The "What the!?!?!" Rule Thread

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by petek

I expect some clarification on this rule. As I read it, <G29> would mean that a basic Class 1 low-profile KOP robot (e.g. a rookie team boxbot) that is 28w x 38l x 18h in its normal running configuration would have to start the match standing on end and would have to flop to run.

While I hadn't thought of this interpretation, and I agree that it will probably be clarified, is it possible that this is intentionally to prevent such 'bots? Unless you're gonna flop, you have to be at least 38" tall. (Though, if you slap the flag holder on top of your kitbot, you're already at 30".)

[Kristian Calhoun]

Originally Posted by boiler

The part I found interesting is that there is a 10 point penalty for scoring for the other alliance, yet qual points are awarded based on the losing team's score. I wonder how many times, for example, the Redabots will be winning by 60 (which, given the exponential structure of the scoring, is by no means out of the question!) and score for the Blueabots, taking the 10-pointer but still winning the match.

I found that rule to be interesting as well, because rule <G21> states:

Originally Posted by Section 7

<G21> SCORING for opponents - ROBOTS may not HANG a GAME PIECE of an opposing
ALLIANCE. If this rule is violated a 10-point penalty will be assessed per infraction.

Then later in the manual, when talking about Ranking Points:

Originally Posted by Section 9

9.3.8 Ranking Score
The total number of ranking points earned by a team throughout their qualification matches,
divided by the number of matches played (excluding any SURROGATE matches), then truncated
to two decimal places, will be their ranking score. Note: because your ranking score is derived
directly from the match scores of the losing ALLIANCES in the matches you play, it is in your best
interest to support your opponents and win by helping each ALLIANCE score as many points as
possible.

Unlike in previous years' games, in Rack 'N' Roll it is impossible to score for the opposing alliance. Hanging a ringer of the opposing alliance would result in a 10 point penalty. I can see the intent of rule <G21> in that it intends to stop, lets say the blue alliance, from hanging a red ringer over another red ringer (originally placed by the red alliance) in order to negate that spider leg, and breaking up any rows that have been formed. So as boiler mentioned, I'm curious as to see how many teams will willingly take the penalty in order to negate row(s) formed by the other alliance. Then once the spider leg has two red ringers on it, the red alliance would not be able to remove the second red ringer without being DQed as per rule <G20>, and even then the ringers on that spider leg would be considered void as per the same rule.

You can further not score for the opposing alliance by climbing onto a robot in their home zone as prohibited by rule <G35> and are penalized for being in their home zone during the end game as per rule <G25>. Therefore, the only way to help the other alliance score more points would be to lighten up on the defense...

[NiGhtMarE_AnGeL]

oh, and i also think its funny that a robot that is taller than me must weigh less than i do!

im like the equivalent of a robot! haha

[paradoxal]

Originally Posted by boiler

The part I found interesting is that there is a 10 point penalty for scoring for the other alliance, yet qual points are awarded based on the losing team's score. I wonder how many times, for example, the Redabots will be winning by 60 (which, given the exponential structure of the scoring, is by no means out of the question!) and score for the Blueabots, taking the 10-pointer but still winning the match.

they made that rule because a leg is ignored if there is two ringers of the same alliance on it

[NoSkaOnTheRadio]

i'm all for pit height restrictions - some of the displays i saw last year were pretty over the top (ha!), and i think this rule will actually facilitate communication between neighbors. it's good to be friendly, you know?

[ahecht]

While I can certainly hope that members of the Game Design Committee read this thread, I just wanted to remind everyone who has posted a discrepancy in the rules has actually submitted it to the Q&A (or had their designated team representative post it). Don't just assume someone else will.

[Sean Schuff]

Gotta gripe again about the batteries rule.

What the !?!?!

Sean

[EricH]

Originally Posted by petek

I expect some clarification on this rule. As I read it, <G29> would mean that a basic Class 1 low-profile KOP robot (e.g. a rookie team boxbot) that is 28w x 38l x 18h in its normal running configuration would have to start the match standing on end and would have to flop to run.

You mean 28wx48lx(something under 38)h, don't you? Something 28w x 38l is in the box already.

[petek]

Originally Posted by EricH

You mean 28wx48lx(something under 38)h, don't you? Something 28w x 38l is in the box already.

If a team was to build the 28 x 38 chassis out of the box but made their robot less than 38 in high, the 38 in length of the kit chassis would be the long dimension so, per <G29>, would have to start with the chassis standing on end and the bottom of the robot (when running) would be vertical at the start.

For the teams that barely get the kit robot working in time to ship this could be quite a surprise when they get to their first regional.

[GMKlenklen]

Yah, it's a weird rule, I'd plan on attaching a useless peice of something just as soon as a ref or inspector said something about it... unless they come out with a clarification before the end of build period.

Or just try to go for the lower spiders no matter what! That's probably something they are trying to foster there... maybe a train of thought that goes like this: "Might as well try! we may learn something".

[Michael Hill]

I'm upset we can't use the 2005 Breaker Panels. It made everything so much cleaner and localized. Also, it was a lot less work.

[Gary Dillard]

From the Q&A Forum:
Q.Rule <G40> states that "ROBOTS may not intentionally detach parts or leave multiple mechanisms on the field." Is the definition of detached merely any component no longer connected to the robot? We would specifically like to know if having robot parts that leave the main robot frame but are still connected to it by a small "tether" would violate rule <G40>.

A. Any mechanisms "attached" to the robot via a tether are likely be considered an entanglement hazard and a violation of Rules <G38>, <R04>, and <R32>.

My comment (still beating that dead horse): Unless, as in 2002, Woody Flowers says it's OK because you spent alot of engineering time developing it, so it would be a shame not to let you use it even though it's blatently illegal.

[Donut]

Originally Posted by Gary Dillard

From the Q&A Forum:
Q.Rule <G40> states that "ROBOTS may not intentionally detach parts or leave multiple mechanisms on the field." Is the definition of detached merely any component no longer connected to the robot? We would specifically like to know if having robot parts that leave the main robot frame but are still connected to it by a small "tether" would violate rule <G40>.

A. Any mechanisms "attached" to the robot via a tether are likely be considered an entanglement hazard and a violation of Rules <G38>, <R04>, and <R32>.

My comment (still beating that dead horse): Unless, as in 2002, Woody Flowers says it's OK because you spent alot of engineering time developing it, so it would be a shame not to let you use it even though it's blatently illegal.

It's okay, we abandoned the tethered ramp idea anyway

[Guy Davidson]

Originally Posted by Kristian Calhoun

I found that rule to be interesting as well, because rule <G21> states:

Then later in the manual, when talking about Ranking Points:

Unlike in previous years' games, in Rack 'N' Roll it is impossible to score for the opposing alliance. Hanging a ringer of the opposing alliance would result in a 10 point penalty. I can see the intent of rule <G21> in that it intends to stop, lets say the blue alliance, from hanging a red ringer over another red ringer (originally placed by the red alliance) in order to negate that spider leg, and breaking up any rows that have been formed. So as boiler mentioned, I'm curious as to see how many teams will willingly take the penalty in order to negate row(s) formed by the other alliance. Then once the spider leg has two red ringers on it, the red alliance would not be able to remove the second red ringer without being DQed as per rule <G20>, and even then the ringers on that spider leg would be considered void as per the same rule.

You can further not score for the opposing alliance by climbing onto a robot in their home zone as prohibited by rule <G35> and are penalized for being in their home zone during the end game as per rule <G25>. Therefore, the only way to help the other alliance score more points would be to lighten up on the defense...

Check the latest team update. It adresses this to the wire.

-Guy

[bobotics319]

I have two gripes. One is the 72x72 rule, which I believe has no relevance other than to hinder us (although we can position our robot diagonally in the box giving us over 100 inches of length). Another is the identical pneumatics <R105> rule. Which says we can't use pneumatics unless they are identical to those on the "Pneumatics Components Order Form" Where is this form? Anybody?