Game Manual - Team UPDATE - 2014-03-18

[jwfoss]

I for one, really appreciate the updates to G12.
Nice work GDC, glad to see our comments are not falling on deaf ears.

[IbleedPink233]

I am really concerned about the new wording of G12. Maybe it will cut down on the number of Technical Fouls, but it seems like they could hand out a Foul for every time that your opponents' ball touches you.
If the the criteria for a Foul includes "unintentional and inconsequential" infractions, then that opens the floodgates. It negates the qualifiers for intentional possession like "desired location" and "overt isolation or holding."
The combination of the definitions + the new Foul qualification for "unintentional and inconsequential" actions + the Blue Box make for a confusing set of rules that can be interpreted in a multitude of ways. I expect that some Refs are going to start handing out Fouls like candy and the defensive game will have to completely change since the Ball becomes a Foul button.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by jwfoss

I for one, really appreciate the updates to G12.
Nice work GDC, glad to see our comments are not falling on deaf ears.

This is my favorite Team Update thus far. Thank god for that rule change.

[IndySam]

I have seen many many instances where a team defending deliberately knocks a ball away from an offensive robot attempting to pick it up. Because this didn't meet the technical definition of herding in the manual it wasn't a foul. I always thought this was wrong. Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it's one hit. I wonder if this update effects this in any way. I would love to see a 20 point foul assessed for this action.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I have seen many many instances where a team defending deliberately knocks a ball away from an offensive robot attempting to pick it up. Because this didn't meet the technical definition of herding in the manual it wasn't a foul. I always thought this was wrong. Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it's one hit. I wonder if this update effects this in any way. I would love to see a 20 point foul assessed for this action.

I'd be all for that, if they also loosened up the purse strings for handing out inital assists for inbounders one-bumping a ball to the next team.

Seems the only way to get that inital inbound assist is for the inbounding team to hold the ball in their machine.

If the purpose of the game is to work together, we need to make it easier for teams to contribute to their alliance.

Although, I'm not convince the refs can tell the difference between deliberate and accidental bumping of a ball. This would probably just add more penalties to the game.

[Racer26]

It does seem, though, that the TECHNICAL FOUL called on 1114s alliance in SF1-2 at ONTO would have been reduced to a FOUL by this rule change.

Errant blue TRUSS shot lands in red ROBOT and is immediately ejected seems like a FOUL and not a TECHNICAL FOUL, by my reading of this change.

I agree that refs seem to be really reluctant to dish out POSSESSIONs to HERDing ROBOTs of an ALLIANCE matching the colour of the BALL. They seem to be much more frequently dishing out the G12 foul for HERDing or TRAPping and opponent's BALL. I don't understand why this is.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by Adam Freeman

I'd be all for that, if they also loosened up the purse strings for handing out inital assists for inbounders one-bumping a ball to the next team.

Seems the only way to get that inital inbound assist is for the inbounding team to hold the ball in their machine.

If the purpose of the game is to work together, we need to make it easier for teams to contribute to their alliance.

Although, I'm not convince the refs can tell the difference between deliberate and accidental bumping of a ball. This would probably just add more penalties to the game.

Agreed. According to the rules, the same definition for POSSESSION and HERDING is supposed to apply whether you're touching your own game ball or the opponents'.

Sometimes a team gets called for any little bump of the opponents' ball. That is not the way it's supposed to be called, in my opinion, because one tap is not possession.

The change to a regular foul for unintentionally or inconsequential POSSESSION is a good change. However, I suspect that referees will have a hard time distinguishing between POSSESSION and CONTACT when making this call, and a lot 20 point fouls will be called when a robot touches the other team's ball for any reason and with any result.

[Zuelu562]

Originally Posted by Racer26

It does seem, though, that the TECHNICAL FOUL called on 1114s alliance in SF1-2 at ONTO would have been reduced to a FOUL by this rule change.

Errant blue TRUSS shot lands in red ROBOT and is immediately ejected seems like a FOUL and not a TECHNICAL FOUL, by my reading of this change.

I agree that refs seem to be really reluctant to dish out POSSESSIONs to HERDing ROBOTs of an ALLIANCE matching the colour of the BALL. They seem to be much more frequently dishing out the G12 foul for HERDing or TRAPping and opponent's BALL. I don't understand why this is.

I came to the same conclusion on your second point. I've been in a situation where a robot on our alliance had a ball land in them on a bounce after a truss shot by the other alliance, and immediately got it out of their robot using their intake mechanism. They were still assessed a technical. That felt off to me, even though the manual tells you in a blue box to try to avoid unintentional possession.

I'm going to ask's the refs at RIDE, as we all should, if they will call it this way. Attempting to immediately remedy the situation of unintentional possession such as that, although pointed out in the manual, really shouldn't be the harshest penalty in the book.

[sailer99]

Originally Posted by Racer26

It does seem, though, that the TECHNICAL FOUL called on 1114s alliance in SF1-2 at ONTO would have been reduced to a FOUL by this rule change.

Errant blue TRUSS shot lands in red ROBOT and is immediately ejected seems like a FOUL and not a TECHNICAL FOUL, by my reading of this change.

I agree that refs seem to be really reluctant to dish out POSSESSIONs to HERDing ROBOTs of an ALLIANCE matching the colour of the BALL. They seem to be much more frequently dishing out the G12 foul for HERDing or TRAPping and opponent's BALL. I don't understand why this is.

I'm not sure whether it would be just a foul now, watching the video it seemed as though they drove towards the bouncing ball. It wouldn't have made a difference in the outcome of the game but it looks intentional from an outside observer.

[Clinton Bolinger]

The new update to the rule seems to make it more subjective to interpretation and more of a Judgement call for Refs. Take something that was Black and White and make it a bit Grey.

For each possession of an opponent's ball the ref will have to determine:

- Was that unintentional and inconsequential possession? (Foul)
- Was it Consequential? (Technical Foul)
- Was it Strategic? (Red Card aka DQ)

While continuing to watch for Assists/Trusses/Catches at the same time.

I also agree that Refs need to give assist for the bumping the ball twice (Herding), the same as opponents bumping the other alliance ball twice and getting a Foul.

-Clinton-

[Matt_Boehm_329]

So I'm a bit more confused now as to the difference between "deflecting" and one incidental hit. Deflecting seems to be an acceptable version of ball control from a defensive perspective due to the fact that there are goalie zones. (1 hit, intentionally trying to prevent the ball from going where it was originally going)

IndySam post #19 "Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it's one hit." under this then all defensive goalie bots are illegal. Why have goalie zones and increased height allowances if deflection is against the addition to G12 blue box?

But it now seems that this could fall into a 20 point foul.

Is one brief intentional hit on an opponents ball allowed as it falls under deflection covered in the blue box of G12?
The addition to the blue box seems to contradict the first part.

--I'll be back with an edit for related quotes and such

[BigJ]

One hit on an opposing ball by anything not moving relative to the ROBOT is a deflection. IndySam is suggesting a change to that rule, but this update did not change it -- it only affects POSSESSIONs.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Matt_Boehm_329

So I'm a bit more confused now as to the difference between "deflecting" and one incidental hit. Deflecting seems to be an acceptable version of ball control from a defensive perspective due to the fact that there are goalie zones. (1 hit, intentionally trying to prevent the ball from going where it was originally going)

IndySam post #19 "Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it's one hit." under this then all defensive goalie bots are illegal. Why have goalie zones and increased height allowances if deflection is against the addition to G12 blue box?

But it now seems that this could fall into a 20 point foul.

Is one brief intentional hit on an opponents ball allowed as it falls under deflection covered in the blue box of G12?
The addition to the blue box seems to contradict the first part.

--I'll be back with an edit for related quotes and such

No, it's still not a foul. The main body of G12 still only penalizes POSSESSION, and deflecting a ball, regardless of how deliberate it is, is still not POSSESSION.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by IbleedPink233

I expect that some Refs are going to start handing out Fouls like candy and the defensive game will have to completely change since the Ball becomes a Foul button.

There are no situations in which this rule change will cause more penalties. The defending robot still needs to POSSESS the ball to get a penalty call, which is exactly what the old rules said. All that this rule does is minimize the impact of unintentional and inconsequential POSSESSIONs by opponent robots by making this infraction worth 20 points instead of 50.

There will be no appreciable change in game flow since the base rule is still the same (don't POSSESS the opponent's ball). If the refs start handing out FOULs like candy, I for one will be happy, because under the old rules, every single one of those would have been a TECHNICAL FOUL.

[Matt_Boehm_329]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I have seen many many instances where a team defending deliberately knocks a ball away from an offensive robot attempting to pick it up. Because this didn't meet the technical definition of herding in the manual it wasn't a foul. I always thought this was wrong. Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it's one hit. I wonder if this update effects this in any way. I would love to see a 20 point foul assessed for this action.

Originally Posted by bduddy

No, it's still not a foul. The main body of G12 still only penalizes POSSESSION, and deflecting a ball, regardless of how deliberate it is, is still not POSSESSION.

Ahh ok after reading it a few more times and discussing it with others over lunch we came to a similar conclusion.