IRI Rule Changes

[Bob Steele]

I like a change where if the ball leaves the field it enters back into the field at that point. Dropped in by field personnel if it did not go out over a human player. Balls shot over the goals are re-entered at ends (sides). If the area the ball is being re-entered has a matching color human player ... they get the ball to re-enter. If not... a drop ball by the field personnel.

[lynca]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

2) Allow up to 6 balls for autonomous.

I like this change. This will make autonomous more interesting at IRI ! Autonomous got boring this year after almost all top alliances put up 60-70 pts.

Here are a couple simple suggestions without drastically changing the game.
1. 25 point catch
2. remove G40
3. in the last 30 seconds: 20 point truss shot

[neshera]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

Are you saying the 9 referees used at each field at Championship weren't enough?

I think there is a broad opinion that the number of referees and the tasks they were given at the Regionals resulted in many problems.

I'm pretty certain there were less than 9 referees on the field at a time at the Regionals. From video I watched, 7 referees (including the Chief Ref) on the Archimedes field. Refereeing was good (but not perfect, of course) on that field.

[LightWaves1636]

Originally Posted by neshera

I think there is a broad opinion that the number of referees and the tasks they were given at the Regionals resulted in many problems.

I'm pretty certain there were less than 9 referees on the field at a time at the Regionals. From video I watched, 7 referees (including the Chief Ref) on the Archimedes field. Refereeing was good (but not perfect, of course) on that field.

Each field had 4 referees in charge of scoring, 2 referees on the far side looking for infractions and the Head Referee. (Although if the possession refs saw something, ie G12, then they can make a call and let the HR know.) There would be two spare referees to help provide breaks to everyone. For elims and Einstein there was 4 referees strictly scoring, 4 referees strictly for infractions, and then the Head Referee.

During the regionals, significantly less. Originally it was 4 referees with a spare ref to provide breaks. Obviously not enough. Some events pulled off 5 referees on duty and 1 on break after an update from HQ came out. Whatever FIRST recommends, I try to push VCs to get 2 more than that.

[stuart2054]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Yeah and no triple balancing in qualifying either, u lucky widebots! Oh, wait, nevermind...sorry - flashbacks

I felt there were many "phantom" assists credited in the Newton division. Balls bouncing off of robots (often rookies) with no hint of actual possession. Sometimes I swear they never even touched the thing. I'd like to avoid that.

I'd like possession to be achieved by either.....

1. Active capture/release with a mechanism, even for a brief instant.
2. Trapping the ball against a field element or another robot.
3. Obvious herding of the ball in a direction (you travel in the same direction as the ball).

Basketball players are permitted touch passes, are they not? Soccer and hockey players can advance the ball/puck without holding it in their possession for an extended period, right? Why not robots? But all of them make some kind of intentional interaction with the game piece to direct it down an intended path. It's not like their teammates regularly bounce the thing off their skates or backs or domes as part of regular gameplay. The robot must be an active and knowing part of the transfer process.

I agree with this. There should be some actual interaction of the robot with the ball.

[TOTCoach]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

... crazy 12 ball play as an endgame. At the last 30 seconds, each hp would get an extra 2 balls to do whatever with, then no assists... Catching your own truss should also be worth a catch during anytime.

I love the idea of 12 ball endgame, and catching your own truss should be worth something. We played many practice matches with just random balls and it was a hoot to watch!

Unlimited ball auton, nice idea. All those balls need to be cleared before assists can start though.

I also like the idea of some risk in shooting the ball outside of HP's reach, weather foul points, or inbounded back at the original inbound location. If HP needs to leave the box, the ball goes back to the start and assist points are removed.

Also, human inbounding to opponent's robot should not be a foul for the robot.

[IKE]

I am going to go out on a limb here and say, the game really does not need that many changes. By the end of the year, the game was very exciting to watch. There are a lot of different ways to play it, and a lot of interesting elements to it.
For IRI, the quality of players will be quite high. I suspect that a lot of the issues that this game has suffered with will not be there.

A couple of big items:
I would like a count for G12.D just like pinning. I would let others decide on the count amount, but I think a 3-5 second visual count (IE punching the air) would be beneficial for "isolation". Pinning needs the 5 count tomahawk so that drivers can tell when the count is starting, and when they need to let up. Isolating the ball should get the same. I like a 3 count for strategic reasons, but a 5 count would be consistent relative to pinning.

G40: Touch a robot, you get a technical....Reach into the field, you get a foul.

I would also request removal of G21. I don't like that robots could be designed to reach 20" past the frame perimeter and the the ability then for these to reach over safety zone. This seems like a mistake to me.

My change requests to G40 & G21 do add some safety concern though for human players as there is a definite interaction zone, and I would hate to give a technical to someone that got injured by a robot ramming into them. My choice of re-interpreting those fouls was mostly due to inconsistency of calls during the season.

[Koko Ed]

I want to see the game play as is with the penalties dialed down. If we add extra balls to the field them the strategy element will be lost and you'll see teams doing the same thing they do every year, doing their own thing and not working together. I really think this game can shine at IRI as is.

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by IKE

I would like a count for G12.D just like pinning. I would let others decide on the count amount, but I think a 3-5 second visual count (IE punching the air) would be beneficial for "isolation". Pinning needs the 5 count tomahawk so that drivers can tell when the count is starting, and when they need to let up. Isolating the ball should get the same. I like a 3 count for strategic reasons, but a 5 count would be consistent relative to pinning.

I like this one. It takes a judgment call and makes it much more concrete.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by IKE

A couple of big items:
I would like a count for G12.D just like pinning. I would let others decide on the count amount, but I think a 3-5 second visual count (IE punching the air) would be beneficial for "isolation". Pinning needs the 5 count tomahawk so that drivers can tell when the count is starting, and when they need to let up. Isolating the ball should get the same. I like a 3 count for strategic reasons, but a 5 count would be consistent relative to pinning.

This is the best suggestion I've seen yet. Too many times I've seen teams inadvertently get tech fouls when they're trying to block a robot and the ball is in just the wrong place. Giving teams a chance to see that it's about to get them a penalty, before it does, will result in less isolation AND less penalties, I think. It doesn't even need to be clear what the ref is counting down. See a ref counting? Better move soon!

[Gregor]

Add a G14A.

G14
Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE.

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

Proposed G14A

Forcing the opposing alliance to violate a rule will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Add a G14A.

For consistency, it would be G14-1 (cf. G26-1).

And I'd change it from "Forcing" to "Causing". But other than that, this is the rule we needed all season. We didn't have an effective "but he made me do it" rule.

Optional: Since you were supposed to design your robot so it couldn't deliberately or inadvertently possess an opponent's ball, G12 might be exempt from G14-1.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Optional: Since you were supposed to design your robot so it couldn't deliberately or inadvertently possess an opponent's ball, G12 might be exempt from G14-1.

Literally impossible if you also wanted to posses your own ball.

[Meredith Novak]

Originally Posted by TOTCoach

Also, human inbounding to opponent's robot should not be a foul for the robot.

This.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Meredith Novak

This.

Yes--this would fall under a 'no call' rule (the proposed G14-1). It's utterly ridiculous that this was omitted this year. I didn't expect it to change until IRI (at least not after stop build), but I really was pushing for it. I hated calling G12s and G21s like that, not to mention an almost-G12 in autonomous on a missed opponent shot.

Also, I still don't understand offensive G12ds when I'm not 'attempting to shield my ball' (from whom?)...but IRI can easily ignore that the same way the GDC has.