|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Why the G13 change? It only makes 2 ball auto more dangerous and really how effective can throwing your one auto boulder at the other alliance be?
|
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Exactly, I think at that point a view looking down at the roof of the dome wouldn't strategically viable... just a guess...
|
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
https://youtu.be/oiMaHpT7bvg |
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Well it would appear that our periscope will now be modified to be 8'8". Benefits of using a pool slimmer pole is that it allows us to adjust height easily.
|
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
The only thing I guess that this could effect would be that teams that have 2 ball autos or 2 ball auto defensive strategies could now be at risk for yellow cards. If that is truly the intent, that really disappoints me because effective autonomous routines are some of the most inspirational things in FRC. |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
Transitive contact is when you contact something through something else... in this case...while holding a ball you contact an opposing robot while your robot is over the midline during auto. IMO that is the reason for the change. I wonder how well this would be called if both robots were going for the same ball and they both grabbed it in auto? If both robots were over the midline I assume both would get the same penalty. This would be very difficult to call for the referee. Evan I think your explantion is better than mine... Last edited by Bob Steele : 03-15-2016 at 05:25 PM. |
|
#22
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
It also incidentally makes boulder wars a lot riskier. Where previously you could maybe stomach taking the foul for a close call at the midline to stop a 2-ball auto, now you're risking a double foul and an automatic auto cross. Edit: Sniped by Coach :-P |
|
#23
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
This is a good change.
|
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
I don't think boulder wars is the genesis of the G13 change. I am guessing this is more likely the problem:
Two opposing robots line up on each side of a boulder. At the start of Autonomous, One robot drives in the wrong direction, and hits the boulder, which then hits the other robot. The other robot was not going after the boulder, but was going for a cross. The other robot is now knocked off it's path and cannot complete the crossing. Since the offending robot did not "touch" the other robot, there was not a G13 - Contact of opponent robot foul. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
Unfortunately the rule could also be read that fouls can be called if both teams are touching a boulder that is on the middle line, even if neither bot enters the volume above the midline. Also does a robot still have be in contact with the boulder for the "transitive" contact to be applied? I.E. is it a foul if a team's auto mode messes up and causes a boulder to roll/shoot/whatever in to an opposing alliance bot? |
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Assumedly so, as rolling/shooting/whatever would fall under G39
|
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
This is exactly the change Travis spoke about the very first time I saw him setting up your camera pole.
Whether 11'8" is an optimal solution, it is a solution none the less. I'd say objective achieved! |
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
How will the alliance colors be decided for playoff matches? |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
For example, the winner of 1v8 will be red regardless of who wins the set and plays the winner of 4v5. The winner of that semifinal is red in the finals. Likewise the winner of 2v7 is red in the semifinals against the winner of 3v6, and the winner of that semifinal is blue in the finals. Last edited by Kpchem : 03-15-2016 at 06:04 PM. |
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Team Update 16 (2016)
Quote:
I can't find the video of it, but I saw this happen at a week 1 event - a red robot drove across the midline and pushed a stationary blue robot several inches transitively through a boulder (no direct robot contact). Only 1 foul was called due to how the rule had been written. I was a ref in week 2, and we discussed this scenario prior. We decided since R13 did not mention transitive contact, we would enforce it the same way as was done in week 1. I'm glad to see the loophole closed, as it preserves the intent of the violation. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|