Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

[Matt_Boehm_329]

Good! No penalty for contact between two appendages was a silly silly rule because I could easily see teams taking advantage of that loophole with the amount of rule lawyering that goes on.

Edit: To compare it to a sport, I assume it would be called like checking in hockey. Charging is called but regular checks not. In hockey its 3+ strides going into a check, here it may be crossing more than two zones or something. It also rules out a team building a "ball intake device" in name only and using it to damage other teams' ball intakes. The explicit allowance for penalty free impacts in g28 I felt was too confusing when preceded by g27

[45Auto]

Worst update ever to the worst game in my nine years of being a FIRST mentor and drive coach.

I've already gone through one regional full of subjective calls. Lots of video out there of violations by one alliance not being called while identical play by the other alliance results in penalties. Not the ref's fault, they're human, no two people will see or interpret subjective events the same way.

Not like we have enough judgement call gray areas already that the refs have to make instant decisions on (did the kid's pinky really cross the invisible line? Is that enough that we call it or not? Is a robot "close enough" that we think it should be a 50 point or 20 point foul?), now the ref's have to decide if a robot is "high speed", "aggressive", "repeated ramming" or even playing "strategically".

On top of that, I'm now responsible for damage to the opponents robot from a legal hit?

Is high speed 6 FPS? 8 FPS? 10 FPS? Who knows?

What is "aggressive ramming"? Can anyone describe "non-aggressive" ramming for me so I at least have some idea of how to try to play this despicable game?

How do you do ANYTHING that is not "strategic" for an automatic tech foul and yellow card?

Our general plan (strategy) in our first regional was to play defense when not inbounding, then scoring the over-the-truss shot from our alliance partner. Now if we play any kind of defense we have to be low speed, non-aggressive, no repeated (more than once is repeated) ramming, AND it cannot be "strategic" without getting a penalty. How the heck do you play without following a general plan to achieve your goal???

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/strategic

stra·te·gic
adjective \strə-ˈtē-jik\

: of or relating to a general plan that is created to achieve a goal in war, politics, etc., usually over a long period of time

We built our robot to be strong and fast so we could play defense when we don't have the ball. Reinforced tank-drive kit-bot chassis with 6 cim, 2 speed transmissions.

Based on the way calls were going, our first 25 seconds of play in the 2nd final at Arkansas would have resulted in 3 or 4 tech fouls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA5J...ature=youtu.be

Our robot (2992) is the tall blue one at the top of the screen on the blue side of the field.

After autonomous, we reverse downfield to play defense. The red robot coming downfield rams us on our side of the field (0:20) (or did we ram it? Who knows? Aggressive High-Speed Ramming penalty for us because they die?), but gets shoved backwards into the wall and dies. Oops, penalty on us for damaging their robot. Maybe we should have run away? Someone should have told me.

Immediately after that collision, we cross the field and ram another red robot (0:22) that is playing defense on our inbounder/truss teammate. Was it a high-speed ram? Again, who knows? Do the refs like us or not? We shove it across the field sideways to free our teammate. Uh-oh, looks like "strategic" play to me.

About all I can think of now is to just accept our penalties with gracious professionalism, tell the seniors that we hope they had a good time, and hope it gets better next year for the underclassmen.

[BrendanB]

Sometimes I wonder what goes through the minds of FIRST/GDC members when they make games and rules like this.

I for one agree with the rules to a degree and I will back up what Brandon said earlier which is we should see how it plays out in Week 4. Yes it does seem very open ended but let's see. For those of you competing, welcome to what it is like competing in Week 1. I for one and not a big fan of heavy defense damaging robots even if it is bumper to bumper contact however I have to ask the following:

Did the GDC even think this game through?

This is a serious question because now that I see this update they are trying to bring us away from heavier defense and bring the game down to what they see. I have a big problem that they didn't see this sooner because it is showing some lack of forethought on their part for a few reasons.

1. Teams have more in their drivebases than ever before. This is the second year we have been allowed to have 6 CIMs on our robot and look back over the years and read through Jim's paper on rules and you can see that 10 years ago was when CIMs were brought into the game. Now we have nearly any transmission available with a huge number of motors to throw in them.

2. The field is extremely open. We haven't had a field this open since the days of 2006 or 2009 (but this year doesn't fit well due to the low friction surface) but a lot of us looked back to 2006 when this game was announced and remember the defensive battles that took place. No, bumpers were not required but when goals changed there was a huge push from one side of the field to the other with many collisions and pushing matches. This is what happens when there is no traffic flow around the field and teams are working down field similar to football.

3. This has been mentioned before but what are the other two robots doing??? I can always see how FIRST wants us to play the game however I think they often get out of touch with how it will actually play out. There are many teams who just don't get their robots done and I think everyone of us has had to face an event or several matches as purely defensive because our upper assemblies just weren't working. Couple this with them pushing for more events with smaller quantities of teams in the district model even with many regionals and you have a smaller pool of teams to pull from. No matter what game FIRST makes, there will always be robots that for one reason or another just can't play the offensive role. In a year where they are only giving ONE ball to an alliance they just increased that number by a lot. Not because there are necessarily more teams who didn't finish but because with one ball the team who is better at scoring will have it for most of the time leaving many teams on the defense. Even teams who do play offense well have to play the defensive position. Our team inbounded and threw the ball over the truss in a matter of seconds and then played defense for the rest of the cycle because our offensive role was complete. We played defense on opponents and defense on the robots covering our main offensive scorer.

Now combine all three together and what do you have? A very defensive, tough, & rough game and it didn't take our team weeks to figure that out. We interpreted the signs immediately and that influenced our design choices on day 1 as it did with others in our area like 1058 who made a top notch drivebase to survive this game. How long was it going to take the GDC to figure this out? Week 4 of competition?

I for one feel like this game could be amazing but FIRST is definitely using fouls with large point values to control exactly how they want it played. That has already been debated but what I dislike the most about 2014 is I just feel the GDC is completely out of touch with how teams play. How many members of the GDC have ever been on an FRC team. How many of them have actually competed?

I have a lot of respect for the GDC as they have to make new games every year and the past few years have had hands down the BEST games. This year is a lot harder for everyone standing in light of the best game we have played. That being said though each year there are several portions of the game, rules, or manual that you have to sit back and ask, "Did they really think this wasn't going to be an issue" or "How were they expecting us to play this".

At the end of the day we are all human but these are the things that just baffle me.

[atucker4072]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

Based on the way calls were going, our first 25 seconds of play in the 2nd final at Arkansas would have resulted in 3 or 4 tech fouls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA5J...ature=youtu.be

Our robot (2992) is the tall blue one at the top of the screen on the blue side of the field.

After autonomous, we reverse downfield to play defense. The red robot coming downfield rams us on our side of the field (0:20) (or did we ram it? Who knows? Aggressive High-Speed Ramming penalty for us because they die?), but gets shoved backwards into the wall and dies. Oops, penalty on us for damaging their robot. Maybe we should have run away? Someone should have told me.

Immediately after that collision, we cross the field and ram another red robot (0:22) that is playing defense on our inbounder/truss teammate. Was it a high-speed ram? Again, who knows? Do the refs like us or not? We shove it across the field sideways to free our teammate. Uh-oh, looks like "strategic" play to me.

About all I can think of now is to just accept our penalties with gracious professionalism, tell the seniors that we hope they had a good time, and hope it gets better next year for the underclassmen.

The only thing that I could see being called is the collision right after autonomous. That in my mind would be a high speed collision and definitely seems like it could have damaging effects.

Still haven't seen any matches yet though. So we will have to see how it plays out. Regardless there is no need for high speed collisions. The best defense I've seen I short close contact.

[Andy A.]

Originally Posted by atucker4072

The only thing that I could see being called is the collision right after autonomous. That in my mind would be a high speed collision and definitely seems like it could have damaging effects.

It didn't appear terribly high speed to me. It doesn't seem any higher speed than a dozen other hits in that match. My interpretation is that the red robot probably didn't adequately secure its Anderson connector. Is that the blue robots fault?

And there in sort of lies the problem. One persons 'high speed' is anothers reasonable bump (which, incidentally is really effective this year). On top of asking refs to gauge whether damage occurs (a non trivial task!) does anyone expect them to figure out what 'High-Speed' means, and apply that evenly?

I would be happy if FIRST just established some non-subjective criteria for what it considers fair play. A top speed, for instance, would be wonderful. Tell me what 'high speed' means in feet per second and I'll limit the robot to that in code and never have to worry about the penalty (neither will the refs!). Everyone can then design a robot and bumpers around a known impact (150lb robot moving at Xfps) going into the season.

I'm glad I didn't volunteer as a ref this year. Seems like an impossible job.

[sircedric4]

Sorry everyone, I think this new subjective ruling is totally my fault. I had this to say in another thread:

"Our beef is with the harsh and subjective penalties associated with the game Aerial Assist. Being on the field is a high stress environment for anyone much less over-stressed refs and high school students. Mistakes are easily made, and having so many penalties in the game, and making them worth so much is our issue. An inconsequential mistake that happens to be observed at that time can cost a team their game. That is why I agree with this petition that the technical fouls should be lowered, changed, or the safety zone improved to decrease the likelihood of bad feelings about this game."

It is obvious that I treaded on some GDC member's ideal version of the game and to punish us they have added even more subjective arbitrary rules for the refs to try and call.

My bad.

(This was sarcasm and hyperbole by the way. To be serious, I just can't see how adding more things for the ref to try and call can be a good thing. This game is now literally irrelevant to what robot you build, it all falls to luck and to what the refs see now. I don't even know how to react to this new rule. I am thinking we will remove our wheels, that way we know we can't foul.)

[E Dawg]

I am not a huge fan of the update. However, I think I can understand the reasoning behind it. This year's game is all about assisting. With heavy defense being played, it is difficult to assist and therefore show off the technical prowess of teams. It's difficult to show what your robot can do if it is stuck. This update is a quick and dirty solution to this problem.

I'm not saying I like what's going on. But perhaps we need to step back and consider the teams that can't get out of a tight spot and simply want to get a shot off.

[Nemo]

I can live with the "high speed or repeated ramming" foul. Effective defenders get in your way as opposed to trying to beat you up, so that part of the update doesn't seem wholly unreasonable to me. Obviously, it will be a game-destroying rule if the referees are overeager to call it at the slightest hint of contact.

The "gameplay resulting in damage to opponent robots" foul is pretty problematic. Now it's an advantage if your robot can visibly fall apart after minor contact in order to draw fouls.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Nemo

I can live with the "high speed or repeated ramming" foul. Effective defenders get in your way as opposed to trying to beat you up, so that part of the update doesn't seem wholly unreasonable to me.

I don't necessarily agree. Hitting an opponent (in the bumper zone) at the precise moment that they are shooting can be extremely effective. I think this is a reasonable part of the game, and unlikely to cause damage if done correctly (and it certainly doesn't need to be a 20fps collision to work well).

Is this now repeated ramming?

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

I don't necessarily agree. Hitting an opponent (in the bumper zone) at the precise moment that they are shooting can be extremely effective. I think this is a reasonable part of the game, and unlikely to cause damage if done correctly (and it certainly doesn't need to be a 20fps collision to work well).

Is this now repeated ramming?

Yeah, I also don't like how the rule opens the door for the referees to call a foul if you "ram" an opponent twice at 6 ft/s. To me that is shoving and bumping as opposed to ramming, but it is true that we are in a pretty fuzzy area with this rule. Like I said, it messes up the game if the referees are too eager with this foul.

[pfreivald]

I've been streaming pretty much every event today (two prep periods, and then a half day where I get to work on the syllabus for my new AP Physics 1 course--so I've got two computers up and am game-hopping while I work), and if anything I've observed fewer fouls, better games, and still a decent amount of pushing and shoving defense being played.

The sky is still where it is; it has not fallen.

[sircedric4]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

I've been streaming pretty much every event today (two prep periods, and then a half day where I get to work on the syllabus for my new AP Physics 1 course--so I've got two computers up and am game-hopping while I work), and if anything I've observed fewer fouls, better games, and still a decent amount of pushing and shoving defense being played.

The sky is still where it is; it has not fallen.

I would be interested to see if this is still the case tomorrow come eliminations. First day qualifiers under the "new" rules, it iss possible that there aren't enough good robots on the field at one time to really see the aggressiveness come out.

Everyone knows eliminations is another can of worms, and it is also when the games start to really "count". That is when teams drive their robots like they stole them because it is better to leave it on the field then lose because you didn't play hard enough.

This is also when the refs start to get worn out and the chances of mistakes start to really swing games. Subjective judgement gets foggier as you get burned out.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

I don't necessarily agree. Hitting an opponent (in the bumper zone) at the precise moment that they are shooting can be extremely effective. I think this is a reasonable part of the game, and unlikely to cause damage if done correctly (and it certainly doesn't need to be a 20fps collision to work well).

Is this now repeated ramming?

Isn't it even more effective though to not let them get into shooting range? I mean if you can't win a pushing war then shot disruption is viable but I would say burning time through pushing is better then attempting to disrupt.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

Isn't it even more effective though to not let them get into shooting range? I mean if you can't win a pushing war then shot disruption is viable but I would say burning time through pushing is better then attempting to disrupt.

Pushing is a lot higher of an opportunity cost as it always takes more time away from you than it does the defender. With a well timed, moderate speed ram to spin a robot, you make them miss their shot and spent 10 seconds chasing after a loose ball, while you only needed to invest 2-3 seconds to perform the maneuver. In a dynamic game where switching from offense to defense in crucial, this is a big difference. But is this "aggressive"? Is moving toward a robot at any speed "aggressive"?

[raptaconehs]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Pushing is a lot higher of an opportunity cost as it always takes more time away from you than it does the defender. With a well timed, moderate speed ram to spin a robot, you make them miss their shot and spent 10 seconds chasing after a loose ball, while you only needed to invest 2-3 seconds to perform the maneuver. In a dynamic game where switching from offense to defense in crucial, this is a big difference. But is this "aggressive"? Is moving toward a robot at any speed "aggressive"?

This is the biggest question. If you come across the field at full speed and then hit a robot that is about to shoot, will you get penalized for it? Cause if blocking that shot can decide which alliance wins the match I think it will be hard to come at a reasonable speed. This will greatly effect close matches.