Offseason Rule Change Recommendations?

[billbo911]

I would definitely like to see robot scored autonomous points really be worth something. Something considerably more than 2 points per ball.

At the Davis regional this year, I saw only one robot score during autonomous. Once they proved they could score, they turned that feature off. There was no advantage to scoring in autonomous and they weren't quite as efficient doing it, so they disabled the feature. To me that is a crying shame. Scoring autonomously should be highly rewarded!

[Kingofl337]

I like the Battle Cry X marks the spot in Autonomous, it will make it easier for us to score on them a robot stops on the X.

I would like to see different colored balls to give 4 points for a robot scored ball in auto.

[Akash Rastogi]

Depending on area teams, I would add in a vote to the non serpentine alliance selection.

If there's more young teams in the area attending the event I'd personally stick with serpentine, otherwise, 1-8 1-8 ftw.

[Chris is me]

I'd carefully consider rule changes about autonomous scoring. I know a lot of teams specifically didn't do that because they saw no advantage to it, so changing the rules would end up rewarding the teams without the foresight to figure out that autonomous scoring isn't all that viable.

I also generally don't like rules changes that override design challenges. This is why I wouldn't support the throwing the empty cell over rule; a big part of the challenge was building an EC mechanism and this way it's basically saying all of your work engineering an EC solution was for naught.

[BrendanB]

It would be cool if you added a bonus to the alliance with the most points at the end of autonomous, and NO G14.

It also would be interesting if you gave a 5 point bonus if the robot scores the super cell instead of the payload specialists.

[EdwardP]

I don't know that autonomous bonuses would be good because as Chris said, it would change the designs that get advantages, plus, it hurts the teams that human load in autonomous and would instead encourage more human player scoring that would in the end usually win the bonus points, not the robots.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by EdwardP

I don't know that autonomous bonuses would be good because as Chris said, it would change the designs that get advantages, plus, it hurts the teams that human load in autonomous and would instead encourage more human player scoring that would in the end usually win the bonus points, not the robots.

In a way, it is kinda hard because I believe that teams that can score in autonomous don't get enough recognition/reward for doing so. There should be at least some reward/bonus for doing so.

I don't believe that it changes the designs that get advantages, as they have gone out and done some really hard programming. Plus, it doesn't encourage human player scoring as that is what most HP's do already. If you look at some matches in which robots score in autonomous, they many times have more points than their opposing alliances HP scores.

My $0.02

[R.C.]

Quick question, what about the no show teams. Stuff happens and stuff tends to break down. What about if we take that trailor off the field?

**Just a thought, what do you think?**

[BrendanB]

I had thought of that, or in the end just give bonus to balls that robots score.

[AustinSchuh]

Originally Posted by rc_cola1323

Quick question, what about the no show teams. Stuff happens and stuff tends to break down. What about if we take that trailor off the field?

I'd say that's a slippery slope. I don't have an answer, but we've been in matches where one of our alliance partners could barely drive, and leaving their trailer off the field might have made it a lot easier on the rest of the alliance. It's probably not GP, but having the option to try to convince that team that they would be better off not showing doesn't sound like a good idea. On the other hand, it's very hard to win a match when you are down one robot and the unattended trailer is completely full because it is such an easy target.

[EdwardP]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

I don't believe that it changes the designs that get advantages, as they have gone out and done some really hard programming. Plus, it doesn't encourage human player scoring as that is what most HP's do already. If you look at some matches in which robots score in autonomous, they many times have more points than their opposing alliances HP scores.

Actually if you go back and look at so of our matches on Galileo, in the playoffs at the end of auto mode we are down by about 40 points, but 111 has about 2o stored, and 67 has about 15, and either we filled up some at our outpost as well.
Also we had our HP's be very conservative and wait until a robot got pined up next to them before they shot, or they get more opportunities to load up our robots that were more accurate.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by EdwardP

Actually if you go back and look at so of our matches on Galileo, in the playoffs at the end of auto mode we are down by about 40 points, but 111 has about 2o stored, and 67 has about 15, and either we filled up some at our outpost as well.
Also we had our HP's be very conservative and wait until a robot got pined up next to them before they shot, or they get more opportunities to load up our robots that were more accurate.

I know that teams had their HP's get more conservative, but they are still scoring as much as they can.

But in the end I believe that teams who do the hard things should be rewarded.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by AustinSchuh

I'd say that's a slippery slope. I don't have an answer, but we've been in matches where one of our alliance partners could barely drive, and leaving their trailer off the field might have made it a lot easier on the rest of the alliance.

I might...

Please note, this is for offseasons only! (Translation: Dave, don't get any ideas.)

Have one of the teams on that colored alliance in the next (or previous) match play as a surrogate for a team that physically did not show up with a robot.

Now, record/rankings: For the team that didn't show up, they get a tie if their alliance wins, and a loss if they lose. (For full credit in a win, drive the robot that's been volunteered themselves.) For the team that loaned their robot's time and battery power, it's a tie in case of a loss and a win in case of a win. Or it just doesn't count for either team, same as a total no-show in an official event.

Now, the beauty of this plan: When you're done with the match, pull the robot and trailer straight to your favorite alliance starting position, change the battery, and load up.

OK, you can haul me off to the crazy house now...

[R.C.]

Originally Posted by EricH

I might...

Please note, this is for offseasons only! (Translation: Dave, don't get any ideas.)

Have one of the teams on that colored alliance in the next (or previous) match play as a surrogate for a team that physically did not show up with a robot.

Now, record/rankings: For the team that didn't show up, they get a tie if their alliance wins, and a loss if they lose. (For full credit in a win, drive the robot that's been volunteered themselves.) For the team that loaned their robot's time and battery power, it's a tie in case of a loss and a win in case of a win. Or it just doesn't count for either team, same as a total no-show in an official event.

Now, the beauty of this plan: When you're done with the match, pull the robot and trailer straight to your favorite alliance starting position, change the battery, and load up.

OK, you can haul me off to the crazy house now...

Eric, I actually like this. Hmmmm....

[AustinSchuh]

This isn't quite a rule change, but more of a design change. I think it would be really helpful to paint the post in the middle of the trailer the same color as the bumpers. I know I have trouble figuring out which team is on which alliance using the vision target colors or finding the bottom of the trailer and looking at that. Most of the time the trailer is stuck in a pile of robots, and you just can't see it.