A robot CANNOT reach over the edge of the field per G21.

The way I see it, if a robot is there at all (adjacent to the HP zone) you cannot break the plane of the safety zone. It could even be an opposing robot, there just so you have to keep your hands back.

The issue is what defines "adjacent"? Hanging over the guardrail? Touching the guardrail? A foot away? Three feet? In the same zone?