IRI - Dates, Info and Rule Ideas

[JohnSchneider]

If you want minibots why not a mini-bridge with extra points if your minibot balances on the mini bridge

[biojae]

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

If you want minibots why not a mini-bridge with extra points if your minibot balances on the mini bridge

Why not go nano-bot?

This is a FTC bot that releases a smaller bot to score the magnet ball.
Crazy.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Instead of altering timing (which I'm a bit leery of, given how longer runs get our CIMs way too hot on last year's robot), how about this: A Kinect-using robot can pre-load a third ball.

Couldn't you then use a Kinect, but not do anything with it?

Last minute "hail marry" shots should be worth the hybrid period points (4, 5, and 6 points per basket, respectively).

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Last minute "hail marry" shots should be worth the hybrid period points (4, 5, and 6 points per basket, respectively).

I could go for that. That's one heck of a shot to hit those.
I finally hit one last weekend in DC after getting the field up and nearly threw out my elbow doing it. Kudos to those who hit it often.

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I could go for that. That's one heck of a shot to hit those.
I finally hit one last weekend in DC after getting the field up and nearly threw out my elbow doing it. Kudos to those who hit it often.

I hit three shots
I also upvote the human player bonus idea


Here's my idea:
In eliminations, the co-opertition bridge can still be used. If a robot is balanced on that bridge, it receives 10 points. In other words, in elims a triple balance is worth 40 points, and a double and single balance gets you 30 points.
Now the actual "having control of the co-op bridge" is the real problem. I haven't picked a really nice solution yet, but maybe the money ball mentioned earlier could be used for this purpose of securing the co-op bridge to one alliance.

-Duke

P.S. I wholeheartedly upvote the CP bridge balance being worth just one seeding point (or maybe get rid of it altogether? Then apply my elims rule to all matches?)

[Chinmay]

I'd love to see a change in the penalty for contacting an opposing alliance's bridge; it would be nice to see no penalty for this unless you contact the bridge while the opposing alliance is. This would get rid of the 9 pt fouls and also introduce the possibility of snatching 2 extra balls if you are careful.

[HD]

How about making the autonomous pre-loads 6 balls per alliance instead of 2 per robot. (so one robot could have 6 pre-loads)

Originally Posted by hmannn1

How about making the autonomous pre-loads 6 balls per alliance instead of 2 per robot. (so one robot could have 6 pre-loads)

Good suggestion, but IRI is supposed to make the game more user-intuitive, but also a bit harder.

How about: Each robot can start with a maximum of 1 ball, and the remaining 12 are placed randomly on the 3 bridges.

[P.J.]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Good suggestion, but IRI is supposed to make the game more user-intuitive, but also a bit harder.

How about: Each robot can start with a maximum of 1 ball, and the remaining 12 are placed randomly on the 3 bridges.

I don't really agree with you on this point. IRI is not supposed to be harder (the teams that come make it harder, but the game is not changed to be more difficult) it's supposed to take the rules that people don't necessarily like and remove them, or add ones to make the game more fun.

I would prefer having 6 balls that can be distributed any way among your alliance rather than taking away balls from them and putting them on the bridges.

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by P.J.

I don't really agree with you on this point. IRI is not supposed to be harder (the teams that come make it harder, but the game is not changed to be more difficult) it's supposed to take the rules that people don't necessarily like and remove them, or add ones to make the game more fun.

I would prefer having 6 balls that can be distributed any way among your alliance rather than taking away balls from them and putting them on the bridges.

Agreed, prefect example is last year. Ubertubes could be scored in teleop, and the value of a minibot was depreciated. Didn't make it harder, just made the rules more fun and more agreeable.

-Duke

Originally Posted by P.J.

I don't really agree with you on this point. IRI is not supposed to be harder (the teams that come make it harder, but the game is not changed to be more difficult) it's supposed to take the rules that people don't necessarily like and remove them, or add ones to make the game more fun.

I would prefer having 6 balls that can be distributed any way among your alliance rather than taking away balls from them and putting them on the bridges.

Whichever way works. I haven't been to IRI yet, so I've only heard it's harder.

Note to self: Go to IRI sometime.

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Whichever way works. I haven't been to IRI yet, so I've only heard it's harder.

Note to self: Go to IRI sometime.

It's harder because every team there is really really good.
Even if your team can't go, you should go to watch. It's amazing.

-Duke

[BrendanB]

What if you decreased the point value of two robots on the coopertition bridge and had a special value if three robots are on the coopertition bridge.

Just a thought I think it would be cool.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Whichever way works. I haven't been to IRI yet, so I've only heard it's harder.

It's harder because 85% of the 70-robot field is the caliber of 254 and 971. Not because the rules are harder. (The other 15% wants to be at that caliber.)