Overdrive <G22> poll: yea or nay?

[johnr]

I haven't seen a field or comp in person yet so could someone tell me if all driver stations have a clear view of their down field robocoach? I was hopping that the robocoach could give hand signal to driver to take inside or outside turn.

[Craig Roys]

Originally Posted by johnr

I haven't seen a field or comp in person yet so could someone tell me if all driver stations have a clear view of their down field robocoach? I was hopping that the robocoach could give hand signal to driver to take inside or outside turn.

I have not been to a comp either, but based on the pictures I saw earlier in another <G22> thread there is a good chance that you cannot see them clearly if you are in the far left station - you would have to look through the center barrier. However, as Paul Copioli also pointed out, the coach can make use of the fact that he/she can move throughout your entire alliance zone to try to get a view of things.

[Lil' Lavery]

Through a misunderstanding about a signaling device, 116 thought of an interesting use of robocoaches for purposes such as directing your drive team. Initially a 116 member didn't realize that 1731's signaling device (4 massive colored flashlights) was being read by a CMU cam on the robot, and thought it was being used to signal the drive crew. We then realized that signaling devices such as that actually could be extraordinarily effective (more so than hand signals, which are visible, but hard to see) for signaling to your drive crew as well as your robot.
Additionally remember that you may still use your robocoach for actually signaling the robot during the tele-operated phase of the game as well. Depending on your programming, it may or may not make sense to have your robocoach help navigate the opposite corners of the field to avoid programming (or at least act as an anti-penalty check if you give him/her some sort of power to stop the robot).

[Phyrxes]

Having seen the pictures on here our Drive team checked out the field at VCU as soon as they were able and pronounced it "not as bad as the pictures." As the field lighting varies by arena this wasn't a big surprise.

[kborer22]

I agree with the comments that "intent" should be determined. At the AZ regional there was a match with 120 or 130 penalty points (can’t remember which) and 90-100 of them were in Hybrid mode, the team was just spinning in circles around the lines, not intentionally I would imagine. I think when a situation like this arises, completely taking an alliance out of a match before it really begins warrants change. I can understand rules for robots destroying the field, or leaving the field of play, which deserves an E-stop/disable from the refs, but this seems a little excessive. Also; there seems to be about 20-30 penalty point average in most matches from what I have seen (NJ/Az regional).

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by kborer22

I agree with the comments that "intent" should be determined. At the AZ regional there was a match with 120 or 130 penalty points (can’t remember which) and 90-100 of them were in Hybrid mode, the team was just spinning in circles around the lines, not intentionally I would imagine. I think when a situation like this arises, completely taking an alliance out of a match before it really begins warrants change. I can understand rules for robots destroying the field, or leaving the field of play, which deserves an E-stop/disable from the refs, but this seems a little excessive. Also; there seems to be about 20-30 penalty point average in most matches from what I have seen (NJ/Az regional).

Advocates of for G22 would tell you to hit the Estop to prevent the bot from racking up so many penalties. But then again it probably wasn't your bot that incurred all of the penalties. This seems to be that "luck" factor that's required to take you to the finals.

I like the cross-field signalling idea. Currently our robocoach sits on our side after Hybrid and cheers when we do something great, and that's about it. I never noticed if 1731 used their signaling device in teleoperated mode.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by JesseK

I like the cross-field signalling idea. Currently our robocoach sits on our side after Hybrid and cheers when we do something great, and that's about it. I never noticed if 1731 used their signaling device in teleoperated mode.

I don't think they ever did actually use them in teleop, but they certainly would have been able to use them not only to signal the robot, but give instructions to the drive team as well. One of our members confusion about it just spawned the idea for it.

[scottanderson]

At the AZ regional there was a match with 120 or 130 penalty points (can’t remember which) and 90-100 of them were in Hybrid mode, the team was just spinning in circles around the lines, not intentionally I would imagine.

Sorry, but if your robot is spinning in circles in hybrid mode and giving you penalties, then that's a programming error, not a problem with the rules...

That said, I think that modifying the rule to say the entire robot has to go back over the line, not just 1/4" of it, satisfies both the intent of the rule and fixes the problem.

That said, it's a bit late to be changing rules now that so many competitions have already run...

[Bongle]

Sorry about my earlier post, I had just come from reading this thread, which contains some fairly bitter anti-G22 posts, so seeing a result like 60% in favour (even if that support is qualified) surprised me. I wasn't trivializing the opposition, I was just surprised to see it so low after reading a thread that was 50-50ish in terms of favouring/decrying G22.

No?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...094#post674094

Perhaps I should've said "it is uncommon to post unprovoked in support of a rule". If we assume that teams are mostly happy with the game this year, than we would expect a post like yours for every rule in the rulebook.

[Racer26]

G22 has caused some pretty heated debate, and IMO, is ok, but needs to be tweaked. Its causing too many people to get penalties when they are inadvertently breaking the plane, either due to robot rotation, or visibility issues.

I would LIKE to see it changed such that (and yes, I know I'm living in a fantasy world) if less than 50% of the robot crosses the line in the reverse direction AND the robot gains no scoring advantage by doing so (ie. doesnt influence a TRACKBALL, doesn't contact another ROBOT) I dont think the robot should be penalized. I think this modification would keep the intent of the rule intact, while allowing for incidental plane breaking non-consequential to the outcome of the game.

[GaryVoshol]

A thought I just had. The vast majority of <G22> violations happened on the lane divider lines, not the finish lines. I suspect it is related to turning vs going straight. The funny thing though, I cannot remember if there are more violations at the far end of the field vs near end. In fact, I remember one team who were dinged twice in Hybrid mode claim that they didn't cross at all. It happened right in front of them, so visibility wasn't an issue.

I'll pay more attention this weekend to see if near-end/far-end makes much of a difference.

[kborer22]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

A thought I just had. The vast majority of <G22> violations happened on the lane divider lines, not the finish lines. I suspect it is related to turning vs going straight. The funny thing though, I cannot remember if there are more violations at the far end of the field vs near end. In fact, I remember one team who were dinged twice in Hybrid mode claim that they didn't cross at all. It happened right in front of them, so visibility wasn't an issue.

I'll pay more attention this weekend to see if near-end/far-end makes much of a difference.

if i had to estimate it would probably be 70% farside and 30% near side(from what i have seen), alot of the near side occuring in hybrid mode, and the far side during teleoperated period.

[TubaMorg]

Apologies to Alan for continuing the debate here with perhaps a slightly different perspective.

I would argue that requiring teams to live up to the high standard of G22 is exactly what FIRST is about. For too long educational standards have been slipping (in this country) due to lowering expectations in the classroom. The end result is a less educated society which is less competitive with the rest of the world. I stand firm for applying the rule as written and as it has been enforced the last two weeks of regionals because we are here to show that difficult tasks are obstacles to be conquered not avoided. Tweaking G22 to make it easier for teams to avoid penalties is admitting defeat. Some are saying that G22 is just too darned hard to adhere to, so let's lower our expectations to get more people over the bar. I reject this argument. If we accept the premise that FIRST is about changing paradigms, is about celebrating technology and innovation the way we celebrate athletics, then we should accept G22 as a difficult standard that must be adhered to.

Most opponents/detractors of G22 argue that the large number of penalties being called is effecting the outcomes of matches. This is true in some cases but I haven't seen any data supporting the MOST assertion. Even if violation of G22 were effecting the outcome of ALL matches, however, I wouldn't support any relaxation of the rule. In light of this year's homework assignment, some have gotten the impression that the emphasis this year is on the competition, rather than the process leading up to the competition. The difference between the two is an argument better left for another thread. I will argue, however, that even though the homework this year is about building publicity for FIRST, the intention is to raise public awareness for the PROCESS. In our media driven society, it is almost essential that FIRST receive adequate media attention in order to obtain the larger goal of creating a paradigm shift that makes science and technology popular again. However, this does not mean we have to lower the high standards set forth every year. Once we start relaxing the rules, erosion of quality occurs.

Every year we get a new game. Every year there are many challenges and obstacles to overcome to meet the parameters set forth in the game. Every year some people have objections to some of these challenges. Am I saying that no one should ever object to any of the rules? Of course not. Sometimes clarification is needed. Sometimes a rule just doesn't fit with the game. G22 is clear and the GDC has stated that there will be no change to the rule in how it is worded OR in how it is enforced. For the teams that still have competitions to attend you now have a choice: Meet the challenge of G22 and overcome it, or get penalized every match and complain. Which team are you going to be?

[Racer26]

All I can say in response TubaMorg is that I would rather legitimately win a match against another team than to win only because they were called on an unintentional violation of G22

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by TubaMorg

Every year we get a new game. Every year there are many challenges and obstacles to overcome to meet the parameters set forth in the game. Every year some people have objections to some of these challenges. Am I saying that no one should ever object to any of the rules? Of course not. Sometimes clarification is needed. Sometimes a rule just doesn't fit with the game. G22 is clear and the GDC has stated that there will be no change to the rule in how it is worded OR in how it is enforced. For the teams that still have competitions to attend you now have a choice: Meet the challenge of G22 and overcome it, or get penalized every match and complain. Which team are you going to be?

G22 & the way it's worded isn't really a "challenge" to overcome. It's more like having to stay inside the lines in 1st grade. It's like a speed limit in the middle of a sunny day in the desert with no one around for miles. These are other examples of blind rules that must be followed just because of rules. If we blindly believe that the GDC is always correct in their rules then I simply must refer us all back to the principles derived in this very wonderfully written post about what being professional means.

More relative to FRC, when something breaks and we get 3+ penalties for that instance, is G22 still considered a "challenge"? Particularly teams who are allied with other bots that seem to break more often than other bots ... is it still a "challenge" that the whole alliance is penalized?