|
#31
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Quote:
Furthermore, a "billion mile an hour" automode has been allowed. Teams have had extremely fast autonomous modes in 2003 and 2004. I saw some extremely violent collisions in both years. I don't ever recall seeing a DQ or penalty for such. Your point about defensive automodes always being allowed is kind of moot, as the Q&A referenced above clearly prohibits it this season. If there's no way to determine intent with respect to blocking (and I think there very clearly is. It was 110% clear who was attempting to impede other alliances, and who was trying to run laps), then I think there's no logical way that you can penalize/yellow card/dq a team that happens to hit such a team who may or may not be impeding the track intentionally. If you penalize the team trying to navigate the field, then the impeding robot has scored a double victory--they have avoided a yellow card that I believe they certainly deserve, and they have given their opponent a penalty/yellow/red card. How is this fair? I think a yellow card is a totally justifiable penalty. With teams like MWR had, two good hybrid bots on one alliance can score between 24-32 points in lines, and 8-16 points in balls, plus whatever the third robot can do. With teams impeding at the far lane divider, the most these 2 teams can score is 16 points in lines and 8-16 points in balls. Even if the offending team were assessed a 10 point penalty, they have effectively negated up to 24-32 points for the other alliance. Without the yellow card, it would be totally worth it for everyone who did not have a great hybrid mode to just camp at the corner and take 10 point penalties all day, to keep more than 10 points from being scored against them. To be fair to the referees, us armchair quarterbacks have no idea whether 1114 was or was not given such a warning prior to being carded. Last edited by Cory : 01-03-2008 at 22:33. |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Dang I want that award =D
From the webcasts, I didnt see this being called either. |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Remember that per <G40>:
Quote:
On the whole, I don't like the idea of being penalized for what happens in autonomous mode. There are so many things that can go wrong, and the only way to stop the robot is to E-stop - which disables the robot for the rest of the match. Perhaps there should be an autonomous-only E-stop. Last edited by StevenB : 01-03-2008 at 22:44. Reason: looked at some of the video |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
After thinking about this problem for a while I think MWR refs actually did a pretty good job. One of the things that I think is most important in a ref crew is consistancy, basically, dont call a penalty on 1 team and not call it when another team does the same thing. The MWR called the penalty on the robot moving, and not on the team impeding. I dont think this was the right call, however after the first incident, all teams knew the risks of autonomous mode. I would have liked to see it called the other way, however they took over a problem that wasnt braught up before and remained consistant with it. I dont think the yellow card had a large impact on 1114, however I may be wrong.
Joey |
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
If you didn't see this penalty being called, it is likely that either the blocked team had not bumped to pass, there was a clear lane around the impeding bot, one of the impeding bots was from the same alliance as the robot being impeded, the impeding robot was in the process of hurdling, or the impeding action didn't last for more than six seconds. Many impeding counts were started. Not many penalties were called. Please read <G40> and <G41> to understand how this rule actually works.
|
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Quote:
![]() |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Quote:
Secondly, I don't think ethier should get a yellow card simply cause you can't penalize a robot that doesn't move. A lap bot takes a wide turn and crashes into a robot without an auto mode and that bot gets a yellow card for impeding?? Is that fair?? Ethier way no yellow cards should be awarded, not right away anyways. It was a little unfair, but when 1114 got a yellow card, they didn't hit a "drive 3 feet and stop" bot, they hit a bot who had crossed one line. So I believe a warning would of worked.. but I'm not a ref. It comes down to what people assume, and unfortunatly that changes from person to person, and bad calls will always be called, and some people won't think they are bad calls, and some people will. |
|
#38
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
As soon as the robot makes a turn, your IR board becomes somewhat useless.
|
|
#39
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
If you weren't on the field, you would have no way of knowing whether a team received a warning.
|
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Quote:
Joey |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
There's no crying in robotics!
|
|
#42
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
What if you arent "intentionally" impeding? sure if you have an auto mode that drives forward 3 feet and stops, its impeding, but so could an auto that hits the middle wall and breaks. A rule preventing impeding during hybrid would be very subjective considering the large potential for error.
|
|
#43
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Quote:
In the above situation, you could easily tell by assessing whether it stopped short of the divider, hits the divider and keeps spinning it's wheels, starts madly spinning in circles, etc. -To anyone playing devil's advocate, an impeding team could certainly have their robot do the above things to mimic a hybrid mode gone bad, but seeing as impeding teams is already illegal, I should hope nobody would stoop to such lows. |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
As the robocoach of one of the teams(along with 16, bombsquad), who impeded 1114 and 1024's hybrid mode in the semi-final matches of Chicago, I would like to say, that there was concern about the legality of the strategy. We specifically asked the refs if that would be called a penalty.
Saying that a low numbered team(team 16 bombsquad) should have known better is ridiculous. The rules allowed it and it did not cause any excess risk of damage to robots or humans. Honestly I would be fine seeing this change over to a penalty, but don't rip on us for playing with some strategy. |
|
#45
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Impeding in Hybrid
Just so we are clear on what we mean by 3 feet and stop, look at what 48/16 did to 1114 in quals/elims.
They were probably under the influence it was a legal move, as this is a grayish area in the minds of most. I believe it should be illegal, because of the Q&A ruling that states it is. However, it seemed liked very few people knew about it. And, this argument isn't even for our own benefit; 973 has yet to run a hybrid mode on our competition bot. We have some decent modes for past robots (so were not all that behind). |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| G22 Direction of Traffic Hilarity | Kevin Sevcik | Rules/Strategy | 16 | 17-01-2008 22:30 |
| Intentionally tipping and disabling your own robot FTW... | Mr. Lim | Rules/Strategy | 30 | 14-01-2008 13:35 |
| Traffic and Weather? | indieFan | Championship Event | 7 | 30-01-2007 15:30 |
| Week 2 Regional Traffic Jam | Koko Ed | Regional Competitions | 6 | 07-03-2006 22:11 |
| Site Traffic Chart | archiver | 2000 | 2 | 23-06-2002 22:01 |