|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
And not one single word clarifying bumper rules. Unbelievable.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Basically it's a conglomeration of updates based on the answers to scoring/PS questions in the Q&A. I guess this is good for those people who didn't bother to read each question in the Q&A...
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
I am surprised by G20c: the operation of recycling the moon rocks to the outpost by "passing" them through the port.
The port is not at floor level and is outside the arena railing. Your robot can't extend past the bumper perimeter. The Payload Specialist in the Outpost has no tongs. If the robot has only a shooter with which to "pass" the moon rocks to the Payload Specialist strapped into his seat on the other side who cannot move out of his seat without incurring a penalty ... Oh, the poor Payload Specialist. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Because there haven't been any changes in the rules since Update #2. There have been several illuninating posts in Q&A lately, but they don't actually create new rules. They only help us to realize what the GDC really was trying to say.
They did add two penalties (<G20C> and <G24C>), making a total of 29. Beside all the PS/handling clarifications, we had the expected change in <G14> that it is the pre-penalty score that counts when calculating 2x or 3x. They have to update the rules when Q&A change them. Only the rules are used by the referees/inspectors/etc. to make decisions. Last edited by GaryVoshol : 13-01-2009 at 19:59. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Does the bumper rules need clarification? So far, they pretty well spell out exactly how the bumpers are supposed to be. There have been debates about whether the rules should exist or not which is rather irrelevant, but the point is that the rules are all there and spell out exactly what is necessary. Frankly, if there is any more clarification on the bumper rules, I will be shocked and somewhat annoyed for having to read the same rule yet again.
Note: I'm sorry if I offended you, Abwehr, or anyone else out there. I'm just tired of reading thread after thread on this topic on delphi, not to mention the dozen threads Q&A and the lengthy section in the manual regarding a simple matter. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
I agree that the trailers for no-shows is not important until competition but it would be helpful for developing stratagy and having a back up plan if anything fails for us or our alliance
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
I also agree about the bumper rule if you follow the simple string around the robot test and read the rules carfully there is, regretably, no real room for interptretation
|
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Bah, I still can not get use to the new names given to drivers/operators/human players. (Yes, I know I sound like a grumpy old man now
) |
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Quote:
![]() |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Its the same thing as last years problem of everyone calling the overpass "the rack"
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
Now they fixed the link to point to Rev C, but they forgot to add the G07 rule changes.
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"<G23> SUPER CELL scoring – During the last 20 seconds of the MATCH, the PAYLOAD
SPECIALIST may enter a SUPER CELL into play by removing it from the CELL RACK. They may then enter it into the CRATER, either over the Alliance Station Wall or through the FUELING PORT. A ROBOT or PAYLOAD SPECIALIST can SCORE any SUPER CELL that has been entered in play. If a SUPER CELL is removed from the CELL RACK before the last 20 seconds of the MATCH, then two (2) PENALTIES will be assigned to the offending ALLIANCE: under such conditions, the SUPER CELL may still be entered into play and subsequently SCORED." Awesome this is what I was hoping we could do. We can probably get a score with our robot than with our shooters, we forgot to recruit members from our basketball team. ![]() |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: UPDATE #3
I tend to agree with the folks that say the bumper rule has been defined. I don't really like the rule as it is written, but it is written. Many people have asked the question in the Q&A about bumper legality. The GDC has answered the questions (see here)
I just hope that this doesn't become the tether rule of 2002. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Update 20 | EricH | General Forum | 6 | 03-04-2007 21:53 |
| Update #19 | GBIT | General Forum | 24 | 30-03-2007 09:15 |
| Update #15 | ChuckDickerson | General Forum | 26 | 09-03-2006 23:21 |
| update #7 | Cobra | Electrical | 1 | 11-02-2003 14:57 |