Contested Containers

[RunawayEngineer]

Originally Posted by Mr_D_Mentor

What happens if your robot has an autonomous "can plucker" and you place your robot in front of a particular can prior to the match. Then a team on the opposing alliance places their robot in front of the same can with the intent of stealing it before your robot can. So you move your robot to another can, and the other team does the same, and so on. I think this is similar to the goalie placement last year, which was covered by a rule. Is this addressed in the rules this year?

I noticed this gap in the rules, as well. Hopefully they will resolve it before it becomes a problem. This is a great Q+A submission.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by Mr_D_Mentor

What happens if your robot has an autonomous "can plucker" and you place your robot in front of a particular can prior to the match. Then a team on the opposing alliance places their robot in front of the same can with the intent of stealing it before your robot can. So you move your robot to another can, and the other team does the same, and so on. I think this is similar to the goalie placement last year, which was covered by a rule. Is this addressed in the rules this year?

From section 5.1 of the game manual:

If order placement of ROBOTS matters to either or both ALLIANCES, the ALLIANCE must notify the Head REFEREE during setup for that MATCH. Upon notification, the Head REFEREE will require ALLIANCES to alternate placement of their ROBOTS, starting with the Red ALLIANCE.

[Mr_D_Mentor]

thanks

[Wayne TenBrink]

Getting control of the cans on the step quickly will be the key to seeding well in quals and winning in playoffs. Can grabbing mechanisms will evolve as the season progresses, and its going to look like the mini-bot arms race in 2011. Whatever is good enough in Week 1 won't be good enough as the season progresses. Good can grabbers will get copied, and new ones will be developed. Teams will use their 30lb. withholding build the latest and greatest. Bots will be broken and flipped as they perform an autonomous tug of war over contested barrels. It should be fun to watch.

[Munchskull]

That awkward moment when you are so busy with robots and school work that you forgot you started a thread.

[themccannman]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

From section 5.1 of the game manual: From section 5.1 of the game manual:

That's interesting that they don't give the red alliance (the higher seed) the final pick on position, that could be a big deal.

Also, did anyone see anything in the rules about accidental field/game piece damage from tug-o-wars?

[dodar]

Originally Posted by themccannman

That's interesting that they don't give the red alliance (the higher seed) the final pick on position, that could be a big deal.

Also, did anyone see anything in the rules about accidental field/game piece damage from tug-o-wars?

I was thinking the same thing. I kind of felt this was thought of more as a qualification match thing where they just picked red.

But in terms of Elims, having red go first does seem a bit odd.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by dodar

I was thinking the same thing. I kind of felt this was thought of more as a qualification match thing where they just picked red.

But in terms of Elims, having red go first does seem a bit odd.

Is there a rule somewhere that states that the higher seeded alliance must be red in the playoffs? I have searched both the 2014 and the 2015 manuals and was unable to find anything like this.

[themccannman]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

Is there a rule somewhere that states that the higher seeded alliance must be red in the playoffs? I have searched both the 2014 and the 2015 manuals and was unable to find anything like this.

It's likely under the tournament rules section. I just assumed it's the same since red alliance has been the higher seed for as long as I can remember.

[GaryVoshol]

I recall a Q&A that the method of deciding red/blue for playoffs has not been determined; they'll let us know.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

I recall a Q&A that the method of deciding red/blue for playoffs has not been determined; they'll let us know.

I found it:

Q28
Q. How will the Red and Blue alliances be determined in Playoff Matches? Since the Yellow TOTE starting positions are asymmetrical on the field for Red and Blue, we would like to know this in advance.

A. Good question! The alliance assignment has not been finalized. Once it's set, implemented, and tested, the Game Manual will be updated and we'll include notification in a Team Update.

I don't fully understand the context though, the yellow tote positions will always appear the same when looking out from the driver station, so I don't see how it would make any difference which alliance color your team has.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by SciBorg Dave

During seeding matches the step can will not be important.
During elims very few teams will go for them.
When team reach worlds the further they go the more important they will become.

More or less this. These bins will only be a significant factor in a handful of playoffs matches prior to the championship event. At those very highest levels of play, they will be a huge deal. While we usually aim our design at elimination matches, we feared that designing our robot primarily around this capability (at the expense of other areas of gameplay) would not be a significant enough factor at our district events to be worth it. You have to qualify for those top levels of play before you can design a robot to win them.

[Mr. Lim]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

I found it:



I don't fully understand the context though, the yellow tote positions will always appear the same when looking out from the driver station, so I don't see how it would make any difference which alliance color your team has.

The yellow totes starting positions are asymmetric if you choose not to place them on the field. I.e. they are behind the glass in the alliance station.

[Pollux]

The containers are pretty much a constraint on how many points you can score per match. If your alliance only has the three containers from your side, you lose out on the opportunity to cap four more stacks and get all the additional points from the containers. Meanwhile, the opposing alliance gains four containers, with a maximum of 120 more points (capping four additional six-stacks for 96 points plus the four noodles for 24 more). Even if they score significantly fewer points, they're still placing a constraint on how much you can score. And while matches aren't officially won, being down by 40 or more points each match is going to set you back significantly in qualifications.

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by Pollux

The containers are pretty much a constraint on how many points you can score per match. If your alliance only has the three containers from your side, you lose out on the opportunity to cap four more stacks and get all the additional points from the containers. Meanwhile, the opposing alliance gains four containers, with a maximum of 120 more points (capping four additional six-stacks for 96 points plus the four noodles for 24 more). Even if they score significantly fewer points, they're still placing a constraint on how much you can score. And while matches aren't officially won, being down by 40 or more points each match is going to set you back significantly in qualifications.

That's assuming an alliance in qualifications and possibly even playoffs is able to score more than three capped stacks. As stated by others in the thread, it really only matters when the alliances are very high powered and capable of scoring more than three capped full stacks in order to make a difference.